Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
Safety Recommendation Details

Safety Recommendation H-12-037
Details
Synopsis: The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) has long been concerned about alcohol-impaired driving, which accounts for approximately one-third of all US highway fatalities. Between 1982 and 1994, the percentage of fatally injured drivers with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) greater than or equal to 0.08 decreased from 49 to 33 percent. However, since that time, there has been no further decline in the percentage, and efforts are needed to address this lack of progress. The NTSB has issued more than 120 safety recommendations on impaired driving since 1968, and “Addressing Alcohol-Impaired Driving” is on the NTSB’s Most Wanted List. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) estimates that alcohol-impaired driving in the United States continues to kill over 10,000 people yearly and to injure many more despite numerous federal, state, and local efforts. The NTSB is also concerned about the growing problem of drug use by drivers. According to NHTSA, from 2005 to 2009, the proportion of fatally injured drivers who tested positive for drugs (illicit, prescription, and over-the-counter) rose from 13 to 18 percent. According to NHTSA’s 2007 National Roadside Survey, 16.3 percent of weekend nighttime drivers tested positive for drugs. The growing prevalence of drugged driving has also captured the attention of the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy, which cites the following principle in its 2011 National Drug Control Strategy: “Preventing drugged driving must become a national priority on par with preventing drunk driving.” In May 2012, the NTSB held a forum to identify the most effective, scientifically based actions needed to “reach zero” accidents resulting from substance-impaired driving. Numerous impaired driving countermeasures were discussed at the forum, including laws, enforcement strategies, adjudication programs, substance treatment programs, ignition interlocks, passive alcohol detection systems, and educational campaigns. Presenters discussed the merits and drawbacks of various countermeasures, as well as the challenges to reducing impaired driving. Reductions in accidents and injuries attributable to impaired driving are the ultimate measures of success. However, inadequate data collection and reporting in many states continue to limit our ability to understand and address the problem of impaired driving and to measure the effectiveness of countermeasures.
Recommendation: TO THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CHIEFS OF POLICE AND THE NATIONAL SHERIFFS’ ASSOCIATION: Inform your members of the value of collecting place of last drink (POLD) data as part of any arrest or accident investigation involving an alcohol-impaired driver.
Original recommendation transmittal letter: PDF
Overall Status: Open - Await Response
Mode: Highway
Location: Washington, DC, United States
Is Reiterated: Yes
Is Hazmat: No
Is NPRM: No
Accident #: DCA12SS003
Accident Reports:
Report #: None
Accident Date: 5/15/2012
Issue Date: 11/21/2012
Date Closed:
Addressee(s) and Addressee Status: International Association of Chiefs of Police (Closed - Acceptable Action)
National Sheriffs' Association (Open - Await Response)
Keyword(s):

Safety Recommendation History
From: NTSB
To: International Association of Chiefs of Police
Date: 6/11/2013
Response: We are pleased that the IACP published an article on POLD data collection and wrong way driving response in the March 2013 edition of your publication, Police Chief. This action satisfies Safety Recommendation H-12-37, which is classified CLOSED—ACCEPTABLE ACTION. Pending the development of the recommended guidance for law enforcement officers regarding their response to wrong-way driving, Safety Recommendation H 12-49 remains classified “Open?Acceptable Response.”

