An Act to amend and reenact § 9.1-102 of the Code of Virginia and to amend the Code of Virginia by adding in Article 1 of Chapter 1 of Title 9.1 a section numbered 9.1-116.11, relating to substantial risk orders; Substantial Risk Order Training Program established; annual report.
HB896 amends Virginia’s law-enforcement training and oversight statutes in Title 9.1 and creates a new Substantial Risk Order Training Program. The bill updates § 9.1-102, which governs the powers and duties of the Department of Criminal Justice Services and the Board, by expanding the list of mandatory training standards the Department must establish for various public safety personnel. The existing training framework already covers law-enforcement officers, jail officers, correctional officers, dispatchers, and others; this bill adds or reinforces training requirements tied to specific duties and vulnerable populations.
A major new component is the addition of § 9.1-116.11, which establishes a training program focused on substantial risk orders and requires an annual report. Substantial risk orders are civil court orders used in firearm-related risk prevention, and the new program is intended to improve training for the personnel involved in their implementation and enforcement. The bill also continues to emphasize specialized training topics already present in the code, including crisis intervention, courthouse security, service of process, pregnancy-related corrections training, and dementia/Alzheimer’s response for dispatchers.
The bill affects state law by amending the Department of Criminal Justice Services’ statutory authority to set compulsory minimum training standards for multiple categories of public safety employees and by adding a new section requiring a substantial risk order training program and annual reporting. In practical terms, it expands and formalizes training obligations for law-enforcement agencies, correctional facilities, sheriffs’ offices, and dispatch operations, and it may require the Department to develop new curricula, standards, and reporting procedures. The bill does not appear to create new criminal penalties, but it does change administrative duties and training requirements for state and local public safety personnel.
The available record shows no committee transcript or recorded vote breakdown, so there is no direct evidence of debate or opposition in the provided materials. Based on the bill’s enactment as Chapter 696, the measure appears to have had sufficient support to pass both chambers and be signed into law. The overall tone of the legislation is policy-oriented and technical, focusing on training, implementation, and public safety administration rather than partisan conflict.
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided committee or vote materials. If there was disagreement, it is not reflected here. Potential areas of concern inherent in the bill’s subject matter would likely involve the scope of mandatory training, administrative burden on agencies, and how substantial risk orders are taught and implemented, but those issues are not explicitly attributed to any legislator, committee member, or stakeholder in the supplied record.