Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Emergency Medical Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would let Washoe health district regulate EMS locally; sponsors also seek to lower EMT licensing age to 16
Summary
AB 102 would allow a county health district in Nevada with a population between 100,000 and 700,000 (e.g., Washoe County) to regulate its own EMS system and would lower the age of eligibility for EMT licensure to 16; proponents said the change would support recruitment and let rural areas benefit if the state focuses on larger systems.
Chief Dave Cochran of the Reno Fire Department, representing the Nevada Fire Chiefs Association, presented Assembly Bill 102, which would allow a county health district with a population greater than 100,000 and less than 700,000 to regulate its own emergency medical services (EMS) system. Cochran said the bill is enabling language only and would require unanimous action by the health district to adopt local EMS regulation.
Cochran told the committee the measure would not mandate local regulation but would allow Washoe County, the largest EMS provider outside Clark County, to assume oversight of its system if it chooses. The bill also lowers the minimum age for EMT licensure from the existing threshold to age 16, which advocates said would enable high-school programs and help recruit new EMTs.
Janice Hadlock Burnett, bureau chief for EMS at the Division of Public and Behavioral Health, said the division's fiscal note reflects revenue reductions tied to licensure and certification fees that currently fund the state's ImageTrend licensure and certification system and training rules. Hadlock Burnett said the fee revenue supports the system that tracks certifications and is partially funded by general fund.
City of Reno and Northern Nevada public-health representatives testified in support, saying the bill is enabling and does not guarantee Washoe will take authority away from the state. Fire chiefs and rural EMS stakeholders said shifting some workload to a county could free state resources for rural areas. The department and witnesses discussed trauma-center exemptions, which remain under state regulation in the bill language.
The committee heard no opposition testimony; agency representatives said the state would see a loss in licensure revenue if local districts assumed responsibilities, but they did not forecast staff reductions and said the fiscal impact would not require layoffs.