From: NTSB
To: International Association of Chiefs of Police
Date: 6/3/2013
Response: From the safety report Reaching Zero: Actions to Eliminate Alcohol Impaired Driving (NTSB/SR-13/01, adopted May 13, 2013, notation 8482): Since the 2012 forum, the NTSB has taken additional steps to address the problem of impaired driving. In November 2012, the NTSB identified eliminating substance-impaired driving as one of 10 transportation safety areas on its Most Wanted List. By expanding the safety area from alcohol-impaired driving to substance-impaired driving, the NTSB recognized the need to address the growing problem of drug-impaired driving, of which alcohol-impaired driving is a substantial component. Although this report is focused on reducing alcohol-impaired driving, the NTSB has made numerous recommendations to address drug-impaired driving, and it continues to seek means of addressing this problem. Also in November 2012, as one outcome of the May 2012 forum, the NTSB made six recommendations calling for improvements to BAC testing and reporting in crashes, common standards for postcrash drug tests, and better tracking of place of last drink (POLD) data (NTSB 2012a, standalone recommendation letter). These recommendations recognize the criticality of obtaining robust data to determine the scope of safety issues, track changes over time, and assess the effectiveness of countermeasures. Specifically, the NTSB recommended that NHTSA take the following actions: H-12-32 Develop and disseminate to the 50 states, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia blood alcohol concentration (BAC) testing and reporting guidelines based on the 2012 report State Blood Alcohol Concentration Testing and Reporting for Drivers Involved in Fatal Crashes: Current Practices, Results, and Strategies, 1997–2009. H-12-33 Develop and disseminate to appropriate state officials a common standard of practice for drug toxicology testing, including (1) the circumstances under which tests should be conducted, (2) a minimum set of drugs for which to test, and (3) cutoff values for reporting the results. The NTSB also made the following recommendations to the 45 states that have low reporting rates for BAC testing,18 the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia: H-12-34 Increase your collection, documentation, and reporting of blood alcohol concentration (BAC) test results by taking the following actions, as needed, to improve testing and reporting rates: (1) enact legislation, (2) issue regulations, and (3) improve procedures used by law enforcement agencies or testing facilities. H-12-35 Once the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has developed the blood alcohol concentration (BAC) testing and reporting guidelines recommended in Safety Recommendation H-12-32, incorporate the guidelines into a statewide action plan to achieve BAC reporting rates of at least 80 percent of fatally injured drivers and at least 60 percent of surviving drivers involved in fatal crashes. To the 50 states, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia, the NTSB recommended the following action: H-12-36 Require law enforcement agencies to collect place of last drink (POLD) data as part of any arrest or accident investigation involving an alcohol-impaired driver. To the International Association of Chiefs of Police and the National Sheriffs’ Association, the NTSB recommended the following action: H-12-37 Inform your members of the value of collecting place of last drink (POLD) data as part of any arrest or accident investigation involving an alcohol-impaired driver. Safety Recommendations H-12-32 and -33 are in “Open—Acceptable Response” status, and Safety Recommendations H-12-34 through -36 are in “Open—Await Response” status. Safety Recommendation H-12-37 is in “Open—Acceptable Response” status to the International Association of Chiefs of Police and in “Open—Await Response” status to the National Sheriffs’ Association. Because the NTSB continues to consider that improvements to BAC testing and reporting following accidents, common standards for postaccident drug tests, and better tracking of POLD data are necessary, it reiterates Safety Recommendations H-12-32 through -37. In December 2012, the NTSB held a Board Meeting on wrong-way driving collisions, during which the Board called on NHTSA and the Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety, Inc., (ACTS)19 to accelerate implementation of the Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety (DADSS). DADSS refers to passive vehicle-based systems that would identify driver alcohol use by touch or by measuring a driver’s exhaled breath; they then would prevent vehicle operation by drivers above the legal limit (NTSB 2012c, wrong-way report). Specifically, the NTSB recommended that NHTSA take the following action: H-12-43 Work with the Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety, Inc., to accelerate widespread implementation of Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety (DADSS) technology by (1) defining usability testing that will guide driver interface design and (2) implementing a communication program that will direct driver education and promote public acceptance. The NTSB also recommended that the 33 states that do not mandate the use of interlocks for all DWI offenders, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia take the following action: H-12-45 Enact laws to require the use of alcohol ignition interlock devices for all individuals convicted of driving while intoxicated (DWI) offenses. Chapter 5 discusses these recommendations concerning technologies that prevent a person from driving a vehicle while impaired.

