TACIR hears wide-ranging testimony on crime-lab capacity, backlogs and training needs

A Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (TACIR) panel on Dec. 19 reviewed a legislative study prompted by Senate Bill 2877 and House Bill 2961 that asked whether Tennessee needs additional crime laboratories, starting with Shelby County.

The study will evaluate current laboratory capacity, processing backlogs and possible locations for new facilities; TACIR staff said a draft will be available for review in spring 2025 and a final report in summer 2025. The city of Memphis and Shelby County are conducting separate, local studies that TACIR will consider in its work.

Why it matters: Forensic laboratories are central to criminal investigations and prosecutions. Panelists told commissioners that recent improvements in some disciplines have reduced inventories and turnaround times, but significant backlogs remain in others — and the principal bottleneck is trained personnel, not necessarily buildings.

TACIR staff member Madison Thorne briefed commissioners that the Senate measure passed while the House companion did not, and that Representative Ryan Williams asked TACIR to broaden the scope to statewide feasibility and capacity. Thorne said the commission intends to assess existing lab capacity and potential locations with an eye toward statewide impacts.

Assistant Director Mike Little of the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation(TBI) Forensic Services Division described TBI’s current footprint and services. TBI operates labs in Nashville, Jackson and Knoxville and provides monthly reports to customers on turnaround times and inventories. Little told the commission that, comparing 2024 to 2023, TBI recorded a 57% decrease in pending requests overall and that improvements in drug‑chemistry turnaround have reduced the statewide average from about 24.6 weeks a year ago to about 11.5 weeks currently.

Local lab perspective: Amanda Sweet, director of the Metro Nashville Police Department crime laboratory, described why Nashville created a locally operated, full‑service lab (DNA/forensic biology, firearms, toxicology, drug chemistry, latent prints) and said it primarily exists to shorten turnaround times and provide closer coordination with one judicial system. Sweet outlined costs and staffing challenges for a local lab: roughly a $30 million facility cost (construction) plus several million dollars for instrumentation and renovations, an operating budget she estimated near $8.5 million annually, and salary/fringe near $6 million of that. Sweet said recruiting experienced scientists is difficult and that some specialized positions (for example, an FBI‑mandated DNA technical leader) are essential to run particular functions such as entering profiles into CODIS.

Impact on victims, prosecutors and defense: Jennifer Eskew of the Tennessee Coalition to End Domestic and [redacted] Violence described the human impact of long processing times for sexual‑assault forensic exam kits: delays measured in months can cause victims to miss civil statute‑of‑limitations windows and can erode trust in the criminal justice process. Stephen Crump, executive director of the Tennessee District Attorneys General Conference, emphasized that laboratory experts also provide scene response and courtroom testimony that prosecutors rely on, and said the labs translate technical science for juries. Patrick Frogue, director of the Tennessee District Public Defenders Conference, said delays create operational bottlenecks for courts and can leave defendants jailed while cases await forensic chemistry results; he argued those delays matter for case resolution and jail population management.

Where backlogs remain: Panelists identified firearms analysis as having one of the longest turnaround averages (the figure cited to the commission was about 71.3 weeks for firearms analysis). Forensic biology turnaround times varied by lab: TACIR materials and panelists cited average forensic‑biology turnaround times of about 5.6 weeks in Nashville, 11.3 weeks in Knoxville and 11.2 weeks in Jackson. Sweet reported a backlog of about 750 sexual‑assault kits in her lab; she said Nashville had secured grant funding to outsource some kits and planned to train additional analysts.

Panel consensus on solutions: Multiple panelists told commissioners that the core constraint is trained scientists rather than real estate. TBI said the General Assembly previously authorized 50 new positions spread across the forensic division; training timelines differ by discipline (roughly one year for drug chemistry analysts, about two years for firearms examiners). Panelists expressed interest in longer‑term workforce development, including coordinated training programs or curricula to produce more entry‑level but job‑ready forensic scientists.

Commission discussion: Commissioners asked whether additional labs are needed or whether the state should focus on recruiting and training scientists and better matching testing priorities to prosecutions. Panelists repeatedly urged that any new facility be fully staffed and full‑service to be effective, and noted that regional variations and testimony requirements mean location decisions should weigh travel and testimony burdens.

Next steps: TACIR staff will integrate the Memphis and Shelby County feasibility studies into its statewide assessment and present draft findings in spring 2025.

Ending: Commissioners thanked the panel for practical assessments of backlogs and workforce needs; TACIR will continue the study and return draft recommendations at its next scheduled meeting cycle.