Transportation Research Circular

80 Pages·4.7 MB·English

NIAAA Library
2 0046 012366 4
Number 437 February 1995
Strategies for
Dealing with the Persistent
Drinking Driver
NIAAA Ubrarv
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
/
TRANSPORTATION Number 437, February 1995
RESEARCH
ISSN 0097-8515
CIRCULAR
STRATEGIES FOR DEALING WITH THE PERSISTENT
DRINKING DRIVER
Group 3 Council
OPERATION, SAFETY, AND MAINTENANCE
OF TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES
Jerome W. Hall, Chairman
Group 3 Council
University of New Mexico
Albuquerque, New Mexico
COMMITTEE ON ALCOHOL, OTHER DRUGS, AND TRANSPORTATION
Barry M. Sweedler, Chairman
Carol Lederhaus Popkin, Secretary
Marcelline Bums Susan E. Martin Herbert M. Simpson
William E. Collins A. J. McLean Anthony C. Stein
Grady C. Cothen, Jr. Judy Z. Meade Lawrence R. Sutton
Kurt M. Dubowski James F. O'Hanlon Maria E. Vegega
James Hedlund Raymond C. Peck Evelyn Vingilis
Ralph Hingson David F. Preiisser Robert B. Voas
Hans Laurell Laurence Ross Alexander C. Wagenaar
Roy E. Lucke Stephen M. Simon Elizabeth Wells-Parker
Adrian K. Lund Jean R. Wilson
Richard Pain, Transportation Research Board Staff
Subscriber Category Transportation Research Board
IVB safety and human performance National Research Council
2101 Constitution Ave., N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20418
The Transportation Research Board is a unit ofthe National Research Council, which serves as an independent
advisor to the federal government on scientific and technical questions of national importance.. The Research
Council, jointly administered by the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and
the Institute ofMedicine, brings the resources ofthe entire scientific and technical community to bear on national
problems through its volunteer advisory committees.
FOREWORD
Thetraffic safetyproblemcausedbythepersistentdrinkingdriver~thedriverwho frequently drives while impaired often at high
blood alcohol levels—represents only a portion ofthe human and economic costs ofimpaired driving. This group, however,
does present special challenges and require innovative approaches. In putting together the panel of experts for this TRB
workshop andinpreparing this report, I have attempted to address all aspects ofthe persistent drinking driverproblem and all
domains in which solutions may be found. The strategies outlined in the circular summarize the best research and expert
opinion currently available. I hope that by presenting these promising and practical approaches, we can encourage states to
take action and thus furtherreduce the tragic toll ofimpaired driving.
Barry M. Sweedler
Chairman
Committee on Alcohol, OtherDrugs, and Transportation
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
A sincerest thank you to the people who participated in the workshop and contributed to the development, production, and
publication ofthis circular.
Editing ofthe circular was expertly accomplished by Barb Valenti, Editorial Services, TRB. Production ofthe final
manuscript was graciously done by Sonia R. Lott, Office ofSafety Recommendations, National Transportation Safety Board.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
1
CHAPTER 1-KEY FEATURES FOR DEALING WITH THE PERSISTENT
DRINKING DRIVER
2
CHAPTER 2-PROMISING STRATEGIES FOR DEALING WITH THE
PERSISTENT DRINKING DRIVER 8
REFERENCES
11
APPENDIXES 14
A. PROGRAM OUTLINE FOR THE WORKSHOP 14
B. LIST OF WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS 15
C. WORKSHOP BACKGROUND PAPERS 16
L CI. Who is the Persistent DrinkingDriver? Part 1: USA 16
James Hedlund, PhJ>. /^/SJ^ /
I C2. Who is the Persistent Drinking Driver? Part II: Canada and Elsewhere . 21
Herb M. Simpson, Ph.D. / 7^
C3. Environmental Strategies to Reduce Chronic Driving While Intoxicated 25
Ralph Hingson, Sc.D. /)~7S''J ^
.32
C4. Media Approaches to the Persistent Drinking Driver
I
Nancy E. Isaac, Sc.D. 7^.30
C5. Enforcement Strategies for the Persistent Drinking Driver . ^ 38
Susan E. Martin, Ph.D., andDavidF. Preusser, Ph.D. /X ^ ...
