PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Subramanyam, Suhas [D-VA-10] · D–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Oct 14, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.10712 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.10712 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.10712 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.10712 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2026-10-01 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed First Responder Behavioral Health Access Act would expand eligibility under an existing mental and behavioral health training program to qualified emergency response providers. It would also create a three-year grant pilot supporting confidential counseling, peer support, and related training for first responders. Grants would prioritize providers with limited behavioral health resources. The bill would authorize $10 million annually for fiscal years 2027–2029; that authorization would not itself provide the money.
This Act may be cited as the First Responder Behavioral Health Access Act.
The term eligible institution includes a qualified emergency response provider.
The Secretary of Health and Human Services (in this section referred to as the Secretary) shall establish a 3-year pilot program
Embedding clinicians, who are licensed or certified by the respective jurisdictions in which such clinicians practice, with qualified emergency response providers for purposes of providing confidential counseling services
Assisting in providing training to peer-to-peer behavioral health care providers at a qualified emergency response provider.
the Secretary shall give priority to eligible entities seeking to assist qualified emergency response providers that are under-resourced with respect to behavioral health care and peer-to-peer programs.
There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this Act $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2029.
Section 2 would add qualified emergency response providers to the institutions eligible under section 756 of the Public Health Service Act. For those institutions, the amendment would support recruiting and placing clinicians or behavioral health service providers in emergency response settings.
Section 756 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 294e–1) is amended
in the case of an eligible institution that is a qualified emergency response provider, to support the field placement and recruitment of clinicians or behavioral health service providers in qualified emergency response providers,
The term eligible institution includes a qualified emergency response provider.
Both program provisions define qualified emergency response providers by referring to the Homeland Security Act's definition of emergency response providers and to public safety telecommunicators. They identify telecommunicators through federal occupational classification 43–5031 in the 2018 manual, or its successor designation.
The term public safety telecommunicator means a public safety telecommunicator as designated in detailed occupation 43–5031 in the Standard Occupational Classification Manual of the Office of Management and Budget issued in 2018, or any successor designation.
The term qualified emergency response provider means— (A) an emergency response provider (as defined in section 2 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101)); and (B) a public safety telecommunicator.
The term public safety telecommunicator means a public safety telecommunicator as designated in detailed occupation 43–5031 in the Standard Occupational Classification Manual of the Office of Management and Budget issued in 2018, or any successor designation.
The term qualified emergency response provider means— (A) an emergency response provider (as defined in section 2 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 101)); and (B) a public safety telecommunicator.
The Secretary of Health and Human Services would have to establish a three-year pilot awarding grants to help qualified emergency response providers support behavioral health needs.
The Secretary of Health and Human Services (in this section referred to as the Secretary) shall establish a 3-year pilot program under which the Secretary will award grants to eligible entities to assist qualified emergency response providers in supporting the behavioral health needs of qualified emergency response providers.
Eligible grant applicants would be state, local, county, or regional public health departments; local, county, or regional behavioral health agencies; and nonprofit organizations experienced in serving first responders to improve behavioral health outcomes.
The term eligible entity means a State, local, county, or regional public health department, a local, county, or regional behavioral health agency, or a non-profit organization with experience servicing first responders with respect to improving behavioral health outcomes.
A grant recipient could use funds for one of the listed purposes, including placing clinicians with qualified emergency response providers to provide confidential counseling. Those clinicians would need a license or certification from the jurisdiction where they practice, and counseling would follow that jurisdiction's confidentiality requirements.
An eligible entity receiving a grant under this section may use funds received through the grant for one of the following purposes:
Embedding clinicians, who are licensed or certified by the respective jurisdictions in which such clinicians practice, with qualified emergency response providers for purposes of providing confidential counseling services, in accordance with confidentiality requirements of such respective jurisdiction.
Other permitted uses would be establishing a peer support program providing the specified counseling, overseeing or supporting such a program, or helping train peer behavioral health care providers. The counseling could include responses to a behavioral health incident and follow-up at periodic intervals.
Establishing a peer-to-peer program at a qualified emergency response provider under which counseling services described in paragraph (1) are provided, including in response to a behavioral health incident and at periodic intervals after such an incident.
Overseeing the operation of, or otherwise supporting, such a program.
Assisting in providing training to peer-to-peer behavioral health care providers at a qualified emergency response provider.
Applicants would have to follow the Secretary's application timing and submission requirements. Applications would describe planned spending, existing behavioral health programs including peer programs, and the applicant's assessment of how funding could improve outcomes in its service area.
An eligible entity seeking a grant under this section shall submit an application at such time and in such manner as the Secretary may require.
Such application shall include— (1) a description of how the entity plans to use funds received through the grant; (2) a description of any behavioral health care programs the entity operates as of the date of the submission of the application, including any peer-to-peer programs; and (3) the entity’s assessment of how the grant funds could be used to improve behavioral health outcomes in the area served by such entity.
The Secretary would have to prioritize applicants helping providers that lack behavioral health care and peer program resources. The Secretary would also have to distribute funds equitably across geographic areas.
In awarding grants under this section, the Secretary shall give priority to eligible entities seeking to assist qualified emergency response providers that are under-resourced with respect to behavioral health care and peer-to-peer programs.
In awarding grants under this section, the Secretary shall ensure an equitable geographic distribution of funds.
Within one year after the pilot ends, the Secretary would have to report to Congress on whether and how it improved behavioral health outcomes, the number of peer contacts, and the number of peer behavioral health care providers trained. The reporting requirement does not establish that the program would improve outcomes.
Not later than one year after the date on which the pilot program under this section concludes, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on such program.
Such report shall address— (1) whether and how the program improved behavioral health outcomes for qualified emergency response providers; (2) how many peer-to-peer contacts were made under the program; and (3) how many peer-to-peer behavior health care providers were trained under the program.
The bill would authorize Congress to provide $10 million for each of fiscal years 2027, 2028, and 2029 to carry out the Act. This is permission for future funding, rather than an appropriation making funds available.
There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this Act $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2027 through 2029.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated October 14, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce on October 1, 2026.
Source snapshot updated 2026-10-14T15:12:07Z. 2026-10-01: Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. 2026-10-01: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-10-01. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy rider was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish what other versions or accompanying materials contain.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for a particular named recipient or place was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. General funding authorization and program allocation requirements do not alone establish earmarks. This conclusion is limited to this version; accompanying earmark materials are absent.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow carve-out, special exemption, or preferential benefit beyond ordinary program coverage and allocation priorities was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Oct 14, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI