Aye, the California Vehicle Code obligates all emergency vehicles to be equipped with a forward-facing, steady-burning red light. It's possible to get a waiver, but I don't think the California Highway Patrol grants very many.
Title 13 - California Law
- Thread starter badge22
- Start date
Mandatory... as in it's traditional?rad123 said:
I located this CVC:
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/dmv/detail/pubs/vctop/vc/vc
Is there an additional CVC or other regulation that requires amber to the rear?
Last edited by a moderator:
It is not mandatory. The Vehicle Code says any emergency vehicle MAY display flashing amber to the rear, front, sides.
Which?Zack said:
It (steady red) is the law. It was the law when a single steady burning light was the only light on most emergency vehicles and that has never been changed. You could argue that the law has remained due to the effective distance tracking of steady burn, the CHP's continued use of minimal lighting when stopped, or tradition. Either way this is a long standing law as far as vehicle warning goes.
Amber, however is not mandated, it is specifically allowed. Several big agencies used it, many sogs adopted it. Companies made CA septups with the required steady red, and approved rear amber. People think both are required, only the red is.
Last edited by a moderator:
Oh, I totally understand the law.JohnMarcson said:
My comment was in response to someone being asked if the requirement was "mandatory" or "traditional." The response to that question being that it was traditional and therefore mandatory.
At least that's how I interpreted it. So my comment was that just because something is "traditional" does not mean that it's "mandated" (by law).
Last edited by a moderator:
I totally understood the assertion that rear amber was not mandatory despite someone continuing to insist that traditional translated to mandatory.
People starting using pronouns, and the mandatory steady red requirement and the allowed amber got confused. To clear the thread up:
Steady burning front facing red is a long standing minimum requirement in CA. Rear facing flashing amber is specifically allowed by law, and specified by many agencies including CHP. The combo has been picked up by so many departments and manufacturers that it is a standard practice in CA. In truth, the law does not mandate the rear amber the way it does the front red, it simply has a provision allowing for it. They are seen together so frequently people think both are required.
-thread merge and resurrection due to
CA vehicle code
Warning Lamps on Authorized Emergency Vehicles
25252. Every authorized emergency vehicle shall be equipped with at least one steady burning red warning lamp visible from at least 1000 feet to the front of the vehicle to be used as provided in this code.
In addition, authorized emergency vehicles may display revolving, flashing, or steady red warning lights to the front, sides or rear of the vehicles.
Authorized Emergency Vehicles: Additional Lights
25258. (a) An authorized emergency vehicle operating under the conditions specified in Section 21055 may display a flashing white light from a gaseous discharge lamp designed and used for the purpose of controlling official traffic control signals.
(b)An authorized emergency vehicle used by a peace officer, as defined in Section 830.1 of, subdivision (a), (b ), (c ), (d), (e), (f), (g), or (i) of Section 830.2 of, subdivision (n) of Section 830.3 of, subdivision (b)of Section 830.31 of, subdivision (a) or (b )of Section 830.32 of, Section 830.33 of, subdivision (a) of Section 830.36 of, subdivision (a) of Section 830.4 of, or Section 830.6 of, the Penal Code, in the performance of the peace officer's duties, may, in addition, display a steady or flashing blue warning light visible from the front, sides, or rear of the vehicle.
(c ) Except as provided in subdivision (a), a vehicle shall not be equipped with a device that emits any illumination or radiation that is designed or used for the purpose of controlling official traffic control signals.
Additional Warning Lights on Authorized Emergency Vehicles
25259. (a) Any authorized emergency vehicle may display flashing amber warning lights to the front, sides, or rear.
(b)A vehicle operated by a police or traffic officer while in the actual performance of his or her duties may display steady burning or flashing white lights to either side mounted above the roofline of the vehicle.
(c ) Any authorized emergency vehicle may display not more than two flashing white warning lights to the front mounted above the roofline of the vehicle and not more than two flashing white warning lights to the front mounted below the roofline of the vehicle. These lamps may be in addition to the flashing headlamps permitted under Section 25252.5.