^ C6. Driver License Strategies for Controlling the Persistent DUI Offender . . . . . 43
R.C. Peck, R. Jean Wilson, Ph.D., andLawrence Sutton, Ph.D. /^^ 7cfc-?*^
t C7. Vehicle-Based Sanctions - An Overview 49
H. Laurence Ross, Ph.D., Kathryn Stewart, andAnthony C. Stein, Ph.D. / /y^
C8. Streamlined Vehicle-Based Sanctions: Specific and General Deterrence Ejects 51
Kathryn Stewart
'7S'3>i'
C9. Can Administrative Programs Control the Persistent Drinking Driver? 52
RobertB. Voas, Ph.D. 7^:^
CIO. A BriefHistory ofthe Use ofIn-Vehicle Devices for Preventing Alcohol-Impaired Driving 56
. .
Anthony C. Stein, Ph.D./'^y
Cll. Evaluating Alternative Sanctions forMultiple-Offender DWIs - A Description
ofSome Prior and Current Research 59
.
Ralph K. Jones, John H. Lacey, andJames M. Byrne, Ph.D. / 7-7^37
^' C12. Rehabilitation ofthe Persistent Drinking/Drugging Driver . 63
Davids. Timken, Ph.D, MicheleA. Packard, Ph.D, Elisabeth Wells-Parker, Ph.D., & BradfordBogue /^y^sS
V C13. Citizen Activists' Assessments ofthe DUI Problem, Public Attitudes, and Selected
Responses to the Persistent Drinking Driver 68
Anne Russell /77Y'^^
V D. Summary ofMinnesota Repeat DWI Offender Plate Impoundment Law 72
Stephen M. Simon / QU-r-y
1
INTRODUCTION
During thepast decade, substantial reductions have occurred injured drinking drivers, or about 30 to 35 percent of all
in drinking and driving in the United States and throughout drivers killedin the United States each year. About 15 to 20
theindustrialized world. In 1982, 57 percent ofall highway percent of all drivers injured each year also fall into this
fatalities in the United States were related to alcohol; by category. This amounts to 7,000 dead drivers and 250,0(X)
1993, that figure had been reduced to 44 percent. In that injured drivers each year. These figures do not take into
sameperiod, thenumberofalcohol-related fatalities dropped consideration the other people who die or are injured in the
from25,165 to 17,461 - areduction of31 percent (NHTSA crashes involving those persistent drinking drivers as
1993) occupants ofthe same or another vehicle, or as pedestrians
.
Progress appears to have resulted in large part from (Simpson 1994). (For additional information and data about
tougher laws, better enforcement, and greater public the characteristics of the persistent drinking driver see the
awareness. In addition, the raising ofthe drinking age has backgroundpapers prepared by Hedlund and Simpson found
had a significant effect on young drivers (Stewart and Voas in Appendix C.)
1994). Although this progress is encouraging, the tragic toll Obviously, no single solution will bring this problem
of drinking and driving is sUll much too high and there under control. There are definite, practical, cost-effective
remains a group of persistent drinking drivers who do not steps that each state can take, however, to deal with the
appear to be deterred by the threat of social disapproval or persistent drinking driver. These suggested strategies are
legal punishment. Additional measures must be taken to basedprimarilyon evaluations ofongoing and pilot programs
further reduce the overall toll ofdrinking and driving. It is and, where such research is notavailable, on the consensus of
important to recognize that while the problem of the experts in the field who attended a TRB Workshop on the
persistent drinking driver is a serious one, many alcohol- PersistentDrinking Driver. The workshop was sponsored by
relatedfatalities involvedrivers who have neverbeen arrested the TRB Committee on Alcohol, Other Drugs, and
before, and the traditional strategies that have been effective Transportation and cosponsored by the International Council
with this group must not be neglected. But whereas these on Alcohol, Drugs, andTraffic Safety; the National Highway
countermeasures will continue to be effective for most Traffic Safety Administration; and the National Institute on
drivers, more innovative measures must be taken to change Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. It was held at the National
the behavior ofthe persistent drinking driver. Acadany of Sciences Study Center at Woods Hole,
Before strategies to deal with this group can be Massachusetts, in July 1994.
