Evansville City board to review HVAC master exam after widespread complaints; several license applications approved or denied

The Evansville City Building Commission agreed at a recent meeting to review the HVAC master license exam and re-evaluate at least one candidate's results after contractors and test-takers raised concerns about question quality and relevance.

The discussion began when Sid Jackson, identified himself as an HVAC professional and commenter, told the commission: "Worst test I've ever seen. Completely honest with you," citing misspellings and questions he said were irrelevant to an HVAC master's exam. Jackson said the most recent exam he took contained "7 misspellings" and examples of questions that lacked necessary variables, and that those issues had affected his score. He told the commission he scored about 72% on one section and that the qualifying threshold was 75%.

The complaint prompted commissioners and staff to discuss short-term fixes and longer-term options. The commission chair identified that the licensing or disciplinary board "has a right to see the questions and the answers," and commissioners asked staff to review Jackson's flagged questions, remove or replace any that are demonstrably inapplicable, and consider regrading or offering replacement questions to impacted candidates at no extra cost. One board member said vendors such as PSI (a testing vendor) and local testing at Ivy Tech currently handle administration; commissioners discussed changing vendors or adopting remote proctoring services.

Board members and attendees also discussed using automated tools to speed test development. A commenter demonstrated that an AI tool (ChatGPT) could generate large question banks when seeded with reference books, and several commissioners said the board could explore using AI to speed creation of an updated, code-aligned test. Commissioners emphasized that any new or AI-assisted test would still need human review and must match the board's subject-matter requirements and proofing standards.

While the exam review was the most time-consuming discussion, the commission also processed licensing applications and continuing-education items. Motions were made and carried to approve a number of applicants (including apprentice and journeyman applications) and to deny or condition approval for others when documentation such as notarized letters or verifiable hours were missing. In at least one case the commission conditioned approval on applicants providing notarized employment letters.

Votes at a glance

- Motion to approve an apprentice (name referenced as Damien; pending verification of enrollment): approved (motion seconded; "all in favor" recorded). - Motion to review Sid Jackson's flagged exam questions and regrade/provide replacement questions at no additional cost: direction taken by the commission for staff review and follow-up (motion/discussion recorded; follow-up meeting scheduled Thursday). - Applicant denial where employer letters were not notarized (Flotek/Flowtech example): motion to deny carried. - Conditional approvals for applicants who supplied W-2s but lacked notarized letters: motion to approve pending notarization carried. - Approvals recorded for named applicants and companies mentioned during the meeting, including Jacob Russell (Jacob Russell Heating and Air), Sean Pruitt (manager at Jack), Jeremy Bushman, and others; details on required notarizations or hours were discussed case by case.

The commission did not set a formal vendor change at the meeting but instructed staff and the licensing committee to pursue: (1) review of the current exam questions, (2) engagement with testing vendors and proctoring platforms, and (3) production of a revised test or replacement-question process that can be used while a full, updated exam is developed. Commissioners said cost and verification of work experience remain constraints with some vendor options.

Chair and next steps

Johnny McAllister, identified in the meeting as the chairman of the commission, summarized the near-term resolution: board members and relevant staff will review the flagged questions, consult the licensing/disciplinary board for access to questions and answers, and arrange replacement/retest options for affected candidates. The commission planned a follow-up meeting on Thursday to continue the conversation and to attempt to have the licensing committee review candidate materials.

Why it matters

Licensing exams determine who can work as journeyman or master HVAC technicians in Evansville City, affecting workforce entry, public-safety standards tied to mechanical systems and gas work, and local contractors'ability to hire licensed staff. The board's decision to review and potentially regrade questions could change outcomes for test-takers who failed due to items the commission later deems inapplicable or flawed.

Sources: meeting transcript, comments and motions recorded on the Evansville City Building Commission agenda.