AB 1913 establishes a firefighter endorsement for drivers of firefighting equipment and defines two paths to legal operation: either hold the endorsement together with certain class C/A/B licenses, or hold an appropriate class A or B license outright. The bill prescribes minimum training curricula, instructor qualifications, a written exam, and biennial medical reporting.
The measure matters because it sets statewide baseline competencies for anyone operating fire apparatus owned or controlled by public, tribal, or recognized volunteer fire departments. That standardization affects training budgets, volunteer recruitment, and departmental staffing decisions while centralizing some responsibilities with the Department of Motor Vehicles and the Office of the State Fire Marshal.
At a Glance
What It Does
Requires a firefighter endorsement (or an appropriate class A/B license) to operate firefighting equipment used to travel to emergency scenes or transport emergency-control gear; mandates minimum classroom and behind-the-wheel training, instructor credentials, a DMV-written exam, and biennial medical submissions. Adds fee rules: no extra charge when endorsement is added at license renewal; adding it midterm requires a duplicate license fee.
Who It Affects
Career and volunteer firefighters who drive apparatus, municipal and tribal fire departments that own, lease, or control emergency vehicles, DMV and the Office of the State Fire Marshal for training and credential oversight, and small/rural departments that presently rely on informal training pathways.
Why It Matters
It replaces locally variable practices with a uniform statewide baseline for apparatus operation, which could reduce operator error and liability but will force departments and individuals to meet specified training and instructor standards, shifting costs and administrative work to departments and state agencies.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
AB 1913 creates a distinct firefighter endorsement and lays out two legal ways to operate firefighting equipment: (1) obtain the firefighter endorsement from the DMV plus hold a class C (with endorsement) or a restricted/noncommercial class A or B license as appropriate for the vehicle, or (2) hold a full class A or B license suitable for the apparatus. The point is to ensure that anyone behind the wheel of an engine, ladder, or similar apparatus meets a state-recognized competency standard.
To earn the endorsement the bill requires proof of active employment or volunteer registration with a recognized fire department and documented fire-equipment operation training. Acceptable training is either the Fire Apparatus Driver/Operator 1A course taught by an instructor registered with the Office of the State Fire Marshal, or a department-delivered program that meets the bill’s specific content and hour minimums.
The statute spells out minimum cognitive and manipulative hours and requires directly supervised behind-the-wheel time.Instructor qualifications are tightly specified: instructors must have substantial field experience (at least five years as an emergency vehicle operator with three years at engineer rank or higher), hold an appropriate California license, and possess recognized instructor or training-officer certification. The DMV will administer a written firefighter exam developed in cooperation with the Office of the State Fire Marshal, and applicants must submit a department-approved medical form when applying and every two years thereafter.The bill also clarifies scope and exemptions.
It applies only to apparatus owned, leased, rented, or under the exclusive control of public agencies, officially recognized volunteer departments, or tribal departments and used to travel to emergency scenes or transport emergency equipment. It exempts trainees operating apparatus for practice during nonemergency training exercises when supervised by a properly licensed department employee.
The statute names the rear-axle driver of a ladder truck as a tiller operator and includes a provision permitting departments to require a full class A or B license even where the endorsement would otherwise suffice.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill creates a DMV firefighter endorsement and sets two compliance routes: endorsement plus specified license classes, or an appropriate class A or B commercial-equivalent license.
Required training must be Fire Apparatus Driver/Operator 1A or an equivalent department course meeting NFPA 1002 (2008) standards and include at least 16 classroom hours and 14 manipulative hours with supervised behind-the-wheel training.
Instructors must have at least five years’ emergency vehicle operator experience (three as an engineer or higher), hold a valid California class A/B or endorsed class C license, and be certified as a training instructor or officer.
Applicants must pass a DMV-written firefighter exam developed with the Office of the State Fire Marshal and submit a department-approved medical form upon application and every two years.
Adding the firefighter endorsement costs nothing at license renewal; adding it mid-cycle requires the duplicate license fee under Section 14901.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Two pathways to operate firefighting equipment
This subsection sets the core licensing requirement: a driver must either obtain a firefighter endorsement and hold the listed base license types or possess an appropriate class A or B license directly. Practically, this allows departments to use the endorsement to qualify noncommercial drivers while preserving the traditional class A/B path for operators who already hold heavy-vehicle credentials.
Qualification package: employment proof, training, and testing
Applicants must prove active firefighter employment or recognized volunteer status and show evidence of completing the prescribed apparatus training. The DMV will require passage of a written firefighter exam co-developed with the Office of the State Fire Marshal. This subsection links personnel status to training eligibility, making departmental verification a gatekeeping step for endorsement issuance.