suggested, thetargetmust be defined. In otherwords, who is Theworkshop addressed strategies to reduce the problem
the persistent drinking driver? It is difficult to develop a of the persistent drinking driver in seven domains:
precise definition, but we all think we know who this driver environmental strategies, media approaches, enforcement
is: the person who drinks and drives again and again, week strategies, driver's license penalties, vehicle-based sanctions,
after week, month after month, year after year; the person alternatives to incarceration, and rehabilitative approaches.
whosedrinking anddrivingbehaviorhas notbeen changed by Each of these domains deals with a different way of
information and education, who has not been deterred by persuading, deterring, apprehending, incapacitating, or
drinkingand drivinglaws andenforcement, and perhaps even treating the persistent drinking driver. In the following two
by arrest and punishment for violating drinking and driving chapters, those approaches with the greatest research and
laws. He (almost always he) has been called hard-core, expert support are outlined.
problem drinker, alcoholic, antisocial. He appears The first chapter describes the key features of a
periodically in the press aftera tragic crash in which he kills comprehensivesystemfordealing with the persistent drinking
innocent victims and prompts repeated calls to "do driver. These features are based, in most part, on research
something" abouthim(Hedlund 1994). A good definition of that shows their effectiveness and on practical experience.
the target group appears to include persons who repeatedly Thesecond chapterdiscusses additional features that appear
drive after drinking, especially with high blood alcohol promising on the basis of more limited research and expert
concentrations (BACs). Obviously, repeat offenders of opinion. This chapter also describes approaches that may be
driving while intoxicated (DWI) are an important part ofthe promisingbut that require furtherresearch. The background
target group. papers prepared forthe workshop and modified on the basis
Using this broad definition (persons who repeatedly ofdiscussion at the workshop are included in Appendix C.
drive after drinking, especially with high BACs), persistent
drinking drivers represent an estimated 65 percent offatally
CHAPTER
1
KEY FEATURES FOR DEALING WITH THE PERSISTENT DRINKING DRIVER
Thischapterliststhe key features ofacomprehensive system applied administratively, although it may take a number of
that each state should consider adopting to deal with the forms. For example, the vehicle can be impounded,
A
persistent drinking driver. brief discussion follows for immobilized, or confiscated, or the license plates can be
each of the features, including, where appropriate, the seized.
research on which the suggested feature is based.
Other key or promising features of an effective program
Key Features include:
• Licenses reinstated following a DWI conviction
Thecornerstoneofanyprogramto address the problem ofthe shouldcarryalower legal BAC limit. Alcohol detected ator
persistent drinking driver is a comprehensive and efficient above this lower limit would be a basis for re-revoking a
systemforimposing and enforcing license penalties. Such a driver's license.
system includes the following components: • At checkpoints, officers should check for valid
• The basic foundation of providing for prompt and licenses.
certain revocation ofthe driving license for first and repeat • Carryout special enforcement campaigns aimed atthe
offenders is needed. This is the sanction found to be most persistent drinking driver, such as the "Hot List" ofmultiple
effective. Administrativelicenserevocation (ALR) is the best DWI offenders or the "Stakeout" of drivers who have lost
way to achieve this goal. theirlicenses, to check ifthey are driving.
• Improve traffic records and the delivery system for • Alljuvenile DWI offenders should be prosecuted as
information to the courts and the police officers on the road. adults, and the record ofthese offenses should be preserved
In this way, prosecutors andjudges will have access to the after the offender reaches adulthood. These actions will
complete prior record of the offender when charging and permitearlyidentification ofyoung adults who are becoming
sentencing. In addition, the officercoming in contact with a persistent drinking drivers.
driver will have the ability to quickly ascertain ifthat driver • Ifadriverrefuses to take abreath test apply the same
is legally licensed to drive and if that driver has been orgreateradministrativepenalty as a positive test result.
involved in an alcohol-related driving offense in the past. • Reduce the legal BAC for all drivers to .08 percent.
This information will allow officers to accurately identify, at This measurereduces drinking and driving among all drivers,
the scene, repeat offenders and those who are driving including persistent drinking drivers.
illegally. The officer then can apply the full range of
administrativesanctions the state permits to be taken against Discussion ofKey Features
these offenders.