From: International Association of Chiefs of Police
To: NTSB
Date: 4/3/2013
Response: -From Richard J. Ashton, Grant/ Technical Management Manager, International Association of Chiefs of Police: Here is the link to the Police Chief article on these two safety recommendations: http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display&issue_id=32013&category_ID=11 NTSB Issues Safety Recommendations to IACP By Richard J. Ashton, Chief of Police (Retired), Frederick, Maryland; and Grant/Technical Management Manager, IACP The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigated wrong-way driving crashes and also held a two-day forum last spring in Washington, D.C., called “Reaching Zero: Actions to Eliminate Substance-Impaired Driving.” As a result of these efforts, the NTSB tasked the IACP and the National Sheriffs’ Association (NSA) with Safety Recommendations H-12-37 and H-12-49.1 Wrong-Way Driving Crashes Each year in the United States, there are relatively few collisions where vehicles traveling the wrong-way on controlled access highways strike, usually head-on, other vehicles traveling lawfully in the prescribed direction (that is, right-way drivers). Yet, on average, 360 lives were lost annually between 2004 and 2009 in 260 fatal crashes, which represent about three percent of the collisions on controlled-access highways. More than 75 percent of these collisions occurred between 6:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m.; about 57 percent happened on weekends (Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays); and most of them took place in the lane immediately adjacent to the median. The vast majority of wrong-way driving crashes resulted from drivers erroneously entering controlled-access highways using exit ramps.2 Alcohol impairment clearly is the primary cause of wrong-way driving collisions. While only 6.5 percent of right-way drivers in this type of fatal collision between 2004 and 2009 had alcohol involvement, approximately 60 percent of wrong-way drivers in these fatal crashes had alcohol involvement. Almost 70 percent of those drivers for which blood alcohol concentrations (BACs) were available had BACs of .08 grams per deciliter (g/dL) or greater, with 10 percent being between .08 and .15 g/dL and 59 percent at .15 or above g/dL.3 The NTSB believes a more accurate understanding of alcohol impairment in these and other types of fatal collisions could result from increased collection and reporting of BACs.4 For example, fewer states reported BAC results for more than 80 percent of fatally injured drivers in 2010 (23 states) than in 1990 (28 states), and the reporting rate for two states (Alabama and Iowa) was less than 25 percent.5 Another cause of wrong-way driving crashes is drivers aged over 70 years, who were overrepresented in fatal wrong-way driving collisions between 2004 and 2009. In fact, the number of wrong-way drivers exceeded that of right-way drivers only in every 10-year age category above 70 years. There were almost 2.5 times more wrong-way drivers between 70 years old and 79 years old and in excess of 30 times more of them were over 80 years old.6 One immediate safety initiative that police chiefs and law enforcement executives can undertake is to caution officers, like the California Highway Patrol did, to drive on controlled-access highways—especially during nighttime hours—in lanes in other than the lane immediately adjacent to the median: When driving on a freeway or divided highway at night, consider wrong-way drivers, most of whom are either under the influence of alcohol/drugs or confused. In either case, impaired drivers will usually be found in the left lane which is perceived as the right lane. When cresting an overpass or rounding a curve at legal speeds, there may be a closing rate of 110 mph or 165 feet per second. At this speed, the only chance would be to instantly swerve the vehicle; braking would be futile. The only real defense against the wrong-way driver is to watch well ahead. When the line of sight is reduced because of the highway configuration, the odds are better driving in the right lanes.7 The NTSB recommended that the 33 states that have not enacted laws requiring the use of alcohol ignition interlocks by all drivers convicted of an impaired-driving offense, along with the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia, do so. It also highlighted the incentive to pass such legislation that is included in the recently enacted Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21); MAP-21 directs the U.S. Department of Transportation to award special grants to states that mandate the use of alcohol ignition interlocks by all of those convicted of impaired-driving violations.8 Thus, the NTSB recommendation expands the scope of an existing effective technology in order to spare additional lives. