Lawmakers in New Jersey are renewing efforts to regulate and license dog groomers in response to a nationwide investigation that raised questions about safety protocols and training at PetSmart, the largest U.S. pet retailer.

State Assemblywoman Valerie Vainieri Huttle said she expects a committee vote this month on her legislation that would require all individual groomers to pass an exam approved by the state Board of Veterinary Medical Examiners in order to obtain a license.

The bill, first introduced in 2014 but which has since stalled, would also require grooming facilities to keep a record of incidents and report them annually to the veterinary board.

"More and more stories of grooming incidents are coming out, and quite frankly people are in shock there's no standard or licensing -- but it's the truth," said Huttle, D-Bergen. "It's time to make sure there's a law in New Jersey."

Read the full investigation, "Groomed, then Gone"

Huttle said she had been assured by leadership the bill would get through committee and get a vote in the full Assembly. A top aide to Assembly Speaker Craig Coughlin, D-Middlesex, said the assemblyman is reviewing the bill but wants to move swiftly.

An identical bill sponsored by state Sen. Christopher "Kip" Bateman is pending in Senate.

"I don't want to hurt small business, but I also want to make certain the safeguards are in place to protect our pets, our loved ones," said Bateman, R-Somerset. "It's important, but I want to do it right."

At the same time, Assemblyman Kevin Rooney said he intends to now push for a vote on his bill, allowing the public to report grooming-related complaints to the state Division of Consumer Affairs, which would be required to investigate and render a finding.

Under the bill, a groomer with three or more complaints found to be valid would be required to register with the division for one year. The list of those subject to registration would be made public. The bill also calls for a grooming safety awareness campaign.

While the legislation would not create a licensing requirement -- which some see as overly burdensome, especially to small businesses -- it would add to "the level of protection and accountability that is clearly needed in our state," said Rooney, R-Bergen.

"Let's give our residents a sense of security when they drop their pet off because quite frankly, pets are like family," Rooney added.

A companion to Rooney's bill has introduced in the Senate in the past 10 days in the wake of NJ Advance Media's investigation.

Representatives of Gov. Phil Murphy and Senate President Stephen Sweeney declined to comment on whether they supported any of the legislation.

The investigation, published Sept. 20, documented 47 cases of dogs dying during or shortly after PetSmart groomings during the past decade. But that's hardly a definitive number as most groomers are not required to publicly report deaths.

The probe revealed the company has offered affected families money, sometimes as little as a few hundred dollars, in exchange for non-disclosure agreements. In addition, former employees detailed allegations of inadequate training and intense pressure to grow profits.

PetSmart -- which operates more than 1,600 stores in the U.S., Canada and Puerto Rico -- fiercely defends its safety record and has not admitted wrongdoing in any of the cases.

"As a company of pet lovers who are dedicated to the health and happiness of all pets, we empathize with these grieving families," it said in a statement. "Nevertheless, we are not aware of any evidence suggesting that PetSmart services caused the deaths of these pets."

[Read the company's full response to the investigation]

While largely routine, groomings anywhere can present a number of dangers to dogs if safety measures are not followed, groomers and veterinarians said. They include overheating -- sometimes the result of drying cages -- intense stress and rough handling.

No state currently requires all individual groomers be certified, so there's a lack of transparency of safety records, no enforced standard training and little public accounting when things go wrong. That makes it very hard to know how often dogs are injured or die.

Bills in several states have been introduced in recent years in an attempt to improve oversight, but they have stalled or were met with roadblocks. In California, legislation that would have established only a voluntary certification program was voted down in 2012.

Colorado has had some oversight over groomers since 1993, though it doesn't apply to everyone, said Nick Fisher, the program administrator for the state's Pet Animal Care Facilities Inspection and Licensing Program.

The regulations require all grooming facilities, including PetSmart and Petco, be licensed, but not the individual groomers. All independent groomers, however, need to be licensed.

Facilities in Colorado are required to report pet deaths and any incident involving a serious injury, Fisher said. His team investigates those incidents and then can issue a civil fine if they feel the groomer was negligent, like leaving a dog unattended on a grooming table, he said.

Though individual groomers at the big-box stores don't have to be licensed, Fisher said the existing regulations reduce the number of incidents because those stores know someone is watching and fear repercussions if there's proven wrongdoing.

NJ Advance Media staff writer Brent Johnson contributed to this report.

Sophie Nieto-Munoz may be reached at snietomunoz@njadvancemedia.com. Follow her at @snietomunoz.

Alex Napoliello may be reached at anapoliello@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Twitter @alexnapoNJ. Find NJ.com on Facebook.

Have a tip? Tell us. nj.com/tips