[{"_1":2,"_124":-5,"_125":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100,112],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6543041,"mediaKeyId","3794771-1547313b22fee4e8db71e787bc8504a6","parentId",3794771,"title","Committee reopens waiting-period rules for certifications; 30‑day retest and instructor three‑year rules questioned","audioSeconds",660,"startMs",5360000,"endMs",6020000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3794771-1547313b22fee4e8db71e787bc8504a6&start=5360&end=6020","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3794771-1547313b22fee4e8db71e787bc8504a6/thumbnail_5360000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6543041/Tennessee/Committee-reopens-waiting-period-rules-for-certifications-30day-retest-and-instructor-threeyear-rules-questioned","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6543041-6202071e9a4a6d3a93e83f6798fcf355/orig.mp4?Expires=1770487224&Signature=LW2axkjhgthgcuVFW2Xr1NcWDTwWJ1vjuL1xp-ITzFtmQ20bmsznhT-mqA94NmYLY3RbN~ZJWEDiNHd6sa5WAz~czaIs1AXrcmyRKs9E1EzTS9o8adG04qqHGTIK4UK9KzxUAa1BKDpDZvBknHOqa-vRUP8TcgEaqhRaMMT0JMbKOHI6gNvKqXQBcS9Ja9wD-k7bViDA2hcTzbqHA5U17NioH4geZ1FCYoV1MSdETKOYu~XryqTG8yd8Ny13wN0tzfPQ2~z0dWdD9-EIFOBS84lCWLtd0evb4XEXL-7Vh7a~YIYd7i6u6rKINMOh3x1ig7g9z2P6emGu~NF9RrLgoQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Commerce & Insurance","date","2025-06-05T00:00:00Z","article","The rules subcommittee returned to a longstanding topic: how long a firefighter must wait between certification levels and whether to keep or change the 30‑day waiting window.

Members said the current 30‑day rule — and earlier reductions of some waiting windows to 15 days — can create operational and scheduling problems for recruit classes and combined academy courses. Several training officers and chiefs described recruit cohorts that complete practical competencies but then must wait 30 days to test again, which can disrupt momentum and training schedules.

At the same time, some committee members urged preserving longer minimum service or waiting periods for higher‑level certificates (examples discussed: instructor 1 often tied to a three‑year service clock; officer progression with multi‑year spacing) to ensure practical experience before advancing to supervisory or instructional roles. Participants cited concerns that very rapid progression (months rather than years) could allow individuals to obtain leadership or instructor credentials before gaining sufficient on‑the‑job experience.

The subcommittee discussed possible options: (a) retain no waiting period between certain foundational practical courses (for example, between HMA/HMO and Firefighter I/II practicals) to accommodate modern academy structures; (b) keep or formalize longer service‑based wait requirements for instructor and officer levels (three years or more after a baseline certification); or (c) allow some programmatic exceptions for accredited combined classes while preserving waiting periods for promotion‑oriented certifications.

Next steps: staff were asked to draft a proposal that (1) identifies which low‑level practical certifications could be exempt from the 30‑day wait for students completing an accredited academy, and (2) recommends service‑time minimums for instructor and officer level certifications. The subcommittee did not vote on a final standard.

Ending: Members asked staff to return with concrete, chapter‑level language proposing a mix of reduced waits for academy cohorts and preserved service time requirements for higher‑level credentials.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","FFC Rules Subcommittee Meeting 6/5/2025 - Part 2","oneSentenceSummary","The rules subcommittee reviewed waiting periods between firefighter certifications and debated whether short retest windows hinder recruit training while longer waits are needed for instructor and officer credentials.","taxTitle","Commerce & Insurance, Deparments in Office of the Governor, Organizations, Executive, Tennessee","taxId",17379,"location","Tennessee","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6543045,"Subcommittee narrows EIP waiver scope to March 1 filing deadline; staff to place broader waiver language elsewhere",932,2884000,3816000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3794771-1547313b22fee4e8db71e787bc8504a6&start=2884&end=3816","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3794771-1547313b22fee4e8db71e787bc8504a6/thumbnail_2884000.jpg","/articles/6543045/Tennessee/Subcommittee-narrows-EIP-waiver-scope-to-March-1-filing-deadline-staff-to-place-broader-waiver-language-elsewhere","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6543045-b1fd8353f9860b621d186af98e8bb957/orig.mp4?Expires=1770487224&Signature=h2d7ZS4sXp7DRaowGzRs74C2QAPfHJbsJsdvhn3WAeM5eQKQJHG9ixQKLvarayl4MTWCjHksx2OTGeOhZgYvpLV~VMqHqmnEB~t0NzqG9BoonMSwb-UhRr9qTBAoeEO1kDdYRfyEYaVOaDlrdQGE~sXnxYVH5FyO4TMHcThmMQzedWh2Lbboelrp9apuN5AI-ltqEE2~U0G6w0FV1NfbZsxcQ5GbJyTLasBk9ws2eQSamWTFQvX-BAoO1ri4UbX1F16mbF4TKmZNGmnqE4sG4D2a0tuuVBKeUfV9sVyCVmKuLBG38~RZWKRpxirDOoFP59kA~rx7MlYi2-9OSts9~A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The rules subcommittee spent substantial time discussing when and for what reasons the commission should grant waivers related to the education incentive pay program.

