AB 1814 directs the California Commission on Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST) to establish and maintain a continuing, instructor-led training course focused on detecting and apprehending drivers who may be impaired by drugs or alcohol. The law targets officers assigned primarily to traffic enforcement and makes the training a recurring professional requirement.
The measure standardizes a statewide baseline for DUI detection training, embeds active learning (scenario-based instruction), and authorizes certain existing POST-certified or CHP courses as substitutes. Because local agencies will have to provide or pay for training time, the bill is declared a potential state-mandated local program subject to reimbursement rules.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill requires POST to develop and maintain an instructor-led continuing education course emphasizing practical, scenario-based methods for detecting DUI drivers and documenting findings for court. It establishes a recurring training obligation tied to officers’ traffic-enforcement assignments and lets POST accept certain existing certified courses as substitutes.
Who It Affects
Peace officers at the rank of supervisor and below who are assigned primarily to traffic enforcement across California, plus POST and the California Highway Patrol as training providers. Local police and sheriff’s departments will need to schedule, track, and fund training for covered officers.
Why It Matters
The bill creates a uniform statewide training baseline for DUI detection that intersects patrol practices, prosecution preparedness, and administrative budgeting for local agencies. It also formalizes POST’s role in approving alternative courses and sets an implementation deadline that agencies must meet.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill adds Section 13519.16 to the Penal Code and makes POST responsible for designing, delivering, and maintaining a continuing course about identifying and arresting drivers suspected of violating Vehicle Code section 23152. POST must build the course around instructor-led active learning — the text explicitly contemplates scenario-based training and facilitated exercises rather than only lecture.
The statute requires the course to be substantive and practical: the course must run at least three consecutive hours and cover a defined set of subject areas that connect roadside observations to documentation and courtroom testimony. By tying the course to continuing professional training eligibility, the bill leaves room for POST to fold the new requirement into existing certification systems and to accept preexisting, certified alternatives.Operationally, the bill applies to peace officers at the supervisor level and below who are assigned primarily to traffic enforcement; it excludes officers who only enforce traffic as an ancillary part of general patrol duties.
The bill also lists specific CHP courses (for example, the standardized field sobriety testing course and Drug Recognition Expert classroom and recertification courses) that satisfy the requirement, and it permits POST-certified continuing education equivalents to stand in for the new course.POST must implement the new rule by July 1, 2027. The statute also includes a standard state-mandated-local-program clause: if the Commission on State Mandates finds this creates reimbursable costs, reimbursement follows the Government Code provisions cited in the bill.
That framing routes the fiscal question into the established reimbursement process rather than leaving an immediate funding mechanism in the statute itself.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The statute requires the POST course to run at least three consecutive hours and to use instructor-led active learning, such as scenario-based training, not just classroom lecture.
The bill enumerates seven minimum topical areas the course must cover, including standardized field sobriety testing, the seven major drug categories, signs and symptoms, physiology of drugs, drug combinations, courtroom testimony, and report writing.
Covered officers are those at the rank of supervisor or below who are assigned primarily to traffic enforcement; officers whose traffic enforcement is only an ancillary patrol function are excluded.
POST may accept specified CHP courses—Standardized Field Sobriety Testing, Drug Recognition Expert classroom and recertification, and Advanced Roadside Impaired Driving Enforcement—as satisfying the requirement, and may also accept any other POST-certified continuing professional training-eligible equivalent.
POST must implement the course on or before July 1, 2027, and the bill includes a state-mandated local program provision that refers reimbursement questions to the Commission on State Mandates and Government Code procedures.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
POST must create an instructor-led DUI detection course
Subdivision (a) directs POST to establish and maintain a continuing training course focused on law enforcement detection and apprehension of drivers suspected of DUI under Vehicle Code Section 23152. The language requires instructor-led active learning — for example, scenario-based training — which obligates POST to design a syllabus and training methods that emphasize applied skills rather than only slide-based instruction. That design choice has consequences for course length, instructor qualifications, and equipment or facility needs (e.g., mock-traffic stops, classrooms configured for role play).