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) data indicate that drivers with BACs of .08 or higher involved in fatal crashes in 2011 were seven times more likely to have had a prior impaired-driving conviction than were drivers without alcohol impairment at the time of the fatal crash.9 Research indicates that limited enforcement of impaired-driving statutes can allow offenders to drive under the influence between 200 and 2,000 times prior to apprehension and that even high-visibility enforcement of these laws still can permit them to drive impaired 80 times before an arrest.10 To vastly reduce the number of impaired-drivers who escape capture, the NTSB encourages NHTSA and the Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety Incorporated to expedite the development and implementation of passive safety technologies, such as the Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety (DADSS), as opposed to active ones, such as alcohol ignition interlocks. DADSS is intended at this stage of development to detect BAC passively using two sensor systems: one based on breath, and the other based on touch.12 but it currently is at least a decade away from being available as optional equipment in new vehicles.14 The IACP Highway Safety Committee (HSC) intends to begin exploring Safety Recommendation H-12-49 at its 2013 Agenda Screening Meeting in New Orleans, Louisiana, this month. The Place of Last Drink Responsible alcoholic beverage service either in commercial establishments or in private settings is key to reducing impaired driving arrests and collisions. “Dram shop liability laws,” which have been enacted in 43 states and the District of Columbia, allow victims of impaired-driving crashes or their families to hold bars and alcohol beverage retailers civilly liable for death, injury, or damage caused by intoxicated customers.15 Similarly, “social host liability laws,” some form of which have been passed in 27 states, operate to hold private individuals legally responsible for knowingly serving alcohol to minors or intoxicated adults who subsequently drive vehicles that are involved in collisions resulting in death or injury.16 Obviously, determining the place of last drink (POLD) is crucial to the successful enforcement of such laws. Additionally, ascertaining POLD can bolster an impaired-driving arrest by providing a time frame as to where, when, and what the defendant was last served. Consequently, the NTSB recommended that the IACP and the NSA inform their members of the value of collecting POLD data as a part of any arrest or crash investigation involving an alcohol-impaired driver.17 The HSC will discuss Safety Recommendation H-12-37 at its 2013 Agenda Screening Meeting. The NTSB remains concerned about the following substance abuse–related driving issues: Alcohol-impaired collision deaths involving drivers with BACs equal to or greater than .08 g/dL decreased from 49 percent of total traffic fatalities in 1982 to 33 percent of them in 1994 and essentially have remained stagnant since 1994, 18 accounting for 31 percent of total traffic deaths in 2011.19 • Driving under the influence of drugs is increasing, but its magnitude cannot yet be measured because standards for post-crash drug testing and reporting have not been established.20 • The HSC welcomes these opportunities to partner with the NTSB to reduce the deaths and the debilitating injuries relating to wrong-way driving crashes and to substance impairment. ? Notes: 1Deborah A.P. Hersman to Joseph A. Farrow and Aaron D. Kennard, November 21, 2012, National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) Safety Recommendation, H-12-37, http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/recletters/2012/H-12-037.pdf (accessed January 28, 2013); and Hersman to Craig Steckler, December 26, 2012, NTSB Safety Recommendation H-12-49, http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/recletters/2012/H-12-049.pdf (accessed January 28, 2013). 2 NTSB, Wrong-Way Driving, December 11, 2012, 1, Highway Special Investigation Report NTSB/SIR-12/01, http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/safetystudies/SIR1201.pdf (accessed January 28, 2013). 3Ibid. 4Hersman to Farrow and Kennard, November 21, 2012, 2, http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/recletters/2012/H-12-037.pdf (accessed January 28, 2013). 