Members agreed the EIP chapter should narrowly contain a waiver authority tied to the March 1 submission deadline (late batches) rather than a catch‑all waiver that could be invoked for missing training hours, certification waiting periods, or other unrelated provisions. Several participants said previous drafts conflated waiver procedures across multiple chapters, creating confusion for departments and for staff processing appeals.

Why it matters: waivers determine whether individual firefighters or departments may receive pay or certification credit despite missed deadlines or incomplete elements. Subcommittee members emphasized a predictable process and noted that allowing broad, discretionary waivers led to inconsistent statewide outcomes.

Subcommittee discussion points included: whether waivers for missing training hours should reside in certification chapters (chapter 3 or 6), whether chapter 6 should hold an enterprise waiver authority covering multiple programs, and how to balance flexibility for rare disasters (floods were cited) against preventing routine case‑by‑case exceptions.

The group endorsed keeping a narrowly scoped waiver in the EIP chapter limited to missed March 1 batches and adding a separate waiver policy in a catch‑all chapter for other exceptional circumstances. Staff were directed to draft text that: (a) limits EIP waivers to March 1 late‑submission cases, (b) references the other chapter for broader waivers, and (c) clarifies the commission’s role in discretionary appeals.

Ending: Staff will return with consolidated wording that reassigns waiver authorities as discussed and clarifies where departments should petition for relief.","Members debated waivers tied to education incentive pay (EIP). The committee favored limiting the waiver in the EIP chapter to late submission (March 1) appeals and housing other waiver authorities in a broader chapter; staff will propose redraft and placement.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6543051,"Subcommittee debates who counts as \"eligible\" for firefighter education incentive pay, including payouts after death",407,553000,960000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3794771-1547313b22fee4e8db71e787bc8504a6&start=553&end=960","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3794771-1547313b22fee4e8db71e787bc8504a6/thumbnail_553000.jpg","/articles/6543051/Tennessee/Subcommittee-debates-who-counts-as-eligible-for-firefighter-education-incentive-pay-including-payouts-after-death","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6543051-46df0bd8f5006a851d73d9e4adbe4825/orig.mp4?Expires=1770487224&Signature=n2rB3YvE~9~O25hnCJCYgt8jHwSVHKcmGC-3vgJ~83DXcfPx4jQ6c0nqUiMS25TJTy7JRHoPKB0aNEY2oHY1-lRl5MUy9LZlyCS9Qc1o8dtOL3~haw6qyBjEofhFhJoUbomzk88tlZD8H3EuJx~WAgfSHyhC8hzvoclGeZch35HOu2CliPyOSkdncr7A9F4DBOnPCmlTtSd6k9XTTZTDMHTdq3qfce1JaBHmk4c40-h9V1FUuz2FpY-ChBBT7-YU0Q-3k71tclj1knFWN~es6JJWKr5ASAFmwdSFgxY7fCvPvxFrPUQ566isG-wfcZktSjJA4IMaW3GMk8h372Vjvg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","At a June 5 rules subcommittee meeting, members discussed whether firefighters who separated, retired or died before the December 31 roster date should receive state education incentive pay (EIP) even if they had completed training hours earlier in the year.

The discussion centered on defining two terms that appear in draft rules: “eligible” (meeting minimum training benchmarks, usually 30 hours for volunteers and 40 hours for career personnel) and “qualified” (meeting eligibility and being on the department roster on Dec. 31 or meeting specified exceptions). Subcommittee members said the current draft uses the words interchangeably and that ambiguity has led to inconsistent payouts.