• Driving while a license is suspended, revoked, or Each key feature is listed below with a discussion of the
DWI
otherwiseinvalidbecauseofa ora related offense, such rationale and research support forthe feature.
as forarefusal to submitto a breath test, should be treated as
avery serious offense. The basic foundation of providing for prompt and
• Eliminate programs that permitthose drivers arrested certain revocation of the driving license for first and
forDWItoavoid losing their licenses by entering atreatment repeatoffenders is needed. This is the sanction found to
or education program. Any treatmentoreducation program be most effective. Administrative license revocation
should be in addition to the loss oflicense. Entering such (ALR) is the best way to achieve this goal.
programs could help shorten the suspension period or be Administrative license revocation has been found to be
made a condition ofrelicensure. In the same vein, entering effective both as a general and as a specific deterrent. It is
such a program should not result in the DWI arrest not agreed generally that the best way to maximize the general
appearing on the driver's record. deterrence effects of a law is to increase the certainty and
• For those drivers who persist in driving with a swiftness ofpunishment. Unfortunately, the usual penalties
suspended license for a DWI offense, the next step is to appliedthroughthejudicial process to drinking drivers are far
separatethemfix)mthevehiclethey were driving when caught firomswiftorcertain. Thejudicial process is slow underthe
driving illegally, and possibly from any other vehicle to bestofcircumstances, and adetermined offendercan engage
whichthey might have access. As has been proven effective in delaying tactics that can postpone punishment almost
with the licensing sanction, this vehicle sanction should be indefinitely. The average length oftime between the offense
3
and the imposition ofany penalty can be 6 months (Stewart Improve traffic records and the delivery system for
et al. 1987). Often, no penalty will ever be exacted. information to the courts and the police officers on the
Offenderscanpleabargaindown to a lesseroffense. Charges road. In this way, prosecutors and judges will have
may be dismissed or offendersjudged not guilty because of access tothe complete prior record ofthe o^ender when
technical problems in die case. Even when offenders are chargingandsentencing. In addition, the officer coming
found guilty, penalties may be suspended or the offenders in contact with a driver will have the ability to quickly
may enter diversion programs that allow them to escape ascertain ifthat driver is legally licensed to drive and if
punishment. In one study carried out in Louisianabefore the that driver has been involved in an alcohol-related
adoption of administrative revocation, a sample of arrest driving offense in the past. This information will allow
records ofoffenders testing overthe state's .10 percentblood officers to accurately identify, at the scene, repeat
alcohol limit was collected. Driving license records ofthese offenders and those who at are driving illegally. The
offenders were then examined. In 44 percent of the cases, officer then can apply the full range of administrative
there was no record of any license penalty. Following the sanctions the state permits to be taken against these
adoption of administrative revocation, a similar sample offenders.
indicated that 90 percent of arrested offenders received a Common sense suggests that courts should have access
license penalty (Stewart et al. 1989). toaccuratedriverrecords sothatthe appropriate penalties can
Research has shown that administrative revocation is be applied. It also makes sense that the easier it is for a
effective in discouraging people in the general public from police officer to determine the past alcohol-related traffic
driving after drinking. In one study carried out for the history of a driver stopped for a DWI offense, the more
Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (Zador et al. 1989), effective that officer will be in identifying those drivers who
the number of traffic crashes in states with administrative have prior DWI convictions or a record of DWI
revocation laws was compared with the numberofcrashes in administrativeactions. Easierdetermination ofpast alcohol-
states without such laws. The study concluded that these related traffic histories will allow the officer to apply the
laws reduced fatal nighttime crashes (which are likely to appropriatesanctions to the offender. One example in which
involve alcohol) by about 9 percent. These findings were an improved records system would have improved the
supported by another study of 17 states with administrative application of sanctions was found by Ross, et al. in their
revocation laws (Sigmastat 1989) that found a 6 percent evaluation of the Minnesota administrative-based plate
average reduction in fatal crashes. In a recent study carried impoundmentlawforthird offenders. They found thatone of
AAA
out forthe Foundation forTraffic Safety in Minnesota, the main reasons that the Minnesota police issued
New Mexico, and Delaware, administrative revocation was impoundment orders to only one-third of the eligible
found to reduce both nighttime fatal crashes and the offenders was the difficulty the police had in analyzing
proportion ofdrivers with a significant amount ofalcohol in drivers' records todetermineifthe offenders they had arrested
theirblood who wereinvolved in fatal crashes. A 14 percent wereeligibletoreceiveanimpoundment order. Based on this
reduction in Delaware was the most dramatic (Ross 1991). findingtheyplan torecommend that Minnesota's Department
Even moreimportant in deterring the persistent drinking ofPublicSafety reprogram theirdriver's license database so
driver is license revocation. Research repeatedly has shown that police officers can obtain impoundment eligibility
thatlicense revocation (whether imposed administratively or information with a simple, short computer query (i.e.,
by courts) is the most effective penalty in reducing traffic requiring only one ortwo keystrokes).
