The study first reviewed each State’s laws affecting BAC testing for both fatally injured and surviving drivers, recent BAC testing rates, and other readily-available information relevant to each State’s BAC testing practices and results. At the same time, the steering committee was formed. With the advice of the steering committee, ten States were chosen for study. Through personal and telephone interviews, project staff examined in detail each State’s BAC laws, policies, practices, procedures, and testing results. Information from the review and the ten State investigations was synthesized into draft findings, conclusions, and recommendations. The steering committee reviewed these results and made additional suggestions for the study’s conclusions and this final report.

State Law Review

Some States have laws explicitly authorizing or enabling BAC testing for drivers involved in fatal crashes, in addition to the standard laws regarding drivers suspected of violating the State’s impaired driving statutes. Project staff reviewed and summarized each State’s laws for both fatally injured and surviving drivers. State laws were searched through the Internet. Additional information was obtained from Forced Blood Draws, American Prosecutors Research Institute (2002), and Digest of State Alcohol-Highway Safety Related Legislation, Twentieth Edition, NHTSA, DOT-HS-809 435 (2002). The results are presented and discussed in Chapter III. The review identified three general types of laws for fatally injured drivers and five types for surviving drivers.

Steering Committee

A seven-member steering committee advised the project. The committee members and their organizations are listed below and in Appendix A.

Jonathan Arden, MD, Chief Medical Examiner, District of Columbia
John Bobo, Director, National Traffic Law Center
Phillip Brewer, MD, Yale New Haven Hospital
James Champagne, Executive Director, Louisiana Highway Safety Commission
Robert DiMiceli, California Highway Patrol
Barbara Harsha, Executive Director, Governors Highway Safety Association
Chip Walls, Director, Forensic Toxicology Laboratory, University of Miami School of Medicine

Collectively, the committee members represent the disciplines involved in all aspects of BAC testing: medical examiners, prosecutors, physicians, highway safety office directors, law enforcement, and toxicologists. The committee met on August 29, 2002, reviewed the overall project goals and plan, advised on critical issues in BAC testing, and suggested States for detailed study. The committee met again on July 29, 2003, reviewed the results from the ten State case studies, reviewed and commented on the draft recommendations, and suggested how the recommendations could be implemented.

Ten State Case Studies

States were selected for study using four criteria.
1) Laws: include States from each of the major law types, for both fatally injured and surviving drivers.
2) Testing rates: include States with good and not-so-good testing rates and States that have improved their testing rates markedly.
3) Geographic diversity: include States from as many NHTSA Regions as possible; include both large and small States.
4) Efficiency: when possible, include States that will provide useful information for both dead and surviving driver testing and reporting practices.

Project staff prepared a preliminary list and circulated it to the steering committee. Staff also discussed the project and the list with Administrators or staff in each NHTSA Region and reviewed reports from workshops regarding BAC testing conducted recently in several States. This produced a working list of eleven States together with several alternates. Project staff contacted these States to investigate arrangements for visits or telephone interviews. Two States could not accommodate the study and one State was added from the alternate list, to produce the final ten States.

The ten States are geographically diverse and include a representative from nine of the ten NHTSA regions (Figure 1). Known BAC rates in 2001 (the most recent data at the time States were selected), ranged from 89 percent to 45 percent for fatally injured drivers, and from 83 percent to 1 percent for surviving drivers, across the ten States.

[d]

Project staff visited or conducted telephone interviews with key persons in each State. Contacts began with the State’s Governor’s Representative or staff and FARS analyst. For the States studied by telephone (Iowa, Minnesota and Nebraska), they recommended representatives from law enforcement, medical examiners or coroners, physicians, and testing laboratories who were then contacted and interviewed. For the States visited, they recruited representatives of these disciplines to meet with project staff. Appendix B lists the persons contacted in each State. Each State study was based on the outline protocol of Appendix C, modified as appropriate to meet the State’s specific circumstances.