Why it matters: education incentive pay is a recurring budget item and a frequent source of appeals from departments and families. The subcommittee said clearer rules will reduce ad hoc decisions, which have in some years resulted in the commission paying individuals who had not completed the minimum training but were paid historically.

Members pressed staff to clarify whether qualifying events that let a departed individual be treated as on the Dec. 31 roster (examples discussed: retirement/acceptance of service retirement, disability retirement, death while employed, certain military deployments) must be prefaced by an explicit statement that the person first satisfied the minimum training benchmark. Several members argued the rule should require proof that the minimum hours were completed before the qualifying event, so that the commission does not create broad, case‑by‑case exceptions.

Committee members and staff noted past practice: in recent years the office paid some deceased firefighters although they had not completed the minimum training; that practice prompted the current rewrite. Some members said occasional compassionate payouts had been done historically but warned that formalizing broad exceptions would create many future appeals (for medical leave, deployments of short duration, or other interruptions). Others pointed out the volume of such cases would likely remain small but could set precedent.

The subcommittee asked staff to consolidate eligibility and qualifying exceptions into one place in the rule, to spell out the minimum training requirement in plain language (e.g., “completed the required 30 or 40 hours”), and to return with redlined language that removes the current ambiguity. Staff agreed to rewrite the section and bring it back to a future rules meeting.

Ending: The subcommittee did not adopt a final change; members directed staff to recast the eligibility/qualifying language, add cross‑references to existing statutes cited in the draft, and bring a consolidated draft back for review before formal filing.","A rules subcommittee reviewed draft changes to education incentive pay rules, focusing on definitions of \"eligible\" versus \"qualified,\" whether the commission should pay members who died or separated before meeting year‑end roster requirements, and how to write clear rule language to avoid ad hoc exceptions.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6543031,"Subcommittee flags reciprocity and recordkeeping problems: Cadence/Acadis data gaps and five‑year rules under review",421,6873000,7294000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3794771-1547313b22fee4e8db71e787bc8504a6&start=6873&end=7294","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3794771-1547313b22fee4e8db71e787bc8504a6/thumbnail_6873000.jpg","/articles/6543031/Tennessee/Subcommittee-flags-reciprocity-and-recordkeeping-problems-CadenceAcadis-data-gaps-and-fiveyear-rules-under-review","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6543031-4721432d1e7ef094d7223a0e3c4ceaaf/orig.mp4?Expires=1770487224&Signature=WxoGy~Fz0QmTTlEZ1rZPPBDo1PKJRhnuUF0CxuYjzHh8gbhp58nAsYHktUKlH5D2f5KehfTqZysAihe8kllLzrH-1y8EDM0vI5hZjkemB0QhKzzNHQ8su~Qo0QJxG7v82Sg7p6BDtHXt7Yu3I6u8wBgG36fMer33ZTNuEY~KYZ5ZKNlyuGAbo8Qcb-gideIXneYH904RJHxEF8RgWvS3Fjy04jQ9QivcEfkVn0qUH9fTyBPxIin3xD5UFcrq4Laf7jXE1P9B-xzj4hmxAy80uOcRmH5ijOR7pAAUnsBxlhcIqQdH76KNbPeLgGaPsZoJGUaHS8OfMeImdCR5bdQp6w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Subcommittee members raised recurring problems with reciprocity processing and training records management. The discussion covered three related issues: (1) how the commission records and recognizes out‑of‑state or ProBoard/IFSAC certifications; (2) inconsistent roster and training data in the commission’s training system (referred to in the meeting as Cadence or Acadis); and (3) the fairness of applying a fixed five‑year out‑of‑service rule to in‑state personnel while out‑of‑state reciprocity candidates are processed differently.

Officials said the reciprocity application requires applicants to submit digital copies of certificates, a driver’s license and a letter from the applicant’s chief or employer. However, staff and committee members noted practical problems: ProBoard seals are not always issued or visible for all jurisdictions; some out‑of‑state issuers use different formats; and Cadence records for long‑tenured Tennessee personnel sometimes remain active even when the member left service years earlier.

