Skip Ribbon Commands
Skip to main content
Safety Recommendation Details

Safety Recommendation H-13-010
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. In the past several decades, awareness of the dangers of alcohol-impaired driving has increased. Public and private entities focusing on this safety issue have changed social perceptions concerning alcohol-impaired driving; they have also achieved important legislative actions to help reduce it. Due to these efforts, the number of lives lost annually in alcohol-impaired-driver-related crashes declined 53 percent, from 21,113 in 1982 to 9,878 in 2011; and the percentage of highway fatalities resulting from alcohol-involved crashes is down from 48 percent in 1982 to about 31 percent today. In recent years, however, US success in addressing this safety issue has plateaued. Since 1995, although the annual number of fatalities has declined, nearly one in three of all highway deaths still involves an alcohol-impaired driver. The cause of these deaths is well understood and preventable, yet even the most concerted efforts have not kept thousands of lives from being lost each year. If traditional methods are no longer reducing the problem, new—and possibly challenging—initiatives must be considered. In this safety report, the NTSB— • Describes the scope of the impaired driving problem; • Summarizes the efforts of advocacy groups, researchers, law enforcement agencies, traffic safety groups, public health organizations, legislators, and motor vehicle agencies, as well as federal, state, and local governments, to reduce the number of crashes, injuries, and fatalities; • Examines the effect of alcohol consumption on an individual’s ability to operate a motor vehicle and on the risk of being involved in a crash; and • Evaluates the effectiveness of current and emerging alcohol-impaired driving countermeasures and identifies new approaches and actions needed to reduce and ultimately eliminate alcohol-impaired driving.
Recommendation: TO THE 10 STATES THAT DO NOT HAVE ADMINISTRATIVE LICENSE SUSPENSION OR REVOCATION LAWS AND THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO: Establish administrative license suspension or revocation laws that require drivers arrested for driving while intoxicated (DWI) to use an alcohol ignition interlock on their vehicle for a period of time before obtaining full license reinstatement. (H-13-10)
Original recommendation transmittal letter: PDF
Overall Status: Open - Await Response
Mode: Highway
Location: United States
Is Reiterated: No
Is Hazmat: No
Is NPRM: No
Accident #: DCA12SS006
Accident Reports:
Report #: SR-13-01
Accident Date: 6/28/2012
Issue Date: 6/3/2013
Date Closed:
Addressee(s) and Addressee Status: Commonwealth of Kentucky (Open - Initial Response Received)
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (Open - Await Response)
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (Open - Initial Response Received)
State of Michigan (Open - Initial Response Received)
State of Montana (Open - Await Response)
State of New Jersey (Open - Await Response)
State of Rhode Island (Open - Initial Response Received)
State of South Carolina (Open - Initial Response Received)
State of South Dakota (Open - Await Response)
State of Tennessee (Open - Await Response)
Keyword(s):

Safety Recommendation History
From: NTSB
To: Commonwealth of Puerto Rico
Date: 9/4/2014
Response: In 2013 or 2014, did Puerto Rico consider applicable legislation? Will there be any effort to address this recommendation?

From: Commonwealth of Puerto Rico
To: NTSB
Date: 7/31/2013
Response: -From Maritere Padilla Rodreiguez, ESQ, Governor’s Advosir, Office of Infrastructure, Environment, and Planning: We received your letter regarding the safety recommendations to adopt policies to address it. Thanks for this valuable information.

From: NTSB
To: Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Date: 9/4/2014
Response: In 2013 or 2014, did Pennsylvania consider applicable legislation? Will there be any effort to address this recommendation?

From: Commonwealth of Kentucky
To: NTSB
Date: 12/3/2014
Response: -From Michael W. Hancock, P.E., Secretary, Transportation Cabinet, Commonwealth of Kentucky: There is a misconception concerning ignition interlock, so we have invited two legislators to join our Impaired Driving Task Force to study/discuss these devices as well as other measures to stop recidivism. There was an "ignition interlock" bill proposed for four years concurrently and it passed the state House in 2013 but then was not heard by the Senate (http://www.lrc.ky.gov/record/13rs/HB286.htm ).

From: NTSB
To: Commonwealth of Kentucky
Date: 9/4/2014
Response: What is the status of the legislation? What further actions are planned to address this recommendation?

