Committee hears bill to allow single rear-facing blue light on private first-responder vehicles; state police oppose

Representative Rich Nelivanco introduced House Bill 4 89 to give first responders a new option to make privately operated response vehicles more visible during emergency responses. "House bill 4 89 ensures that all first responders operating a vehicle during an emergency, whether the vehicle is publicly or privately owned, have clear and consistent visibility, improving safety for both first responders and the public," Nelivanco told the committee.

Nelivanco, who said the change would cost towns and the state nothing because volunteer personnel typically pay for their own emergency lights, described the measure as a narrow fix to correct an inconsistency in RSA 266:78-b that previously allowed a single rear-facing blue light on apparatus. Representative Mark Prue, a career firefighter and EMT who said he sponsored the original change that put blue lights on apparatus, told senators he has observed that blue lights attract drivers’ attention and encourage them to slow down at incidents. "Blue lights stand out in the darkness, in the mixture," Prue said. "People take more notice of that as they're coming up to that scene."

Opposition and public-safety concerns: The New Hampshire State Police registered formal opposition. Matt Amatucci, representing the State Police, said the primary reason for restricting blue lights has been to maintain public safety and to avoid misidentification. "The primary reason for restricting blue lights to emergency vehicles is to maintain public safety and trust," Amatucci said. He warned that adding blue lights to many private vehicles on roadways could desensitize the public and blur the visual distinction between law enforcement and other responders.

Retired police chief David Goldstein echoed the concern, saying blue has been closely associated with law enforcement and that flooding roads with blue lighting risks habituating motorists. Several fire and EMS witnesses, including Gordon Kemp, a selectman and licensed emergency medical responder, and volunteer firefighter witnesses, said the bill only allows a small single rear-facing blue module in addition to the red rear lights that volunteers already use — typically visible only from behind — and stressed the bill would not authorize forward-facing blue bars.

Agency and technical points: Witnesses demonstrated the proposed lighting device and explained LEDs are not visibly distinguishable when off, and that many modern fixtures can show multiple colors. Several witnesses said the single rear-facing blue element catches attention at night or in poor visibility when red or amber lighting blends with other roadside lighting.

Committee action: The committee took testimony from supporters, the State Police, and other interested parties and closed the hearing with no vote recorded in the transcript.

What it does not do: The bill does not mandate purchase or installation of blue lights, nor does it authorize front-facing blue lights on private vehicles. Several witnesses and the sponsor emphasized that volunteers would remain responsible for appropriate use of lighting.