Tennessee House Bill HB0834

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Filed/Introduced: 8/16/26
• Introduced: 2/4/25
• Refer: 2/6/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 68, Chapter 221, Part 9, relative to the Water and Wastewater Operator Certification Act.

Summary

HB0834 amends Tennessee’s Water and Wastewater Operator Certification Act to change how the state board prepares, administers, and grades operator certification examinations. The bill requires board exams to be designed to measure the skills, knowledge, ability, and judgment needed for each operator classification, to use the same questions for all applicants, and to include at least 10% state regulatory questions relevant to the classification. Applicants must answer at least 70% of both the overall exam and the state regulatory portion correctly to receive a certificate, in addition to meeting the other requirements of the certification law. The bill also restricts the board’s use of applicant demographic information by prohibiting collection or use of age, race, sex, or cultural background data. In addition, it bars the board from delegating to a third party, by contract or other agreement, the authority to determine minimum operator competency or to prepare, conduct, or grade examinations, while still allowing the board to use staff under its direct supervision for those tasks. The act takes effect upon becoming law and applies to contracts and agreements entered into, amended, or renewed on or after that date.

Impact

This bill would amend Tennessee Code Annotated Title 68, Chapter 221, Part 9 by adding new examination standards and administrative limits for the Water and Wastewater Operator Certification Board. It changes the certification process for water and wastewater operators by establishing uniform testing requirements, a specific passing threshold, and a mandatory regulatory-content component, while also limiting the board’s data collection and outsourcing authority. The practical effect is to centralize exam control within the board and its supervised staff and to set clearer statewide standards for operator certification.

Sentiment

No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or partisan division in the available record. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to be framed as an administrative and professional-standards bill rather than a controversial policy change. Its provisions suggest a focus on exam consistency, regulatory knowledge, and limiting outside influence in certification decisions.

Contention

The main points of potential contention are the prohibition on collecting or using applicant demographic data and the ban on delegating exam-related authority to third parties. Supporters would likely view these provisions as promoting fairness, consistency, and state control over licensing standards, while opponents might argue they reduce flexibility, limit modernization or outsourcing options, and constrain the board’s ability to use demographic information for oversight or analysis. The requirement that applicants pass both the overall exam and the state regulatory questions could also be viewed as a stricter certification standard, though no recorded opposition is available in the provided materials.