The 2001 amendments to Penal Code section 3041 do not affect the well-established authority of the Board of Parole Hearings to hold a rescission hearing. After 20 parole hearings, petitioner finally was granted parole in October 2008. In March 2009, the Board of Parole Hearings approved the suitability finding of the panel. But at the August 2009 hearing to calculate petitioner’s release date, the board reconsidered the suitability finding and instead ordered a rescission hearing. Petitioner filed a petition for writ of mandate, which was denied, and this appeal ensued. He argued that the 2001 amendments to Penal Code section 3041, and particularly the 120-day finality provision found in subdivision (b), preclude holding a rescission hearing once the board reviews a panel’s decision to grant parole. The court affirmed. It is settled that the Board of Parole Hearings is authorized to rescind a parole date for good cause. Significantly absent from the language of the amendment or its legislative history is any reference to the board’s rescission authority or to rescission hearings. Had the Legislature intended to alter this authority, it would have said so. The board continues to have the authority to rescind a decision to grant parole for good cause.