Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ems Staffing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate hears proposals to allow two-person ambulance response when staffing shortfalls persist
Summary
A House bill (HB 559) to codify emergency-era staffing flexibility for ground ambulances drew support from small-town officials and fire chiefs seeking a legal option to send one licensed EMS provider and one trained firefighter when staffing shortages prevent two licensed EMS providers from responding.
Representative Jennifer Rhodes and Representative Mark Pru introduced House Bill 559 before the Senate Health and Human Services Committee on April 16, seeking to make permanent an emergency staffing rule used during the COVID-19 pandemic that allowed an ambulance to respond staffed by one licensed EMS provider and one trained firefighter.
Why it matters: Several small-town chiefs and volunteer-based departments told the committee that persistent workforce shortages make it difficult to staff two licensed EMS personnel for every ambulance shift. Proponents said the bill would be an exception to the norm used only when necessary and would preserve timely response in rural and volunteer-reliant communities.
Proponents' testimony: The bill's prime sponsor, Representative Jennifer Rhodes (Cheshire County District 17), said the measure mirrors an earlier emergency order and is intended as a narrowly used option, not the new standard. She described local experiences in which departments could get an ambulance to a scene by sending one EMS provider and a firefighter for equipment and patient handling. Representatives and town chiefs said this approach was used infrequently during the pandemic but was lifesaving in isolated incidents.
Senator questions focused on safety and operational safeguards. Senator Susan Prentiss (questioning from her EMS background) noted state data showing the COVID-era waiver was used in fewer than 1 percent of transports in 2020'21 and pressed sponsors on training and safety expectations for the non-licensed team member. Representatives and chiefs said the driver/firefighter would be a trained member of the department, not a random volunteer; sponsors said they would accept clarifying amendments to require the second person be a member of the department and receive training.
Opposition and concerns: The hearing record did not show organized opposition in the same volume as the ambulance reimbursement hearing; a few committee members pressed sponsors on whether rulemaking options or licensing waivers might address infrequent staffing emergencies without making a statutory change.
Committee outcome: The hearing closed without a committee vote; sponsors and committee members discussed the possibility of statutory amendments to require department membership and training for the non-licensed responder and explore commissioner-level waiver options as alternatives.