Minimum length and mandatory topic list
Subdivision (b) sets the minimum course length at three consecutive hours and lists seven topic areas that must be included. That creates a floor for content (standardized field sobriety testing; seven major drug categories; signs and symptomatology; physiology of drugs; drug combinations; courtroom testimony; and report writing). For POST and training providers this means curricula must be mapped to those topics and instructors must be prepared to bridge roadside observations to court-ready documentation and testimony.
Who must take the course and the assignment test
Subdivision (c) places the training obligation on peace officers at the rank of supervisor or below who are assigned primarily to traffic enforcement, and requires completion within one year of assignment and every two years thereafter. The statute clarifies that the designation is assignment-based: officers who do traffic enforcement only as an ancillary function of general patrol are not captured. Departments will therefore need assignment-tracking processes to determine who triggers the requirement and when re-training deadlines occur.
Authorized substitutes and CHP courses that qualify
Subdivision (d) allows certain CHP-delivered, POST-certified courses to satisfy the requirement: the standardized field sobriety testing course, the Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) classroom and recertification courses, and the Advanced Roadside Impaired Driving Enforcement course. It also permits any other POST-certified, continuing professional training-eligible course on DUI detection to stand in. That creates an administrative pathway for crediting existing coursework and reduces duplication where local agencies already rely on CHP or other POST-certified programs.
Implementation deadline and mandate language
Subdivision (e) requires POST to implement the section on or before July 1, 2027. The bill’s final provision sends the question of state reimbursement for any local costs to the Commission on State Mandates and the Government Code procedures for mandated-cost claims, rather than appropriating funds or specifying immediate reimbursement mechanics in the statute itself.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Justice across all five countries.
Explore Justice in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Traffic-assigned peace officers: receive standardized, scenario-based instruction that is intended to sharpen on-road detection skills and courtroom testimony, improving evidentiary quality and professional confidence.
- Prosecutors and courts: benefit from more consistent report-writing and courtroom testimony because the course explicitly trains officers on documentation and testimony linked to roadside observations.
- Public road users and victims of impaired driving: stand to gain from potentially improved detection and interdiction of impaired drivers due to a uniform statewide baseline for training.
Who Bears the Cost
- Local police and sheriff’s departments: must schedule training time, pay overtime or backfill, and potentially purchase instructor time or facilities to meet the new continuing-education obligations for covered officers.
- Small and rural agencies: face disproportionate burden because they have fewer officers to cover shifts, less internal training capacity, and smaller budgets to absorb recurring training costs every two years.
- POST and CHP: will need to allocate staff time and resources to develop, deliver, certify, and track the new course and to administer credit for alternative, POST-certified courses; that administrative load could require re-prioritization of other training programs.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is balancing public-safety benefits from a uniform, scenario-driven DUI detection standard against the fiscal and operational burden placed on local agencies and POST to design, deliver, and repeatedly administer that training; improving detection and courtroom-ready evidence requires investment and implementation choices that can be expensive and uneven across jurisdictions.
The bill sets a clear statewide baseline for DUI detection training, but it leaves important implementation choices to POST. The statute prescribes minimum content and an active-learning approach, yet it does not specify instructor qualifications, maximum class sizes, or assessment standards for competence.
Those omissions mean POST will decide whether the course is a hands-on skills test, a performance-assessed scenario, or a documented-attendance model — and each choice carries different costs, efficacy profiles, and legal risk implications for agencies and officers.
There is also a practical tension between accepting existing CHP and POST-certified courses as substitutes and ensuring consistent training quality. Allowing substitutes reduces duplication and respects existing certification pipelines (like DRE), but it can produce variation in how topics are covered and assessed across different providers.
Finally, routing fiscal relief to the Commission on State Mandates starts the reimbursement clock but does not guarantee timely or full funding; many local agencies will need to plan for outlays up front while reimbursement claims proceed through an often-lengthy administrative process.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.