crashes and offenses among arrested offenders (e.g.. Peck
1991). All too often, however, it is never applied in the Driving while a license is suspended, revoked, or
DWI
judicial process. otherwiseinvalid,because ofa or a related offense,
Research further has shown that administrative license such asfora refusal tosubmit to a breath test, should be
revocation has reduced the likelihood ofa subsequent arrest. treated as a very serious offense.
In oneevaluation significantdecreases in rearrestwere found This feature is one ofthe majorareas needing attention.
in twoofthreestates included in the study. In the third state, Althoughlicensesuspension has been shown to be one ofthe
though therewas nodecrease in rearrest forimpaired driving, more effective driving under the influence (DUI)
therewas adecreasein othertraffic offenses. The decrease in countermeasures, drivercompliance with the law is poorand
rearrestcontinuedbeyondthe period ofrevocation, indicating enforcement is low. Among the problems identified through
that the punishment may have a lasting effect on the driving aseries ofCalifornia studies are(1) approximately 75 percent
habits ofoffenders (Stewart et al. 1989). Ross (1991) also of suspended drivers at least occasionally drive while
found that drivers whose licenses had been revoked suspended, (2) the majority of traffic convictions and
maintained a safer driving record even after their licenses accidents that occurduring periods ofsuspension/revocation
were eligible forreinstatement. are not prosecuted as suspension violations, (3) minimum
4
mandatoiyfines andjail sentences often are not levied against survey, programs allowing for presentence diversion still
those drivers convicted ofsuspension violations. There is exist in 15 states, and 10 states have probation before
also a frequent failure to increase or graduate sanctions as a judgment programs. These programs allow offenders to
function of a number of prior convictions, even when avoidtheusual sanctions for an offense andtypicallyprevent
statutory requirements mandate graduated sanctions. This ordelayinformationaboutanoffense from appearingontheir
problem is prevalent in many states (Peck et al. 1994). drivingrecord (Russell 1994).
Analysis ofFatal Accident Reporting System (PARS) There is no doubt that mandatory license suspension is
data for California for 1991 and 1992 indicates that 13 moreeffectivethandiscretionary suspension inreducing total
percent of all fatal-accident drivers were suspended or crashes and violations (Nichols and Ross 1990; Preusseret
revoked at the time oftheiraccident. Data from California's al. 1988). This is largely due to its greater perceived cer-
driverrecordfiles indicate that approximately 6 percent ofall tainty and the reduced influence ofjudicial discretion. The
drivers aresuspendedatanypoint in time. Unfortunately, the evidence is also very clear that diversion to treatment (with
precedingfigures arenotbroken down by type ofsuspension, eitherunrestricted or limited license) leads tohigheraccident
but it is known that drunk driving actions comprise a andviolation rates than full license suspension (Nichols and
substantial percentage ofall suspensions and revocations in Ross 1990). Anumbaofstudies reportthatfull license sus-
California, this fact is presumably true ofmost states and pension also reduces DUl recidivism (e.g., Peck et al. 1984;
provinces. Itthaefore seems clear that effective strategies for Vingilis et al. 1990), but the evidence is less consistent.
increasing suspension compliance offermuch potential. However, thetraffic safetyeffects are almost, ifnot complete-
In some states prosecution for driving while suspended ly, explained by reduced exposure on the part ofsuspended
ishamperedbythe lack ofproofthat the driver was officially drivers. During the suspended period, offenders are driving
notified ofthe suspension. In California there is evidence less or more cautiously orboth, than drivers not suspended.