Warning Lights on Vehicles Operated by Personnel of Marshal's Department
25254. In any county with a population of 250,000 or more persons, publicly owned vehicles operated by peace officer personnel of a marshal's department, when actually being used in the enforcement of the orders of any court, including, but not limited to, the transportation of prisoners, may display flashing amber warning lights to the rear when such vehicles are necessarily parked upon a roadway and such parking constitutes a hazard to other motorists.
TITLE 13
§ 818. Type of Warning Lamps Used on Emergency Vehicles and Special Hazard Vehicles.
13 CA ADC § 818
Title 13. Motor Vehicles
Division 2. Department of the California Highway Patrol
Chapter 2. Lighting Equipment
Article 22. Warning Lamps (Refs & Annos)
Warning lamps on emergency vehicles and special hazard vehicles shall be of the following types:
(a) Required Red Warning Lamps on Authorized Emergency Vehicles. The steady burning red warning lamp required to be visible to the front of an authorized emergency vehicle by Vehicle Code Section 25252 shall be a Class A, B or C warning lamp. Motorcycles may instead be equipped with two Class D warning lamps in the front, one of which may flash.
(b)Permitted Additional Red Warning Lamps on Authorized Emergency Vehicles. The additional steady burning or flashing red warning lamp permitted by Vehicle Code Section 25252 shall be a Class A, B, C, or E warning lamp.
(c ) Permitted Yellow Warning Lamps on Authorized Emergency Vehicles. The additional flashing yellow warning lamp permitted on authorized emergency vehicles by Vehicle Code Section 25259 shall be a Class B, C, or E warning lamp. Two yellow motorcycle turn signal lamps may be used as warning lamps on the rear of motorcycles.
(d) Permitted Blue Warning Lamps on Police Vehicles. The additional flashing or steady burning blue warning lamp permitted by Vehicle Code Section 25258(b ) shall be Class B, C, or E.
(e) Required Yellow Warning Lamps on Tow Cars. The flashing yellow warning lamp required on tow cars by Vehicle Code Section 25253 shall be a Class B, C, or E warning lamp. The flashing yellow warning lamp permitted to be displayed to the rear of a tow car while towing a vehicle and moving at a speed slower than the normal flow of traffic may be a 360-degree revolving or gaseous discharge lamp. In such case, the front and side areas of the lens or transparent cover that extends back to 45 degrees to each side of the straight-to-the-rear axis of the lamp shall be covered with opaque material reaching to the top of the lighted area. A revolving lamp may instead be equipped with a device that turns each light source off during the forward three-fourths of its rotation.
(f ) Permitted Yellow Warning Lamps on Special Hazard Vehicles. The flashing yellow warning lamps permitted on special hazard vehicles by Article 7 of Division 12 of the Vehicle Code beginning with Section 25252, shall be a Class B, C, or E warning lamp, depending on whether the lamp is permitted to be displayed only to the front and rear or to the front, sides, and rear.
(g) Warning Lamps for Undercover Cars. The required steady-burning forward-facing warning lamps on authorized emergency vehicles with special plates permitted by Vehicle Code Section 5001 shall be a class A, B, or C. This warning lamp may also be a fixed or handheld red spotlamp with a filament of at least 30 watts, and producing at least 3,000 candela in red at the brightest point in the beam. Such a lamp need not meet any of the other requirements of this article except for color. Additional steady-burning or flashing warning lamps shall be class A, B, C, or E. These warning lamps may be displayed through transparent or translucent material provided the light, of proper color, is plainly visible and understandable in bright sunlight and during darkness, under normal atmospheric conditions, to a distance of 800 feet from the vehicle. These lights shall not transfigure, disrupt or mask any other required lighting device.
Note: Authority cited: Section 26103, Vehicle Code. Reference: Sections 24012 and 26103, Vehicle Code.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes are they follow them?
Mx7000,lp6000,xl9000,.....were used in most agencies expesually lapd and lasd.
one more thing,does someone maybe now whay
Are or did some agencies used to rear side
amber and blue flashing lights or amber and red flashing light?
Maybe chp,lapd or lasd??? Are there some difference betwen them maybe?
Mx7000,lp6000,xl9000,.....were used in most agencies expesually lapd and lasd.
one more thing,does someone maybe now whay
Are or did some agencies used to rear side
amber and blue flashing lights or amber and red flashing light?
