No, California Didn't Raise Its Heat Threshold for High School Sports. Here's What Actually Changed.

If you saw headlines this week saying California will allow high school athletes to practice and compete at higher Wet Bulb Globe Temperature readings, there's an important update.

That's not what the law Gov. Gavin Newsom signed actually does.

Assembly Bill 2503 was signed into law this week and does address the California Interscholastic Federation's heat illness prevention guidelines. But language that would have raised the allowable WBGT threshold in certain desert regions was removed from the legislation before it reached the governor's desk.

An earlier version of AB 2503 proposed allowing practices and contests for qualifying schools in California's hottest desert regions at WBGT readings up to 93.5°F, provided additional heat-safety measures were implemented.

That proposal generated discussion about athlete safety and the role of Athletic Trainers in managing exertional heat illness.

But the 93.5°F provision isn't in the law that passed.

So What Does AB 2503 Actually Do?

The final legislation requires CIF to review its guidelines, procedures and safety standards for preventing and managing exertional heat illness by July 1, 2027 — and every year thereafter.

Those reviews must give special consideration to regions of California with higher average temperatures. CIF can then update its guidelines as necessary.

The law continues to require CIF's heat guidelines to establish environmental conditions under which schools must limit or prohibit practices and competition. It also retains the use of Wet Bulb Globe Temperature (WBGT) as part of measuring environmental heat stress.

In other words, AB 2503 creates a required annual review process. It does not itself establish a new 93.5°F WBGT threshold.

Why the Confusion?

There actually was a 93.5°F proposal earlier in the legislative process.

An April analysis of the original bill described a requirement that CIF allow outdoor practices and contests for certain schools in Region Category 3 at WBGT readings up to 93.5°F, accompanied by measures such as hydration breaks, reduced intensity and duration, monitoring for heat illness, acclimatization protocols, shade and cooling measures.

By the time the legislation moved forward, however, that language had been replaced with the annual-review requirement. An April 22 analysis already described the revised bill as requiring CIF to review its heat guidelines annually rather than mandating the higher threshold.

That distinction matters — particularly for Athletic Trainers responsible for putting heat policies into practice.

The Conversation Isn't Over

While California isn't raising the WBGT threshold through AB 2503, the new law does require CIF to revisit its heat illness policies every year and specifically consider the state's hotter regions.

And that raises some worthwhile questions for Athletic Trainers.

How often should heat policies be reevaluated as research and environmental conditions change?

Should athletes accustomed to hotter climates be treated differently when establishing activity thresholds?

And what role should Athletic Trainers and other sports medicine professionals have when those policies are reviewed?

Those may be the more interesting conversations to have now.

Athletic Trainers: What would you want CIF — or your own state association — to consider when reviewing heat illness policies?