that increasing the signed proof of service of suspension Theperiodofeffectiveness mayextendbeyond the suspension
increases conviction rates for driving while suspended. period because some drivers fail to reinstate their license or
Gebers and Hanley (1987) and DeYoung (1990) used a pay insurance surcharges.
certified mail strategy, which increased signed service rates
from 25 percent to 70 percent. This, in turn, led to a For those drivers who persist in driving with a
DWI
substantial increase in court convictions of suspension suspended license for a offense, the next step is to
violators. separate them from the vehicle they were driving when
caught driving illegally, and possibly from any other
Eliminate programs that permit those drivers arrested vehicle to which they might have access. As has been
DWI
for to avoid losing their licenses by entering a proven effective with the licensing sanction, this vehicle
treatment or education program. Any treatment or sanction should be applied administratively, although it
education program should be in addition to the loss of may take a number offorms. For example, the vehicle
license. Entering such programs could help to shorten can be impounded, immobilized, or confiscated, or the
the suspension period or be made a condition of license plates can be seized.
relicensure. In the same vein, entering such a program Persistent drinking drivers have demonstrated by their
should not resultintheDWI arrest not appearing on the repeatedviolation ofthe lawthatthey are not affectedbythe
driver's record. loss of their driving license or other sanctions routinely
There are programs in use in a number of states that appliedto offenders (Ross etal. 1994). Other steps mustbe
permit certain DWI offenders to be diverted from the taken to separate these individuals from the vehicles they
traditional sanctions, including license suspension, and into might drive. Imprisonment would, of course, be most
alcohol education or treatment programs. Although these effective in preventing further driving—at least during the
programs havetheapparentbenefit ofencouraging persons to period of incarceration. Moreover, jail would have the
seek treatment for drinking problems, the programs are too advantage of symbolizing the seriousness with which the
often used in place ofsanctions withknown effectiveness in community views drunk driving. Judges, however, are
reducing crashes and violations. Furthermore, these usually unwilling to incarcerate for lengthy periods those
programs can result in major distortions in an individual's drunkdrivers~thevastmajority-whohave not caused a crash
record. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) or harmed someone else. In addition, the cost to the public
(1984), the Presidential Commission on Drunk Driving treasury of such incarceration, along with the cost of lost
(1983) andothers have recommended that these diversion or incometothefamilies and therefore ofpublicweffare, would
supervision programs not be used in place of license not be acceptable. Moreover, there would be a principled
revocation and that court and motor vehicle records reflect reluctancetoimprisonforan extendedperiod a person guilty
participation in diversion/supervision programs. According only ofexceeding the blood-alcohol standard, even ifthis
to recent information gathered from the Rating the States offense was the third ormore ofsimilaroffenses.
5
A more socially acceptable and cost-effective approach Analysisoftherecidivismrecords ofthese offenders indicated
to separating the persistentdrinking driverfrom a vehicle is thatthsTQwas no difference during the time the program was
by making access to a vehicle more difficult. The most managed by the court between offenders whose plates had
straightforward approach to intervening between a drinker been impounded and offenders who had not received this
andavehicleis somevariation oftemporarily orpermanently sanction. Incontrast, duringtheperiod when the program was
takingthevehicleas partofthepunishment fora repeatdrunk managedadministratively, Rodgers found that in the group of
drivingoffense. At the most extreme, the vehicle used in the violators with three "DWI/implied consent" violations on
offense, ifownedby the offender, is confiscated by the state. their record, violators who received a police-issued
A less severe penalty is to immobilize the vehicle for some impoundment order had one-half the recidivism rate (8
time, through impoundment either in a tow lot or on the percentat 12 months and 13 percent at 24 months) compared
offender's property using a "club" or "Denver boot" with violators in this group who received no impoundment
technology. A variation on impoundment is removal ofthe order.