Maybe chp,lapd or lasd??? Are there some difference betwen them maybe?
Last edited by a moderator:
At my local department here in SoCal, only a few cars use steady burn red. Crown Vic's are usually fitted with blue/amber lights in front and rear, and the newer Ford explorers we have are fitted with Valor light bars, the lights start from the center and part out in the front and does not have a steady burn red on the Valor.
I guarantee you that there is a steady red on the vehicles. It is CA law, and has not changed for decades.
Usually on the Valor they use a "hotfoot" where the base of the lightbar has leds on the mounting feet. Usually in CA they area steay Red and Blues. The lightbar itself flashes. This is because the new bars don't have steady patterns in them.
I have also seen agencies add red and blue LEDs to the under side of the lightbar itself to use as steady burn.
If the lightbar does not have it, they may have grill lights or an interior light set to steady.
Nothing says the lightbar has to have it, as long as it is mounted to the vehicle, facing to the front, it does not matter where it is.
If the units you are talking about is one that is in your avatar here on ELB, the steady red and blues are on the hot foot. Mounted on the ends of the bar, beneath the actual bar.
I would like to know if there is any way we can use this method of reviving dead threads in a practical life setting. This product idea would be worth millions if not billions if we could revive people as easily as these long dead threads. Any thoughts or people willing to help me fund this research? :haha:
Last edited by a moderator:
I just saw one of the crown vics today, no red. Just blue and amber in the front. I may have some pictures of the unit somewhere, i'll try to dig them up. We also have a traffic unit with no solid red lights, I do have pictures and video of that one.
Heres one of the traffic units. As seen in the picture, it doesn't have a solid red. Its R/B visor light flashes back in forth as well as the lower strobe grille lights. This was taken last week.
On the Silverado its clearly not legal, unless someone messed with the flash patterns. I guarantee any installer in CA will set lights to steady burn.
If that is your department you may want to tell them, so it can be changed back. By law there has to be a steady burn light. A lawyer will eat the department on the stand if they have pics like this that show it is not a legal emergency vehicle. Regardless of what it says on the side of the vehicle, technically someone does not have to pull over for it, or stop for it. If they light someone up and they run, a lawyer can pretty much have any eluding cases dropped because it was not a legal emergency vehicle.
It dumb to think of it like that, but it is a law that has been in the CVC for decades. How a lawyer will look at it like, your officers are breaking the law every time they run through red lights, or stop signs, so why is my client for not stopping for a vehicle, that was not in compliance with the law? CVC says a vehicle must yield to a steady burn red, does not say anything about flashing lights.
Just trying to cover your butt. I have seen traffic investigators for insurance companies and lawyers take photos of emergency vehicles, and their positioning if they were involved in an accident or anything, and what factors caused it.
Is that Redlands? As San Bernardino Co? You can see on the Utility in the background that the steady red and blues are under the light bar.
If that is your department you may want to tell them, so it can be changed back. By law there has to be a steady burn light. A lawyer will eat the department on the stand if they have pics like this that show it is not a legal emergency vehicle. Regardless of what it says on the side of the vehicle, technically someone does not have to pull over for it, or stop for it. If they light someone up and they run, a lawyer can pretty much have any eluding cases dropped because it was not a legal emergency vehicle.
It dumb to think of it like that, but it is a law that has been in the CVC for decades. How a lawyer will look at it like, your officers are breaking the law every time they run through red lights, or stop signs, so why is my client for not stopping for a vehicle, that was not in compliance with the law? CVC says a vehicle must yield to a steady burn red, does not say anything about flashing lights.
Just trying to cover your butt. I have seen traffic investigators for insurance companies and lawyers take photos of emergency vehicles, and their positioning if they were involved in an accident or anything, and what factors caused it.
Is that Redlands? As San Bernardino Co? You can see on the Utility in the background that the steady red and blues are under the light bar.
It's not unusual for an agency to have non emergency vehicles for non emergency functions with non emergency lighting. Cal fire has amber lightbars on support apparatus. Crime
scene units, traffic investigation vehicles, animal control trucks don't typically have a justifiable need for emergency response... That could
explain the lack of red...
scene units, traffic investigation vehicles, animal control trucks don't typically have a justifiable need for emergency response... That could
explain the lack of red...