From: NTSB
To: Commonwealth of Kentucky
Date: 9/30/2013
Response: We will include your update in a comprehensive review of all open safety recommendations that have been issued to your state and will advise you of the classifications of Safety Recommendations H-13-5 through -8 and -10, and H-12-34 through -36 and -45, as well as any other open recommendations, at the conclusion of our review. Thank you for your efforts to promote traffic safety.

From: Commonwealth of Kentucky
To: NTSB
Date: 9/17/2013
Response: -Michael W. Hancock, P.E., Secretary: Administrative license revocation (ALR) was one of the highway safety recommendations for the 2013 General Assembly by the advocacy group Kentuckians for Better Transportation (kbt.org) and possibly will be recommended by KBT in 2014 (currently pending).

From: NTSB
To: State of Montana
Date: 9/4/2014
Response: In 2013 or 2014, did Montana consider applicable legislation? Will there be any effort to address this recommendation?

From: State of Michigan
To: NTSB
Date: 12/3/2014
Response: -From Michael Prince, Michigan Office of Highway Safety Planning: There is currently no statutory requirement for this Recommendation.

From: NTSB
To: State of Michigan
Date: 9/4/2014
Response: Does Michigan plan to consider legislation to address this recommendation?

From: NTSB
To: State of Michigan
Date: 9/18/2013
Response: We will include your update in a comprehensive review of all open safety recommendations that have been issued to your state and will advise you of the classifications of Safety Recommendations H-13-5 through -8, and -10, and H-12-34 through 36, and -45, as well as any other open recommendations, at the conclusion of our review.

From: State of Michigan
To: NTSB
Date: 8/26/2013
Response: -From Col. Kristie Kibbey Etue, Director, State of Michigan, Department of State Police, Lansing, Michigan: While judges have the discretion of including ignition interlock as part of OWl sentencing, Michigan law does not currently mandate use of ignition interlocks for all offenders. The Department of State, which is responsible for all driver and vehicle licensing in Michigan, is required to revoke the driver license of a habitual offender and deny his or her application for another license. In Michigan, a habitual offender is defined as having two or more convictions within seven years or three or more convictions within ten years. After a period of revocation/denial, a minimum of 30 days, a habitual offender may be eligible for a driver license appeal hearing. If a restricted license is ordered, the hearing officer must require that the habitual offender install a Breath Alcohol ignition Interlock Device [BAllD) on any vehicle he or she owns or intends to operate. The person cannot drive until the BAllD is properly installed and proof of installation is presented to a local Secretary of State branch office.

From: NTSB
To: State of New Jersey
Date: 9/4/2014
Response: In 2013 or 2014, did New Jersey consider applicable legislation? Will there be any effort to address this recommendation?

From: State of Rhode Island
To: NTSB
Date: 11/6/2014
Response: -From Michael P. Lewis, Director, Rhode Island Department of Transportation: In 2014, Governor Chafee signed into law legislation (2014-S 2231A, 2014-H 8296) (attached) to provide judges and magistrates the authority to prohibit individuals adjudicated of driving under the influence from operating vehicles that are not equipped with ignition interlock systems. The legislation also establishes updated rules, regulations, fines and penalties for the continued enforcement of the ignition interlock system.

From: NTSB
To: State of Rhode Island
Date: 9/4/2014
Response: In 2013 or 2014, did Rhode Island consider applicable legislation? Will there be any effort to address this recommendation?

From: State of South Carolina
To: NTSB
Date: 12/2/2014
Response: -From Leroy Smith, Director, South Carolina Department of Public Safety: Establish administrative license suspension or revocation laws that require drivers arrested for driving while intoxicated (DWI) to use an alcohol ignition interlock on their vehicle for a period of time before obtaining full license reinstatement. NTSB Responses/Questions: South Carolina was in the process of drafting an Impaired Driving Plan for submittal to NHTSA in late 2013, which was expected to include two Driving Under the Influence Court grant projects that would commence on October 1, 2013. It is expected that both courts will utilize ignition interlock technology with an array of other sanctions in deterring recidivism. Was the plan submitted? Will South Carolina consider applicable legislation to address this recommendation? Status: Act 158 was enacted on April 23, 2014 and provided for the use of alcohol ignition interlock devices for first-time DUI offenders under certain circumstances. The Act amended South Carolina Code of Laws Sections 56-1-400 and 56-52-447 that now restricts drivers convicted of driving while impaired, under certain circumstances to operating only a vehicle equipped with an ignition interlock device. The full text of the Act, in addition to any related bills which were filed in the session but not enacted, appears in Attachment 3 of this document. The two pilot grant projects referenced above, Driving Under the Influence Courts, were indeed funded through the Office of Highway Safety and Justice Programs in the South Carolina Department of Public Safety. Both courts can impose conditions which include that violators adopt ignition interlock devices for their vehicles.