5Ibid., 3; NTSB, Wrong-Way Driving, 11. 6NTSB, Wrong-Way Driving, 37. 7Department of California Highway Patrol, Enforcement Driving Guide, July 10, 2008, 5-6, http://www.californiaduiguide.com/documents/CHP_Docs/Enforcement%20Driving% 20Guide.pdf (accessed January 28, 2013). 8NTSB, Wrong-Way Driving, 35, 58. 9NHTSA’s National Center for Statistics and Analysis (NCSA), Traffic Safety Facts: 2011 Data Alcohol-Impaired Driving, NHTSA publication no. DOT HS 811 700, December 2012, 4-5, http://wwwnrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811700.pdf (accessed January 28, 2013). 10Traffic Injury Research Foundation, Understanding Drunk Driving, 2010, 9–10, http://www.tirf.ca/publications/PDF_publications/wg_messaging_brochure_final_web.pdf">http://www.tirf.ca/publications/PDF_publications/wg_messaging_brochure_final_web.pdf (accessed January 28, 2013). 11NTSB, Wrong-Way Driving, 35-37, 58. 12Michael Walsh, “Alcohol Detecting Technology Could Save 10,000 a Year from Drunk-Driving Death: Scientists,” New York Daily News, January 3, 2013, http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/alcohol-detecting-technology-save-10-000-year drunk-driving-death-article-1.1231763#ixzz2Iokviz39 (accessed January 28, 2013). 13NTSB, Wrong-Way Driving, 37. 14Ibid., 52, 58. 15FindLaw, “Dram Shop Laws,” http://dui.findlaw.com/dui-laws-resources/dram-shop-laws.html?DCMP=ADC-DUI_LawsBroadModifier-DramShop&HBX_PK=dram+shop (accessed January 28, 2013). 16FindLaw, “Social Host Liability,” http://injury.findlaw.com/accident-injury-law/social-host-liability.html (accessed January 28, 2013). 17Hersman to Farrow and Kennard, November 21, 2012, 8, http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/recletters/2012/H-12-037.pdf (accessed January 28, 2013). 18Ibid., 1; NTSB, Wrong-Way Driving, 55. 19NCSA, Traffic Safety Facts: 2011 Data Alcohol-Impaired Driving, 1. 20Hersman to Farrow and Kennard, November 21, 2012, 7–8, http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/recletters/2012/H-12-037.pdf (accessed January 28, 2013); NTSB, Wrong-Way Driving, 39–40. Please cite as: Richard J. Ashton, "NTSB Issues Safety Recommendations to IACP," Highway Safety Initiatives, The Police Chief 80 (March 2013): 64–66.

From: NTSB
To: International Association of Chiefs of Police
Date: 4/1/2013
Response: We are encouraged that the IACP plans to publish articles on POLD data collection and wrong-way driving response in your monthly publication, Police Chief. We are further encouraged by your Highway Safety Committee’s plans to discuss the value of collecting POLD data and the development of guidance for officers on wrong-way movement response at the March 2013 Agenda Screening Meeting. We would appreciate receiving copies of the published articles and look forward to receiving periodic updates on further efforts planned to address these recommendations. Until such actions are completed, Safety Recommendations H-12-37 and -49 are classified OPEN—ACCEPTABLE RESPONSE.

From: International Association of Chiefs of Police
To: NTSB
Date: 2/19/2013
Response: -From Joseph A. Farrow, Chair, Highway Safety Committee: The IACP Highway Safety Committee (HSC) welcomed your invitation to respond to the National Transportation Safety Board’s Safety Recommendation H-12-37. While the HSC has not formally met since I received your November 21, 2012, letter, it will hold its 2013 Agenda Screening Meeting in New Orleans, Louisiana, on March 16 and 17 and will discuss the value of collecting place of last drink (POLD) data. Additionally, Colonel John T. Born, Superintendent of the Ohio State Highway Patrol and a HSC member, will dis-cuss at that meeting a “New Statewide Impaired Driver Fatality ‘Trace-Back’ Initiative” and has agreed, as well, to contribute an article on Ohio’s POLD program. The Colonel’s article will appear in the July 2013, issue of the Police Chief, which will be devoted to highway safety. The Police Chief has an average monthly circulation of almost 24,000 copies. Finally, an article relative both to POLD data collection and to wrong-way driving crash-es (Safety Recommendation H-12-49) will appear in the March 2013, issue of the Police Chief. As an aside, the HSC will commence work on Safety Recommendation H-12-49 at next month’s meeting. I thank you for the opportunity to assist you on this important highway safety issue, and I reassure you of the HSC’s continued cooperation, assistance, and support on all matters of mutual interest and concern.