That's Redlands PD. When the slide switch is in position one and two, it has solid red, but when its all the way in position 3, the its random light patterns with no solid red. I'm not part of redlands pd, im from sbsd.
Redlands PD needs to get with the program and fix the problem. It will become a problem as Jason said, a lawyer will eat them alive. And the City will have to pay out if a unit gets in a crash.
Case in point, late 1990, Federal Fire Dept on US Navy bases in the San Diego area only had flashing and rotating red lights on their USN fire engines. They started responding off base on mutual aid calls. We brought up to their Bat Chiefs CVC requiring a steady red light, they laughed at us "were the federal government, we don't have to follow state law". A couple of months later a Bat Chief responding on a city street outside the base got in a crash in an intersection, the Navy's lawyer ended up asking the other driver how many zero's they would like on the amount of the check. Buy the next week all the fire engines had a steady red light installed on top of the light bar.
Case in point, late 1990, Federal Fire Dept on US Navy bases in the San Diego area only had flashing and rotating red lights on their USN fire engines. They started responding off base on mutual aid calls. We brought up to their Bat Chiefs CVC requiring a steady red light, they laughed at us "were the federal government, we don't have to follow state law". A couple of months later a Bat Chief responding on a city street outside the base got in a crash in an intersection, the Navy's lawyer ended up asking the other driver how many zero's they would like on the amount of the check. Buy the next week all the fire engines had a steady red light installed on top of the light bar.
CA T13 has nothing to do with the brand of lights really - but rather than way they are used. Ex: with almost every major brand and the departments they are used in, the end user/up fitter controls HOW (flash patterns) used. . . Like on CantrolWC, Blueprint, Matrix, Pathfinder etc…and to be CA T13 compliant there must simply be at least ONE forward facing RED light visible at all times — accomplished via many lights, with at least one light displaying red at any given point (like if recording a vehicle flashing, it should show a red light at any point that the video is paused). **When less control of total lighting packages was possible, BRANDS usually included a CA T13 feature / pattern option(s). ex: Code3 light heads might have 69 flash patterns, of which 10 are CA T13 —or— like Whelen LC products, like an Inner Edge XLP LC, or FedSig ILS Serial, have a trigger wire that steady burns one red specific module, or even allows selection of any of the Red modules to display steady on while all other modules do their flash patterns.
***Soooo…short answer : NO, FS/SOS didn’t do anything wrong, and virtually ALL major brand products are/can be compliant. BTW: Tomar?? Really…?? Not even in the same league as Whelen, FS, SOS or Code3. . . Close runners up would be Star Signal, Feniex, Abrams (lot of Code3 manufactured items), and SnM (primarily 911 Signal manufactured products - essentially the Whelen/FS of Asia). Then Tomar and Brookings etc. **NEVER, mistake STL, UBL, or especially ETD as being “professional” level brands. They are at best POV volunteer products for those on tight budgets
T13 has nothing to do with the steady red requirement. Steady red is ONLY required if the vehicle is responding, they have to have a steady red to be classified as an emergency vehicle. The vehicle can have nothing else on the car except a steady red.
T13 dictates the brightness and intensity the lights have to meet to promote safety.
Pretty much EVERY major manufacture since the 80s have made their lights to meet the CA requirement since CA is probably the largest market for emergency and amber lighting.
There really is no violation for not using CA T13 items in CA. It is more there so if something was to happen then a lawyer can say that X agency or department or company is responsible for using X light on their vehicles and it caused an accident because their driver didn’t see it, so that agency is responsible for the damages since T13 CCR was not followed. It is more of an administrative code, not enforceable law.
As long as a light meets the actual requirements set forth in the CA Vehicle Code for the distance a light is required to be seen by the naked eye, you can use what ever you want, given the vehicle is authorized to have the given color lighting.
CA Steady Burn Red as interpreted by me; or 15 mins of reading that the majority of the world will find boring.
