Title of Regulation: 6VAC20-20. Rules Relating to Compulsory Minimum Training Standards for Law-Enforcement Officers (amending 6VAC20-20-25).

Statutory Authority: § 9.1-902 of the Code of Virginia.

Public Hearing Information: No public hearings are scheduled.

Public Comments: Public comments may be submitted until 5 p.m. on August 5, 2009.

Effective Date: January 1, 2010.

Agency Contact: Judith Kirkendall, Regulatory Coordinator, Department of Criminal Justice Services, 1100 Bank Street, 12th Floor, Richmond, VA 23219, telephone (804) 786-8003, FAX (804) 225-3853, or email judith.kirkendall@dcjs.virginia.gov.

Basis: Section 9.1-102 of the Code of Virginia authorizes the Criminal Justice Services Board to set compulsory minimum training standards for law-enforcement officers.

Purpose: The purpose of the amendment is to enable standing review committees to function more smoothly to achieve the goals and objectives for which they were created. Currently, the ability to change the performance outcome as needed is difficult. It is essential to public safety that law-enforcement training is consistent and standardized for the entire Commonwealth and the need to annually review all parts of the training standards and revise and update as necessary is a critical component to this training.

Rationale for Fast-Track Process: Affected and interested parties have been notified and no one has voiced any objection.

Substance: The amended regulation transfers approval authority from the Criminal Justice Services Board to the Committee on Training and is proposed due to the desire to have the Committee on Training responsible for changes to all parts of the training standards rather than continuing to have one item of the standard allocated to the board. Over 10 years of experience in working in the current manner strongly recommends that all parties would be better served by having the Committee on Training handle all suggested changes to the training standards using the process set up in the rules. The language added related to this process clarifies that interested parties or members of the community may make suggestions for change to the training standards and have these reviewed by the Curriculum Review Committee.

Issues: The advantages to the public and to the Commonwealth include a simpler, less costly, and less time-consuming method for changing the performance outcome statement that is part of the training standards. This enables annual updates to be completed more efficiently and provides greater clarity to instructors and recruits involved in entry-level law-enforcement training. There are no disadvantages.

The Department of Planning and Budget's Economic Impact Analysis:

Summary of the Proposed Amendments to Regulation. The Criminal Justice Services Board (Board) proposes to amend its minimum training standards for law enforcement officers to move the responsibility of setting performance outcomes from the Board to the standing Committee on Training. The Board also proposes to add language that specifies how the Committee on Training will handle public suggestions for regulatory change.

Result of Analysis. The benefits likely exceed the costs for all proposed changes.

Estimated Economic Impact. Currently, the Board has approval authority for training categories, setting hours of required training and for deciding performance outcomes. The Committee on Training currently has approval over "training objectives, criteria and lesson plan guides." The Board proposes to move authority to set performance outcomes to the Committee on Training so that they will be responsible for setting and amending all parts of the training standards. This change will likely streamline the process of considering training standards so that new rules take less time to consider. Regulated entities and other interested individuals will likely benefit from the clarity that this change brings to the process of setting training standards.

Although § 2.2-4007 of the Code of Virginia provides for members of the general public to propose new regulations or changes to existing regulations, these Rules have not had an explicit provision for how such comments and suggestions should be handled. The Board proposes to set guidelines to specify how the Committee on Training will review such suggestions. Under these proposed regulations, the Committee will review any suggestions they receive in writing at their next regularly scheduled meeting. If suggestions are made at a public hearing, the Committee will be able to make a decision as to whether to act on them at that time. The public will likely benefit from this change as it clarifies their right to be part of the process of writing/amending regulations.

Businesses and Entities Affected. The Department of Criminal Justice Services reports that these regulations most directly affect law enforcement agencies and entities that provide training to law enforcement officers. There are approximately 400 law enforcement agencies and training entities in the Commonwealth.

Localities Particularly Affected. No locality will be particularly affected by this proposed regulatory action.

Projected Impact on Employment. This regulatory action will likely have no impact on employment in the Commonwealth.

Effects on the Use and Value of Private Property. This regulatory action will likely have no effect on the use or value of private property in the Commonwealth.

Small Businesses: Costs and Other Effects. Small businesses in the Commonwealth are unlikely to incur any costs on account of this regulatory action.

Small Businesses: Alternative Method that Minimizes Adverse Impact. Small businesses in the Commonwealth are unlikely to incur any costs on account of this regulatory action.

Real Estate Development Costs. This regulatory action will likely have no effect on real estate development costs in the Commonwealth.

Legal Mandate. The Department of Planning and Budget (DPB) has analyzed the economic impact of this proposed regulation in accordance with § 2.2-4007.04 of the Administrative Process Act and Executive Order Number 36 (06). Section 2.2-4007.04 requires that such economic impact analyses include, but need not be limited to, the projected number of businesses or other entities to whom the regulation would apply, the identity of any localities and types of businesses or other entities particularly affected, the projected number of persons and employment positions to be affected, the projected costs to affected businesses or entities to implement or comply with the regulation, and the impact on the use and value of private property. Further, if the proposed regulation has adverse effect on small businesses, § 2.2-4007.04 requires that such economic impact analyses include (i) an identification and estimate of the number of small businesses subject to the regulation; (ii) the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and other administrative costs required for small businesses to comply with the regulation, including the type of professional skills necessary for preparing required reports and other documents; (iii) a statement of the probable effect of the regulation on affected small businesses; and (iv) a description of any less intrusive or less costly alternative methods of achieving the purpose of the regulation. The analysis presented above represents DPB's best estimate of these economic impacts.

Agency Response to the Department of Planning and Budget's Economic Impact Analysis: The Department of Criminal Justice Services concurs with the economic impact analysis as reviewed by the Department of Planning and Budget.

Summary:

The proposed amendments transfer the responsibility of setting performance outcomes from the Criminal Justice Services Board to the standing Committee on Training.

6VAC20-20-25. Approval authority.

A. The Criminal Justice Services Board shall be the approval authority for the training categories, and hours and performance outcomes of the compulsory minimum training standards. Amendments to training categories, and hours and performance outcomes shall be made in accordance with the provisions of the Administrative Process Act (§ 9-6.14:1 et seq. (§ 2.2-4000 et seq. of the Code of Virginia).

B. The Committee on Training of the Criminal Justice Services Board shall be the approval authority for the performance outcomes, training objectives, criteria, and lesson plan guides which that support the performance outcomes. Training Performance outcomes, training objectives, criteria, and lesson plan guides supporting the compulsory minimum training standards and performance outcomes may be added, deleted, or amended by the Committee on Training based upon written recommendation of a chief of police, sheriff, agency administrator, academy director or the, Curriculum Review Committee, an interested party, or member of the community. Any suggestions received related to performance outcomes, training objectives, criteria, and lesson plan guides shall be reviewed at the regularly scheduled meeting of the Curriculum Review Committee. If comment is received at any public hearing, the Committee on Training may make a decision at that time. Changes to the hours and training categories will only be made in accordance with the provisions of the Administrative Process Act.

C. Prior to approving changes to the performance outcomes, training objectives, criteria or lesson plan guides, the Committee on Training shall conduct a public hearing. Sixty days prior to the public hearing, the proposed changes shall be distributed to all affected parties for the opportunity to comment. Notice of change of the performance outcomes, training objectives, criteria, and lesson plan guides shall be filed for publication in the Virginia Register of Regulations upon adoption, change, or deletion. The department shall notify each certified academy in writing of any new, revised, or deleted objectives. Such adoptions, changes, or deletions shall become effective 30 days after notice of publication in the Virginia Register.