Training content and instructor registration
The statute mandates either the Fire Apparatus Driver/Operator 1A course as taught by OSFM-registered instructors or a department course that matches NFPA 1002 (2008) benchmarks, with minimum classroom and manipulative hours. It also limits who may teach: instructors must either be OSFM-registered or meet experience, licensing, and certification criteria, narrowing the pool of acceptable trainers and privileging standardized instruction.
Fees for adding or renewing the endorsement
The bill waives any additional charge when a firefighter endorsement is added at the time of license renewal. If a driver requests the endorsement outside the renewal cycle, they must pay the duplicate license fee under existing law. This creates a small financial incentive to time endorsement applications to coincide with renewal.
Scope, ownership, and training exemptions
The licensing requirement applies only when the vehicle is owned, leased, rented, or under exclusive control of a public agency, recognized volunteer department, tribal department, or federal/state agency and is used to travel to emergency scenes or carry control equipment. It carves out a practical training exemption: trainees may operate apparatus during supervised, nonemergency training without the endorsement provided a properly licensed trainer supervises.
Definitions: tiller operator and firefighting equipment
The bill defines a tiller operator as the driver of the rear free-axle portion of a ladder truck, clarifying that articulated ladder drivers fall within the rule. It also ties ‘firefighting equipment’ to vehicles that meet class A or B definitions and are used in emergency response by covered departments, which limits the endorsement’s reach to apparatus actually used on-scene.
Department discretion to require higher-class licenses
Even where the endorsement would permit an operator to drive, a regularly organized fire department may still require employees or volunteers to hold a full class A or B license. This preserves local control for departments that prefer commercial-equivalent licensing standards for operational or liability reasons.
Applicability date reference
The statute states it applies to persons hired by a fire department, or renewing a driver’s license, on or after January 1, 2011. That retrospective-seeming date is in the text and will require administrative interpretation about whether the provision creates ongoing qualification standards for current operators or was intended only for post-2011 hires and renewals.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Transportation across all five countries.
Explore Transportation 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
- Fire departments and incident commanders — standardizing operator qualifications reduces uncertainty about driver competence and helps with operational planning and liability management.
- Public safety risk managers and insurers — clearer, documented training pathways and testing can reduce operational risk and support underwriting and claims defensibility.
- Volunteer firefighters who complete the required courses — they gain a recognized state credential that formalizes their ability to operate apparatus and may ease mutual-aid interoperability.
- Office of the State Fire Marshal — the bill increases the OSFM’s role in registering instructors and aligning departmental courses with state standards.
- DMV — gains a clear statutory basis to issue a firefighter endorsement, standardize testing, and centralize medical-fit reporting for apparatus drivers.
Who Bears the Cost
- Small and rural volunteer fire departments — they face new training, recordkeeping, and instructor-identification burdens and may need to send personnel off-site to meet hour and instructor requirements.
- Individual drivers without class A/B licenses — obtaining the endorsement, completing course hours, passing the written exam, and meeting biennial medical reporting will impose time and indirect financial costs.
- Fire departments — administrative tasks increase (verifying employment, documenting training, coordinating recertification), and some may choose to require class A/B licenses, which are more costly to obtain.
- State agencies (DMV and OSFM) — implementation will require staff time to develop the exam, register instructors, and process endorsements and medical forms, potentially without dedicated funding.
- Training providers and instructors — the narrow instructor requirements may limit who can teach, forcing departments to recruit qualified instructors or pay for external trainers.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma: improve public safety by raising and standardizing driver competency versus the risk that higher, uniform standards will reduce the available pool of apparatus operators—particularly in volunteer, rural, and under-resourced departments—creating staffing gaps at the very moment higher competence is needed.
AB 1913 draws a clear line between safety standardization and practical capacity. The bill’s training minima and instructor credentials aim to raise minimum operator competence, but those same rules risk shrinking the available instructor pool and increasing the marginal cost of training—especially for volunteer or tribal departments that rely on low-cost, locally delivered instruction.
The statute references NFPA 1002 (2008) specifically; that dated standard may misalign with later NFPA updates or local best practices and will require agencies to decide whether to update references administratively or by future legislation.
Several implementation ambiguities could matter in practice. The requirement that applicants provide a letter or designee verification from the chief places verification burden on departments without specifying an electronic or audit-friendly recordkeeping standard.
The biennial medical-reporting requirement raises privacy and administrative questions: which medical standards apply, who reviews the submissions, and how medical disqualifications are appealed. Finally, the section that limits application to vehicles under “exclusive control” of covered departments and the oddly retroactive-seeming applicability date (January 1, 2011) invite interpretative disputes about whether certain mutual-aid, leased, or emergency-hire arrangements fall inside or outside the rule.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.