The main breakdown on what is "required" on any given emergency vehicle in the United States as far as lights and sirens falls into two major categories; what does that state require in their vehicle code as a minimum (usually very outdated and below current practice) and what is an accepted industry practice. Acceptable industry practice is essentially enforced by civil lawsuits creating civil legal precedent. Insurance companies and people who look at agency liability care about civil liability. Civil cases usually hinge upon (excluding operator behavior which is the number one issue) what is "reasonable and currently practiced" as far as equipment. There are numerous different companies and standard writers who attempt to define this such as NFPA, SAE, DOT, CAAS, Fed 3K ambulance, etc. Those standards are not law (expect where adapted as such), they are standards used to help builders and agencies meet existing best practices, which are enforced via civil law using precedent.
Ohio as an example;
The state revised code (4513.17) requires an emergency vehicle requesting the right of way to (besides driving with due regard) have/utilize "at least one flashing, rotating or oscillating light visible under normal atmospheric conditions from a distance of five hundred feet to the front of the vehicle and the driver is giving an audible signal by siren, exhaust whistle, or bell". Other sections define color and markings for law enforcement as well as requiring a external roof light for traffic patrol, but none of it really applies to minimums for safe response.
The state law is a really low standard to meet. As in "Autozone tail light on a 537 flasher on the dash and car alarm speaker" type low. Does that mean if you come to Ohio you are going to see emergency vehicles driving around with one light and a bell? Of course not. Through the indirect enforcement model of the civil court system most agencies choose to adopt or loosely mirror established industry practices. Most Ohio fire vehicles are very close to NFPA compliant, and most ambulances are very close to Federal 3K complaint. When you order them they basically default to the industry minimums and you can add more. Yes you will see some white lights while stopped or to the rear and the occasional rouge amber to the front while moving as well as some non-center out patterns on ambulances, all not 100% NFPA or 3K complaint. But it is all very close and/or equivalent to industry standards that have held up or been deemed "not deficient" in civil court. By the very nature of ordering an emergency vehicle most agencies have now met both the state law (easily) and the most up to date industry practices both defined by written and implied standards and current vehicles in the field.
I cannot stress enough that driver behavior is by far the bigger liability issue in almost every case. The term due regard is debated and used as the crux of legal arguments almost every time an emergency vehicle response case shows up. I have done a brief search and can't even find a case related to minimum lights that doesn't moreover hinge on the operator not using due regard. No matter how good your lights are if you are being reckless you are going to pay in at least a monetary sense if not criminally as well.
California specifically;
What the state requires as a minimum by the letter of the statute and what the industry uses as a standard are very much different, just like many states (note my Ohio example). However, the difference in CA vs. other states is that the state minimum has a very specific requirement that isn't easily met by following other existing standards. This requirement is likely a left over from when steady burn lights were the standard practice as the law was written in 1959. Why it has survived can be debated, whether by legislative apathy or intentional design based on studies done by CHP, it doesn't really matter. It is the law, and has been in use for so long it is now also the civil precedent in CA. When ever this comes up the debate turns to Title 13 vs state law. I find that to be pretty irrelevant. The law is a state law, the title is a vehicle standards code or what other states call administrate definitions or admin code. The two really mirror and/or expand upon one another anyway. Yes you could follow the law but not meet the Title but it would be pretty much next to impossible with modern lights. The law is below. Title 13 regulation which defines the type of light(s) that meet the law's requirements is easily reviewed here and shown further below in part.
Every authorized emergency vehicle shall be equipped with at least one steady burning red warning lamp visible from at least 1,000 feet to the front of the vehicle to be used as provided in this code.
In addition, authorized emergency vehicles may display revolving, flashing, or steady red warning lights to the front, sides or rear of the vehicles.
Title 13
818. Type of Warning Lamps Used on Emergency Vehicles and Special Hazard Vehicles.
Warning lamps on emergency vehicles and special hazard vehicles shall be of the following types:
(a) Required Red Warning Lamps on Authorized Emergency Vehicles. The steady burning red warning lamp required to be visible to the front of an authorized emergency vehicle by Vehicle Code Section 25252 shall be a Class A, B or C warning lamp. Motorcycles may instead be equipped with two Class D warning lamps in the front, one of which may flash.
(b) Permitted Additional Red Warning Lamps on Authorized Emergency Vehicles. The additional steady burning or flashing red warning lamp permitted by Vehicle Code Section 25252 shall be a Class A, B, C, or E warning lamp.