From: NTSB
To: State of South Carolina
Date: 9/4/2014
Response: Was the plan submitted? Will South Carolina consider applicable legislation to address this recommendation?

From: NTSB
To: State of South Carolina
Date: 9/30/2013
Response: We will include your update in a comprehensive review of all open safety recommendations that have been issued to your state and will advise you of the classifications of Safety Recommendations H-13-5 through -8 and -10, and H-12-34 through -36 and -45, as well as any other open recommendations, at the conclusion of our review. Thank you for your efforts to promote traffic safety.

From: State of South Carolina
To: NTSB
Date: 8/30/2013
Response: -From Leroy Smith, Director: Thank you for your letter to Governor Nikki R. Haley dated June 3, 2013 concerning the National Transportation Safety Board’s (NTSB) safety report, adopted on May 14, 2013. As the Director of the South Carolina Department of Public Safety, which includes the Highway Patrol, State Transport Police, and Office of Highway Safety and Justice Programs, the Governor has asked that I respond on her behalf. The report issued five new recommendations to the states and reiterated four earlier recommendations concerning the issue of impaired driving. South Carolina has previously responded to the four recommendations, and I will briefly offer comment on the five new recommendations. However, for a comprehensive description of our state's progress toward improving highway safety and our priorities for the future, I encourage NTSB staff to review our state's FFY 2014 Highway Safety Plan which was recently submitted to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA) regional office in Atlanta. This plan offers an exhaustive discussion of the many initiatives this agency and other state agencies are taking in concert to reduce fatal crashes and injuries, including those that are impaired driving-related, on our roadways. The first recommendation cited in your letter, H-13-05, calls for the establishment of a breath alcohol concentration (BAC) of .05 or lower for all drivers not already required to adhere to lower BAC limits. As is likely the case in most other states, this matter is beyond the authority of the South Carolina Department of Public Safety and rests solely within the purview of our General Assembly. Regarding H-13-06, we concur with your view that passive alcohol-sensing technology can be a valuable tool in some circumstances. In fact, our Office of Highway Safety and Justice Programs has funded grants in the past to several local law enforcement agencies which provided for the purchase of passive alcohol-sensing equipment. We will continue to give favorable consideration to well-supported requests from our subgrantees for equipment related to high visibility enforcement of impaired driving laws. Similarly, we will continue to include elements in our highway safety plan which target repeat offenders as recommended by H-13-07 and H-13-10. In fact, we are in the process of drafting an Impaired Driving Plan for submittal to NHTSA by September 1, 2013. The plan will address final recommendations that are forthcoming from a team of national experts who conducted an Impaired Driving Assessment for this state during the week of July 22-26, 2013. Those recommendations will likely include strategies to deal with the issue of repeat offenders. The Impaired Driving Plan will also address ignition interlock policies and will include two (2) Driving Under the Influence Court grant projects that will commence on October 1, 2013. It is expected that both courts will utilize ignition interlock technology with an array of other sanctions in deterring recidivism. The recommendation designated H-13-08 encourages states " ... to move toward zero deaths from impaired driving." I am pleased to advise you that the South Carolina Department of Public Safety, with the support of the Office of the Governor, has adopted the theme of "Target Zero" to represent the entirety of our highway safety efforts. "Target Zero" is now our agency goal and encompasses all of our enforcement, prevention and education initiatives. This goal is not limited to the elimination of impaired driving-related deaths, but all roadway deaths, regardless of cause. Please know we will take the recommendations promulgated by the National Transportation Safety Board under careful consideration as we move forward in the process of updating and deploying our state's Strategic Highway Safety Plan. Thank you for what you and the National Transportation Safety Board do to bring down the number of deaths on our nation's highways.

From: NTSB
To: State of South Dakota
Date: 9/4/2014
Response: In 2013 or 2014, did South Dakota consider applicable legislation? Will there be any effort to address this recommendation?

From: NTSB
To: State of Tennessee
Date: 9/4/2014
Response: In 2013 or 2014, did Tennessee consider applicable legislation? Will there be any effort to address this recommendation?