vehicle's licenseplate, which makes it impossible to drive the Thus, the administrative impoundment system not only
carwithoutattracting police attention, or stickering the plate resulted in a more complete application of the penalty but
toachievethesame effect (Ross et al. 1994). Arrangements alsomadethe penalty more effective in protecting the public
canbemadeforfamily members orfriends who may own the againstrepeat offenders. A summary ofthe MinnesotaDWI
vehicle driven by an unlicensed driver to obtain the right to Offender Plate Impoundment Law, prepared by Stephen M.
drive the vehicle undercertain conditions, basically with the Simon,canbefoundin Appendix D. Other vehicle sanction
clear understanding that if the unlicensed driver is again programs, discussed in the background papers by Ross,
caught driving the vehicle, it will beconfiscated and sold. Stewart and Voas, can be found in Appendix C.
Although laws allowing forvehicle-based sanctions for
DWI
repeat offenders are widespread, their use has been quite Licenses reinstated following a conviction should
BAC
limited (Voas 1992). These laws generally require action by carry a lower legal limit. Alcohol detected at or
thecourts, which rarely apply them. A majorreason forthe abovethislowerlimit would be a basis for re-revoking a
limited use of the sanctions is the logistical and legal driver's license.
problems involved, including the problem of applying When theStateofMainelowered its legal BAC from .10
penalties in the case ofan "innocent owner" who may have percentto .08 percentin 1988, it also lowered its BAC to .04
unknowingly allowed an unlicensed or intoxicated driver to pocentforpersons with aprevious operating while impaired
use a vehicle. In any event, because ofthe great amount of conviction. As noted previously, Hingson in press examined
discretion that judges enjoy and because of the limited the results ofthe law by comparing the experience in Maine
resources available, the courts are noteffective managers of with those in New Hampshire and Vermont for the first 3
systems designedtocontrol the driving ofoffenders. Another years after the law went into effect. Nighttime fatal crashes
option is to apply the vehicle sanction administratively as involving drivers with previous operating while impaired
most states are now applying the driving license sanction. convictions declined 38 percent in Maine during the 3
Law enforcement and vehicle licensing agencies could postlaw years, whereas they increased 50 percent in New
administer this penalty without involving the courts. Hampshire and Vermont, a highly statistically significant
Perhaps the best evidence for the superiority of difference.
administrative actions against vehicles compared with court
administered programs was provided by the study conducted At checkpoints, officers should check for valid licenses.
by Rodgers (1994), who measured the effectiveness of a Checkpoints offer the opportunity to detect persons
1988 licenseplate impoundment law forthird DUI offenders driving with a suspended orrevoked driver's license because
inMinnesota; the law was managed by the courts, compared result of a drinking and driving conviction. These
with an administrative impoundment procedure that began checkpoints may be safety, traffic, belt-use, or sobriety
when the law was amended in 1991. During the 29 months checkpoints.
that the law was managed through diejudicial system, only In most states, officers at acheckpoint may examine the
464 (6 percent) ofthe 7,698 eligible third-time violators had licenseofeverydriverora random sample ofdrivers passing
their license plates impounded. During the 21 months after thecheckpointlocation. Thelicense examination provides an
the 1991 amendment, when the law was administered by the opportunity to apprehend individuals who might be driving
DepartmentofPublicSafety(DPS), 3,136 (68 percent) ofthe in violation of their license sanction. Often, when this
4,593 third DUI offenders had vehicle plates impounded. technique is used at sobriety checkpoints, more unlicensed
Under this law, the arresting officer, acting as an agent of than impaired drivers are found.
DPS, destroys the license plates of the vehicle used in the
violation, even ifthe vehicle is registered to someone else.
6
Carry out special enforcement campaigns aimed at the Ifadriverrefuses totakeabreath test apply the same or
persistent drinking driver, such as the "Hot List" of greater administrative penalty as a positive test result.
multipleDWI(lendersorthe "Stakeout" ofdrivers who Withincreasedpenalties forsecond and subsequent DWI
have lost their licenses, to check ifthey are driving. offenses, some persistent drinking drivers are refusing to
A number of special programs have been designed to submit to the requested BAC tests. Because obtaining a
apprehend drivers who, even though they were prohibited conviction ofthe DWI offense is more difficult without the
fixDmdriving, continue to do so. The state ofOhio, as partof results ofa test, the arrested offendermay believethatheor
its Habitual Offender Program, instituted in 1991 the she may receive a lesser penalty ifthe testis refused. Laws
Habitual Offenders Tally, or "Hot" sheet, which lists shouldbesuchthatrefusals result in at least the same penalty
offenders whohavebeen convicted ofDUI five ormore times as a positive test result does or in an even greater penalty.