(c) Permitted Yellow Warning Lamps on Authorized Emergency Vehicles. The additional flashing yellow warning lamp permitted on authorized emergency vehicles by Vehicle Code Section 25259 shall be a Class B, C, or E warning lamp. Two yellow motorcycle turn signal lamps may be used as warning lamps on the rear of motorcycles.
(d) Permitted Blue Warning Lamps on Police Vehicles. The additional flashing or steady burning blue warning lamp permitted by Vehicle Code Section 25258(b) shall be Class B, C, or E.
(g) Warning Lamps for Undercover Cars. The required steady-burning forward-facing warning lamps on authorized emergency vehicles with special plates permitted by Vehicle Code Section 5001 shall be a class A, B, or C. This warning lamp may also be a fixed or handheld red spotlamp with a filament of at least 30 watts, and producing at least 3,000 candela in red at the brightest point in the beam. Such a lamp need not meet any of the other requirements of this article except for color. Additional steady-burning or flashing warning lamps shall be class A, B, C, or E. These warning lamps may be displayed through transparent or translucent material provided the light, of proper color, is plainly visible and understandable in bright sunlight and during darkness, under normal atmospheric conditions, to a distance of 800 feet from the vehicle. These lights shall not transfigure, disrupt or mask any other required lighting device.
Note: Authority cited: Section 26103, Vehicle Code. Reference: Sections 24012 and 26103, Vehicle Code.
So whether you are a State code citing type person or someone who has title 13 as their hill to die on, it doesn't matter. There remains a legal requirement (shown above) to display the steady red light, and there are requirements though "title" (or admin code essentially) as to what meets the law also shown above as well. Because of these requirements and their 60 year tenure, a state level accepted industry minimum civil standard also exists. When an agency chooses not to follow the law, and therefor the industry standard, they open themselves up to problems on multiple fronts. Primarily civil liability would be how any agency would come to regret not using a steady burn light. A civil case is easier to make when one party clearly violated both the law and an established industry practice. Sometimes immunity that would otherwise apply when a standard or precedent is not met suddenly disappears when a law is also violated. Steady burn red is both a law and practiced industry wide in the state of CA. No matter how you try to squirm around it, if the industry standard created by civil precedent doesn't get you, the failure to comply with the law probably will. It should also be noted that as I previously mentioned driver behavior will likely be a bigger issue in 99% of cases anyway, so always remember the right equipment isn't what keeps people safe, it is the user of the right equipment.
I would be interested to see a case where it is argued that modern LEDs, when used in a group as a whole, essentially make a light source that has zero off time and thereby makes them steady burn complaint. The lights would meet title 13 as they are all of the correct type/class. The argument would come down to what constitutes "a light". LEDs have really blurred the line as to where one "light" ends and the next begins. Especially in lightbars that don't have individual heads, is "a light" the bar as a whole or the segments in which you choose to flash it? It is an interesting idea to ponder as LEDs take over many laws that were already dated will become more so. I can find no such case on record, and based on how easy it is to comply with the law/standard (set a section of the bar to steady and be done), I don't see anyone intentionally fighting it. I suppose it could be a defense in a case where the standard was not followed but multiple red led lights were present, but I doubt it gets challenged intentionally. I do occasionally find videos of CA emergency vehicles with no true steady burn lights. LA City had no true steady burn lights on their heavy rescue wrecker number 3 (video below) when it was new. However the flash patterns and the number of total lights seemed to make a situation where (to the human eye) there is never a "dark time". I thought the pattern choice on the grill lights was not very effective, but that's a different argument. I was left wondering if this lack of a true steady burn was intentional or an oversight in design? I think my question was answered when a little over a year later the lightbar had one steady burn on the driver side (second video bellow).
So it would seem for the time being that the letter of CA vehicle code, the vehicle equipment title that defines it, and the state level industry standard it has created in it's 60 plus years on the books, is compelling agencies to keep the steady burn alive. I will stay tuned to the issue as LEDs change the way we look at what "a light" is.