From: NTSB
To: National Sheriffs' Association
Date: 6/3/2013
Response: From the safety report Reaching Zero: Actions to Eliminate Alcohol Impaired Driving (NTSB/SR-13/01, adopted May 13, 2013, notation 8482): Since the 2012 forum, the NTSB has taken additional steps to address the problem of impaired driving. In November 2012, the NTSB identified eliminating substance-impaired driving as one of 10 transportation safety areas on its Most Wanted List. By expanding the safety area from alcohol-impaired driving to substance-impaired driving, the NTSB recognized the need to address the growing problem of drug-impaired driving, of which alcohol-impaired driving is a substantial component. Although this report is focused on reducing alcohol-impaired driving, the NTSB has made numerous recommendations to address drug-impaired driving, and it continues to seek means of addressing this problem. Also in November 2012, as one outcome of the May 2012 forum, the NTSB made six recommendations calling for improvements to BAC testing and reporting in crashes, common standards for postcrash drug tests, and better tracking of place of last drink (POLD) data (NTSB 2012a, standalone recommendation letter). These recommendations recognize the criticality of obtaining robust data to determine the scope of safety issues, track changes over time, and assess the effectiveness of countermeasures. Specifically, the NTSB recommended that NHTSA take the following actions: H-12-32 Develop and disseminate to the 50 states, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia blood alcohol concentration (BAC) testing and reporting guidelines based on the 2012 report State Blood Alcohol Concentration Testing and Reporting for Drivers Involved in Fatal Crashes: Current Practices, Results, and Strategies, 1997–2009. H-12-33 Develop and disseminate to appropriate state officials a common standard of practice for drug toxicology testing, including (1) the circumstances under which tests should be conducted, (2) a minimum set of drugs for which to test, and (3) cutoff values for reporting the results. The NTSB also made the following recommendations to the 45 states that have low reporting rates for BAC testing,18 the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia: H-12-34 Increase your collection, documentation, and reporting of blood alcohol concentration (BAC) test results by taking the following actions, as needed, to improve testing and reporting rates: (1) enact legislation, (2) issue regulations, and (3) improve procedures used by law enforcement agencies or testing facilities. H-12-35 Once the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has developed the blood alcohol concentration (BAC) testing and reporting guidelines recommended in Safety Recommendation H-12-32, incorporate the guidelines into a statewide action plan to achieve BAC reporting rates of at least 80 percent of fatally injured drivers and at least 60 percent of surviving drivers involved in fatal crashes. To the 50 states, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia, the NTSB recommended the following action: H-12-36 Require law enforcement agencies to collect place of last drink (POLD) data as part of any arrest or accident investigation involving an alcohol-impaired driver. To the International Association of Chiefs of Police and the National Sheriffs’ Association, the NTSB recommended the following action: H-12-37 Inform your members of the value of collecting place of last drink (POLD) data as part of any arrest or accident investigation involving an alcohol-impaired driver. Safety Recommendations H-12-32 and -33 are in “Open—Acceptable Response” status, and Safety Recommendations H-12-34 through -36 are in “Open—Await Response” status. Safety Recommendation H-12-37 is in “Open—Acceptable Response” status to the International Association of Chiefs of Police and in “Open—Await Response” status to the National Sheriffs’ Association. Because the NTSB continues to consider that improvements to BAC testing and reporting following accidents, common standards for postaccident drug tests, and better tracking of POLD data are necessary, it reiterates Safety Recommendations H-12-32 through -37. In December 2012, the NTSB held a Board Meeting on wrong-way driving collisions, during which the Board called on NHTSA and the Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety, Inc., (ACTS)19 to accelerate implementation of the Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety (DADSS). DADSS refers to passive vehicle-based systems that would identify driver alcohol use by touch or by measuring a driver’s exhaled breath; they then would prevent vehicle operation by drivers above the legal limit (NTSB 2012c, wrong-way report). Specifically, the NTSB recommended that NHTSA take the following action: H-12-43 Work with the Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety, Inc., to accelerate widespread implementation of Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety (DADSS) technology by (1) defining usability testing that will guide driver interface design and (2) implementing a communication program that will direct driver education and promote public acceptance. The NTSB also recommended that the 33 states that do not mandate the use of interlocks for all DWI offenders, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia take the following action: H-12-45 Enact laws to require the use of alcohol ignition interlock devices for all individuals convicted of driving while intoxicated (DWI) offenses. Chapter 5 discusses these recommendations concerning technologies that prevent a person from driving a vehicle while impaired.