Assemblymember Brian Hibbets and Rick McCann presented Assembly Bill 93 to the committee on May 31. The bill revises the statutory definition of "police officer" for purposes of the Nevada Occupational Diseases Act (the state’s heart‑and‑lung presumptions) to add categories including school police officers employed by boards of trustees of school districts, juvenile probation officers, bailiffs or deputy marshals of municipal courts, city marshals and additional Category 1, 2 or 3 peace officers defined under NRS chapter 289.

McCann explained that existing provisions (NRS 617.455 and NRS 617.457 as cited in testimony) create a conclusive presumption that certain lung and heart diseases arise out of covered officers’ employment after two or more years of continuous service. He said the bill closes a long‑standing gap and aligns coverage for juvenile probation officers and school officers who, he argued, are exposed to similar risks and receive the same annual cardiac and pulmonary screenings as other covered officers.

Sponsors and multiple law‑enforcement organizations backed the bill. Testimony in support came from the Las Vegas Police Managers and Supervisors Association, Las Vegas City Marshals, the Police Officers Association of the Clark County School District Police Department, the Juvenile Justice Probation Officers Association and the Nevada Association of Public Safety Officers. Supporters described AB93 as a public‑safety and personnel benefit measure that brings parity to officers performing similar duties.

Senator Ellison asked about costed fiscal items in the bill (the testimony cited fiscal estimates for the cost of annual heart and lung exams for additional covered personnel), and Bridal Hibbitts (sponsor comment) explained the appropriations would fund the exams for newly covered staff in the Capitol Police and related groups who previously lacked coverage. The sponsor noted that similar bills have been introduced in many prior sessions and said section 21 in the bill aims to add all peace officers in a single amendment to avoid repeated future changes.

The committee received no on‑record opposition; the committee then voted on a motion to do pass AB93. The motion carried by voice vote.