The main breakdown on what is "required" on any given emergency vehicle in the United States as far as lights and sirens falls into two major categories; what does that state require in their vehicle code as a minimum (usually very outdated and below current practice) and what is an accepted industry practice. Acceptable industry practice is essentially enforced by civil lawsuits creating civil legal precedent. Insurance companies and people who look at agency liability care about civil liability. Civil cases usually hinge upon (excluding operator behavior which is the number one issue) what is "reasonable and currently practiced" as far as equipment. There are numerous different companies and standard writers who attempt to define this such as NFPA, SAE, DOT, CAAS, Fed 3K ambulance, etc. Those standards are not law (expect where adapted as such), they are standards used to help builders and agencies meet existing best practices, which are enforced via civil law using precedent.
Ohio as an example;
The state revised code (4513.17) requires an emergency vehicle requesting the right of way to (besides driving with due regard) have/utilize "at least one flashing, rotating or oscillating light visible under normal atmospheric conditions from a distance of five hundred feet to the front of the vehicle and the driver is giving an audible signal by siren, exhaust whistle, or bell". Other sections define color and markings for law enforcement as well as requiring a external roof light for traffic patrol, but none of it really applies to minimums for safe response.
The state law is a really low standard to meet. As in "Autozone tail light on a 537 flasher on the dash and car alarm speaker" type low. Does that mean if you come to Ohio you are going to see emergency vehicles driving around with one light and a bell? Of course not. Through the indirect enforcement model of the civil court system most agencies choose to adopt or loosely mirror established industry practices. Most Ohio fire vehicles are very close to NFPA compliant, and most ambulances are very close to Federal 3K complaint. When you order them they basically default to the industry minimums and you can add more. Yes you will see some white lights while stopped or to the rear and the occasional rouge amber to the front while moving as well as some non-center out patterns on ambulances, all not 100% NFPA or 3K complaint. But it is all very close and/or equivalent to industry standards that have held up or been deemed "not deficient" in civil court. By the very nature of ordering an emergency vehicle most agencies have now met both the state law (easily) and the most up to date industry practices both defined by written and implied standards and current vehicles in the field.
I cannot stress enough that driver behavior is by far the bigger liability issue in almost every case. The term due regard is debated and used as the crux of legal arguments almost every time an emergency vehicle response case shows up. I have done a brief search and can't even find a case related to minimum lights that doesn't moreover hinge on the operator not using due regard. No matter how good your lights are if you are being reckless you are going to pay in at least a monetary sense if not criminally as well.
California specifically;
What the state requires as a minimum by the letter of the statute and what the industry uses as a standard are very much different, just like many states (note my Ohio example). However, the difference in CA vs. other states is that the state minimum has a very specific requirement that isn't easily met by following other existing standards. This requirement is likely a left over from when steady burn lights were the standard practice as the law was written in 1959. Why it has survived can be debated, whether by legislative apathy or intentional design based on studies done by CHP, it doesn't really matter. It is the law, and has been in use for so long it is now also the civil precedent in CA. When ever this comes up the debate turns to Title 13 vs state law. I find that to be pretty irrelevant. The law is a state law, the title is a vehicle standards code or what other states call administrate definitions or admin code. The two really mirror and/or expand upon one another anyway. Yes you could follow the law but not meet the Title but it would be pretty much next to impossible with modern lights. The law is below. Title 13 regulation which defines the type of light(s) that meet the law's requirements is easily reviewed here and shown further below in part.
ARTICLE 7. Flashing and Colored Lights [25250 - 25282]
( Article 7 enacted by Stats. 1959, Ch. 3. ) 25252.Every authorized emergency vehicle shall be equipped with at least one steady burning red warning lamp visible from at least 1,000 feet to the front of the vehicle to be used as provided in this code.
In addition, authorized emergency vehicles may display revolving, flashing, or steady red warning lights to the front, sides or rear of the vehicles.
Title 13
818. Type of Warning Lamps Used on Emergency Vehicles and Special Hazard Vehicles.
Warning lamps on emergency vehicles and special hazard vehicles shall be of the following types:
(a) Required Red Warning Lamps on Authorized Emergency Vehicles. The steady burning red warning lamp required to be visible to the front of an authorized emergency vehicle by Vehicle Code Section 25252 shall be a Class A, B or C warning lamp. Motorcycles may instead be equipped with two Class D warning lamps in the front, one of which may flash.
