Senate panel hears SB 3 80: autism training for officers and temporary RBT registration draw strong support and board opposition

Senator James Oranchall, sponsor of Senate Bill 3 80 and the senator for District 21, said the bill “revises provisions relating to Autism Spectrum Disorder” by requiring certain peace officer training on autism and permitting applicants certified as registered behavior technicians to practice under direct supervision of a licensed behavior analyst while their state registration is pending.

Proponents — including family members, providers, local law enforcement and disability advocates — described two separate but related aims: (1) required training for law enforcement and first responders to improve recognition and de-escalation when interacting with people on the autism spectrum; and (2) a change to the state registration timeline for registered behavior technicians (RBTs) that would allow nationally certified RBTs who have submitted required Nevada paperwork and fees to begin billable work under a licensed behavior analyst while their Nevada registration is pending.

Corey Ward, a special education teacher and commission member who said he is the parent of adult children on the spectrum, testified: “This bill helps build the registered behavior technician workforce.” Jan Crandy, a former chair of the Nevada Commission on Autism Spectrum Disorders, explained the registration problem in detail. She said the national RBT certification requires background checks and that Nevada’s separate state registration can take weeks to months; “The intent of SB 3 80 is to allow a certified registered RBT who has submitted all the required documentation and fees to the Nevada Board of Applied Behavior Analysis and is pending state registration to practice billable applied behavior analysis under the supervision of a Nevada licensed behavior analyst while waiting for the state to complete their process.”

Multiple provider organizations and families testified that the delay between national certification and Nevada registration has led some newly trained RBTs to abandon the field or accept other work while they wait. Jan Crandy and other witnesses supplied workforce figures they attributed to state sources: 2,324 RBTs currently registered in Nevada and 1,051 RBTs who did not renew for the 2026 cycle; national certification data cited 3,057 RBTs who became inactive or expired in Nevada over the past five years.

Advocates also described law enforcement training needs. Michelle Scott Lewing of the Autism Coalition of Nevada said ACON had provided multiple law enforcement trainings over the past decade and offered to partner with law enforcement to provide low-cost, ongoing training, including involvement of people with autism in trainings. Family members and providers offered examples where better training might prevent traumatic outcomes during police interactions.

The Nevada Board of Applied Behavior Analysis mounted formal opposition to section 4(2) of the bill, which would allow temporarily practicing RBTs during the state registration pendency. Dr. Bridal Franopo, chair of the board, said the provision “proposes the allowance of these entry level individuals to work with a highly vulnerable population even for a short time without the state required criminal history review resulting in unnecessary risk to the consumer.” The board’s executive director and chair said the delays are caused by understaffing at the Department of Public Safety (DPS) and urged fixing DPS turnaround times rather than creating a temporary registration category. Board representatives also warned of a fiscal impact because a new temporary registration category would increase the board’s administrative workload.

The bill’s supporters proposed guardrails: many witnesses and a caller recommended time limits on any provisional status (60–90 days was suggested by one caller) and continued direct supervision requirements (the licensed BCBA would remain professionally and legally responsible). Several witnesses cited examples from other licensing areas where temporary practice was allowed during background-check processing (e.g., pandemic-era nursing licensing) as precedents for temporary flexibility.

Committee members asked about the nature of the background checks and the duplication between the national certification and Nevada’s registration. Jan Crandy and board witnesses explained that national certification includes background/abuse-registry checks; Nevada’s process performs a separate criminal-history check (including fingerprint submission to the central repository). The board and its executive director emphasized that Nevada’s additional background checks were deliberately required when the statutes were adopted.

After roughly 73 minutes of testimony and questioning, the committee closed the hearing and asked the sponsor and stakeholders to continue discussions offline on specifics including limits on provisional practice, supervisory requirements and the DPS background-check delays.