Members proposed improving the reciprocity workflow: accept certificate copies and chief/employer verification as primary evidence; add an attestation checkbox for applicants about their last active service date; and strengthen guidance and outreach to local training officers to keep roster records current in Cadence/Acadis. Several members asked staff to consider adding administrative consequences (for example, limiting program participation) for departments that fail routine roster maintenance.

The subcommittee also recommended that the rules explicitly state whether the reciprocity effective date for certification‑progression purposes should be the original issue date of the external certification or the commission’s acceptance date in Tennessee (the committee leaned toward preserving original issue dates for progression eligibility where reasonable). Staff were asked to propose explicit wording for reciprocity effective dates and record submission requirements.

Ending: Staff will draft edits clarifying the required documentation for reciprocity, the effective date for progression calculations, and record‑keeping obligations for departments, and will surface any enforcement options for chronic noncompliance.","The group discussed problems verifying out‑of‑state certifications, inconsistent roster maintenance in Acadis/Cadence, and whether the five‑year break-in‑service rule should remain for in‑state personnel. Members recommended clarifying reciprocity documentation and recordkeeping expectations.",{"_33":113,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":114,"_41":115,"_43":116,"_45":117,"_47":118,"_49":119,"_51":120,"_53":121,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":122,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":123,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6543036,"Subcommittee consolidates NFPA references into a single chapter for easier updates",110,4408000,4518000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3794771-1547313b22fee4e8db71e787bc8504a6&start=4408&end=4518","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3794771-1547313b22fee4e8db71e787bc8504a6/thumbnail_4408000.jpg","/articles/6543036/Tennessee/Subcommittee-consolidates-NFPA-references-into-a-single-chapter-for-easier-updates","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6543036-863c6407419d9a160cec627ff3e64c0f/orig.mp4?Expires=1770487224&Signature=ZWtuBN2etyqj3FEsZrbY7HnnrXCJAzW5s-f8Hih4UCUXaHr~3dYBQIWfGEOBVaMx0tXha5s3R-SyynnYaMhuUMY1mYD~TNNCXVsqMjdr2BAMw63ASN1ManVx4~3RqQq7GZQzb3ovIDgAReaAeHjnkoyo6JRVHt7YZABt7OgCAjYKfnW9mQ1LqeXv1kbswJDRrzprNrd46BsrXOzerQVWr3Jh9rZ6zmPF2mbINRyc6ug0PoCstyLe3O~hiQGKANlmdW5VKwF4ZDKQSCvcbkb03GIjXlnwdrWthLwiPkIdYP0bRA~wNRZ~fDl8~UNBp~58Pu6nnuLV0qifyuwhTji-Bg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Committee staff proposed consolidating all NFPA references into a single chapter so the commission can update adopted editions in one place instead of repeatedly amending multiple chapters. Members supported the approach as a way to streamline future updates and shorten the administrative process for adopting new NFPA editions.

Staff said several NFPA documents (examples cited in the meeting included consolidations the draft labeled as \"10/10,\" 1006, 1006/1003 material, 1403, and 1500 references) would be referenced in the consolidated chapter. Members asked staff to verify edition years and to confirm whether any legacy references remain elsewhere in the proposed rule package; staff agreed to correct residual references and to include a short justification for each adopted edition.

Why it matters: NFPA standards underpin many training, certification and safety requirements. Consolidating the references reduces the number of rule sections the agency must open when NFPA editions change and simplifies future rulemaking.

Next steps: staff will clean the draft to ensure each NFPA citation is correct and that any chapters that previously named a particular NFPA standard now point to the consolidated chapter for the adopted edition. The subcommittee also asked staff to confirm that references to any niche standards (for example, industrial fire brigades) are still needed and to recommend removal where unused.

Ending: The committee endorsed the consolidation approach in principle and asked for final citation verification before filing.","Members agreed to consolidate references to National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) standards into a single chapter (chapter 6) so future updates require opening fewer chapters. Staff presented a proposed consolidation of several NFPA documents and asked for final verification of the listed editions.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Committee reopens waiting-period rules for certifications; 30‑day retest and instructor three‑year rules questioned

Subcommittee narrows EIP waiver scope to March 1 filing deadline; staff to place broader waiver language elsewhere

Subcommittee debates who counts as "eligible" for firefighter education incentive pay, including payouts after death

Subcommittee flags reciprocity and recordkeeping problems: Cadence/Acadis data gaps and five‑year rules under review

Subcommittee consolidates NFPA references into a single chapter for easier updates