(b) Permitted Additional Red Warning Lamps on Authorized Emergency Vehicles. The additional steady burning or flashing red warning lamp permitted by Vehicle Code Section 25252 shall be a Class A, B, C, or E warning lamp.
(c) Permitted Yellow Warning Lamps on Authorized Emergency Vehicles. The additional flashing yellow warning lamp permitted on authorized emergency vehicles by Vehicle Code Section 25259 shall be a Class B, C, or E warning lamp. Two yellow motorcycle turn signal lamps may be used as warning lamps on the rear of motorcycles.
(d) Permitted Blue Warning Lamps on Police Vehicles. The additional flashing or steady burning blue warning lamp permitted by Vehicle Code Section 25258(b) shall be Class B, C, or E.
(g) Warning Lamps for Undercover Cars. The required steady-burning forward-facing warning lamps on authorized emergency vehicles with special plates permitted by Vehicle Code Section 5001 shall be a class A, B, or C. This warning lamp may also be a fixed or handheld red spotlamp with a filament of at least 30 watts, and producing at least 3,000 candela in red at the brightest point in the beam. Such a lamp need not meet any of the other requirements of this article except for color. Additional steady-burning or flashing warning lamps shall be class A, B, C, or E. These warning lamps may be displayed through transparent or translucent material provided the light, of proper color, is plainly visible and understandable in bright sunlight and during darkness, under normal atmospheric conditions, to a distance of 800 feet from the vehicle. These lights shall not transfigure, disrupt or mask any other required lighting device.
Note: Authority cited: Section 26103, Vehicle Code. Reference: Sections 24012 and 26103, Vehicle Code.
So whether you are a State code citing type person or someone who has title 13 as their hill to die on, it doesn't matter. There remains a legal requirement (shown above) to display the steady red light, and there are requirements though "title" (or admin code essentially) as to what meets the law also shown above as well. Because of these requirements and their 60 year tenure, a state level accepted industry minimum civil standard also exists. When an agency chooses not to follow the law, and therefor the industry standard, they open themselves up to problems on multiple fronts. Primarily civil liability would be how any agency would come to regret not using a steady burn light. A civil case is easier to make when one party clearly violated both the law and an established industry practice. Sometimes immunity that would otherwise apply when a standard or precedent is not met suddenly disappears when a law is also violated. Steady burn red is both a law and practiced industry wide in the state of CA. No matter how you try to squirm around it, if the industry standard created by civil precedent doesn't get you, the failure to comply with the law probably will. It should also be noted that as I previously mentioned driver behavior will likely be a bigger issue in 99% of cases anyway, so always remember the right equipment isn't what keeps people safe, it is the user of the right equipment.
I would be interested to see a case where it is argued that modern LEDs, when used in a group as a whole, essentially make a light source that has zero off time and thereby makes them steady burn complaint. The lights would meet title 13 as they are all of the correct type/class. The argument would come down to what constitutes "a light". LEDs have really blurred the line as to where one "light" ends and the next begins. Especially in lightbars that don't have individual heads, is "a light" the bar as a whole or the segments in which you choose to flash it? It is an interesting idea to ponder as LEDs take over many laws that were already dated will become more so. I can find no such case on record, and based on how easy it is to comply with the law/standard (set a section of the bar to steady and be done), I don't see anyone intentionally fighting it. I suppose it could be a defense in a case where the standard was not followed but multiple red led lights were present, but I doubt it gets challenged intentionally. I do occasionally find videos of CA emergency vehicles with no true steady burn lights. LA City had no true steady burn lights on their heavy rescue wrecker number 3 (video below) when it was new. However the flash patterns and the number of total lights seemed to make a situation where (to the human eye) there is never a "dark time". I thought the pattern choice on the grill lights was not very effective, but that's a different argument. I was left wondering if this lack of a true steady burn was intentional or an oversight in design? I think my question was answered when a little over a year later the lightbar had one steady burn on the driver side (second video bellow).
So it would seem for the time being that the letter of CA vehicle code, the vehicle equipment title that defines it, and the state level industry standard it has created in it's 60 plus years on the books, is compelling agencies to keep the steady burn alive. I will stay tuned to the issue as LEDs change the way we look at what "a light" is.
Last edited:
