Relates to the licensing of sign language interpreters; creates a state board for sign language interpreting.
Summary
This bill would create a new Article 169 in the Education Law to regulate sign language interpreting as a licensed profession in New York. It makes it unlawful to practice sign language interpreting or use the title “sign language interpreter” for compensation unless a person is licensed or otherwise authorized under the article. The bill defines “client” broadly to include deaf, hard of hearing, and hearing persons receiving interpretation services or being assessed for licensure purposes.
The measure establishes a State Board for Sign Language Interpreting to advise the Board of Regents and the Education Department on licensing and professional conduct. The board would include deaf or hard of hearing individuals and licensed interpreters, and it would be responsible for developing a code of ethics, licensing standards, testing guidance, consumer database requirements, and rules for licensing interpreting agencies. The bill also sets licensing requirements, fees, continuing training expectations, and temporary or permanent exemptions for certain out-of-state or in-state applicants.
Impact
If enacted, the bill would add a new licensing framework to the Education Law governing sign language interpreters, bringing the profession under state oversight similar to other licensed occupations. It would give the Education Department authority to issue licenses, collect fees, administer examinations, and enforce practice restrictions, while also creating a board to shape standards, ethics, and exemptions. Deaf and hard of hearing consumers, interpreters, and interpreting agencies would all be affected by the new regulatory structure.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes, the overall sentiment appears to be supportive of professionalizing and standardizing sign language interpreting services. The bill’s emphasis on consumer access, ethics, training, and inclusion of deaf and hard of hearing members on the advisory board suggests a policy goal of improving quality and accountability. There is no recorded opposition in the provided materials, but the proposal’s new licensing requirements and fees could be viewed as burdensome by some interpreters or agencies.
Contention
The main points of potential contention are the mandatory licensure requirement, the fee structure, and the scope of exemptions for out-of-state and in-state practitioners. Interpreters or agencies may be concerned about added compliance costs, testing, and continuing education obligations, while consumer advocates may focus on whether the licensing standards are strong enough to ensure quality access. Another possible issue is how the board’s standards and exemption rules will be implemented in practice, especially given the bill’s broad authority for the board and department to set industry standards and ethics rules.
Requires health insurers, SHBP, SEHBP, and NJ FamilyCare coverage for sign language interpreter services for covered individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing.
Requires health insurers, SHBP, SEHBP, and NJ FamilyCare coverage for sign language interpreter services for covered individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing.
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4; Title 63; Title 68, Chapter 1, Part 1 and Title 71, Chapter 4, Part 21, relative to sign language interpreters.