The Honorable Garland W. Fulbright Opinion No. H- 141
Executive Director
Commission on Fire Protection Re: Whether Article 4413(35),
Personnel Standards & Education § 6(a) applies to changes
2209 Hancock Drive, Suite B in employment after
Austin, Texas 78756 September 1, 1972, and
related questions
Dear Mr. Fulbiight:
Your request for an opinion poses the following questions:
1. In the event fire protection personnel obtain
employment in a municipality other than the
one where they were serving under permanent
employment prior to September 1, 1972, would
they be subject to the required training for
certification within one year from the date of
their appointment to the new position in accord-
ance with Article 4413(35), 5 6?
2. Do personnel who receive pay from the fire
department, wear fire department uniforms,
who may or may not be assigned firefighting
duties, and who are employed in the operation
of ambulances have to meet the minimum train-
ing standards required of fire protection per-
sonnel?
Article 4413(35), 5 1, Vernon’s Texas Civil Statutes, creates the Commis-
sion on Fire Protection Personnel Standards and Education, authorized to
“establish minimum educational, training, physical, mental, and moral stan-
dards for admission to employment as fire protection personnel’: etc. The
Act provides in its $6(b) that:
p. 671
The Honorab,le Garland W. Fulbright, page 2 (H-141)
“No person after September 1, 1972, shall be
appointed to a municipal fire department, except on
a temporary or probationary basis, unless such per-
son has satisfactorily completed a preparatory pro-
gram of training in fire protection at a school approved
or operated by the Commission . . . .‘I
However, in 5 6(a) of the Act it provides:
“Fire protection personnel already serving
under permanent a,ppointment prior to September 1,
1972, shall not be required to meet any requirement
of Subsections (b) and (c) of this section as a condition
of tenure or continued employment . . . . The Legis-
lature finds, and it is hereby declared to be the policy
of this Act, that such fire protection personnel have
satisfied such requirements by their experience. ”
Clearly, the Act provides that fire protection personnel under a
permanent appointment prior to September 1, 1972, so long as they serve
under that appointment, shall not be required to meet the training require-
ments of Subsection (b). Your question, however, adds the additional factor
of an appointment to a municipal fire department in which the personnel in
question did not have a permanent appointment prior to September 1, 1972.
In construing the language of the statute, it is our purpose to deter-
mine the legislative intent. In doing this, it is proper to consider the
general policy toward the matter legislated upon, the purpose of the legis-
lation, the evils to be remedied, and the object to be accomplished. See
Do1an.v. Walker, 49 S. W. 2d 695 (Tex. 1932).
We believe that it is obvious the legislative intent in enacting Article
4413(35) was to provide that fire protection personnel be adequately trained.
The legislation is not directed at length of service within any particular
department. Rather, it requires that such personnel undergo such training
as the Commission shall direct. It assumes, as an exception to that require-
ment, that fire protection personnel, serving under permanent appointment
p. 672
The Honorable Garland W. Fulbright, page 3 (H-141)
prior to September 1, 1972, will have acquired the same training by exper-
ience and need not undergo the formal program prescribed by the Commis-
sion.
In our opinion, this will be true whether the particular person involved
remains in one department or transfers to another. We therefore answer
your first question that, if fire protection personnel were serving under a
permanent appointment prior to September 1, 1972, they do not have to meet
the requirements set forth in Subsections (b) and (c) even though they transfer
to a fire department of another municipality.
Your second question asks whether personnel who may or mav not be
assigned fire fighting duties, but who receive their pay from a fire depart-
ment, wear a fire department uniform and are employed in the operation of
ambulances have to meet the minimum training standards required of fire
protection personnel by Article 4413(35), 5 6.
Section 10 of the Act provides: “This Act shall apply only to fully paid
firemen. ” The Act does not define either “firemen” or “fire protection per-
sonnel. ”
Section 6, in addition to the portions which we have quoted earlier,
provides that “No person” shall be appointed to a municipal fire department
unless he has completed the training program.
It is our opinion that the Legislature intended that all those in the employ
of a fire department who “may” be assigned firefighting duties, even though
their primary duties may be asanambulance driver or attendant, or in some
other position, should be required to complete the prescribed training as a
prerequisite to receiving a permanent appointment.
We therefore are of the opinion that the requirements of Article 4413(35),
§6 > apply to all personnel of a fire department who may be assigned firefighting
duties at any time.
SUMMARY
1. Fire protection personnel not required to undergo
the training provided by Article 4413(35), § 6, V. T. C. S.,
p. 673
The Honorable Garland W. Fulbright, page 4 (H-141)
retain that status even though they may become
employed in a different municipality.
2. Personnel of a fire department who are
employed in the operation of ambulances, but who
may also be assigned firefighting duties, are re-
quired to meet the minimum training standards of
fire protection personnel required by Article 4413
(35), §6.
Very truly yours,
JOHN L. HILL
Attorney General of Texas
DAVID M. KENDALL, Chairman
Opinion Committee
p. 674