and whose driving privileges are currently suspended. Hot For example, if failure ofthe test would result in a 90-day
sheets for each county are tabulated and shared with each administrative suspension of the driver's license, refusal
state trooper, local police departments, and sheriffs' offices mightcarrya 180daysuspension. In addition, the offender's
for more effective targeting of those who continue driving record should show the refusal, and it should count as a
while under suspension (Perlman 1994). The Ohio positive test result for determining, on subsequent arrest,
Department of Public Safety (DPS) distributes Hot Sheet whetherthe driveris afirstorrepeat offender.
News, a monthly newsletter to law enforcement agencies,
judges, courts, and otherinterested parties. The publication Reduce the legal BACforall drivers to .08 percent This
reviews all multiple offenders who are apprehended and the measure reduces drinking and driving among all
A
agencies involved in the arrests. special law enforcement drivers, including persistent drinking drivers.
awards program also recognizes the efforts ofofficers who Evidence is beginning toemerge that lowering BAC for
have made an arrest ofa multiple offender. From August 1, adults to .08 percent, will result in reducing drinking and
1991, to May 1, 1994, 1,398 habitual offenders were drivingamongthe general populations, as well as among the
arrested. This program has contributed to a 30 percent persistentdrinking driver. Currently, 12 states in the United
reduction in alcohol-related crash deaths in Ohio from 1990 States have reduced theirBAC limit to .08 percent. Almost
to 1993 (Ohio DPS 1994). all other industrialized countries have BAC limits of .05 to
Anotherprogram, known as "Stakeout" is in use in some .08 percent, with some ofthem having even lowerBACs.
states, including New York. Using lists ofrepeat offenders The National Center for Statistics and Analysis in the
whohavelost their licenses, police officers watch the homes NHTSA has recently released a report that analyzed 6
oftheseoffenders, usually attimes when people would leave different measures of driver involvement in alcohol-related
or return from work. Ifthe offenders wereobserved driving, fatal crashes in each of 5 states; 30 comparisons in all
they would be arrested. (NHTSA 1994). Itfound statistically significant decreases in
9 ofthe30comparisons, non-significant decreases in 16, and
DWI
All juvenile offenders should be prosecuted as non-significant increases in 5. The report concludes: "This
adults, and the record of these offenses should be preliminary assessment appears to indicate that the
preserved after the offender reaches adulthood. These implementation of 0.08 BAC laws and other associated
actions will permit early identiflcation ofyoung adults acdvities (such as public information campaigns drawing
who are becoming persistent drinking drivers. attention tothechange) areassociated with reductions in fatal
Currentlaws in many states treat impaired drivers under crash driveralcohol involvement."
18 differently from adults. In particular, they may allow the The largest state to reduce the legal BAC limit is
young driver to be diverted into an education program that California, which lowered its BAC to .08 percent in January
results in the offense being removed from the driving record. 1990. Six months later California also passed the
Although this type ofprogram may seem like agood way to Administrative Per Se Law that permitted police to
give a young driver a second chance, it may instead prevent administratively suspend a driver's license. A preliminary
thedriverfrom being identified as aproblem drinking driver analysis fortheNHTSA(1991) found a 12 percent decline in
and receiving needed penalties and treatment. alcohol-related fatal crashes during the first yearafterthe law,
This is not a new concept. In its 1984 study on repeat compared with the previous 4 years. Declines occurred for
offenders, the NTSB recommended that all state governors drivers at all BAC levels, indicating that the persistent
work to develop record systems in their states that preserve drinking drivers also were deterred. No decline in
records of alcohol-related traffic offenses committed by nonalcohol-related fatal crashes was observed during the
juveniles afterthe offenderreaches adulthood (Sweedlerand same period. Unfortunately, because only 1 yearofpostlaw
Smith 1984). data were analyzed and no comparison area was monitored,
the results must be regarded as preliminary. Further, the