BILL ANALYSIS
SB 1388
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 1388 (Torlakson)
As Amended June 26, 2008
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :32-5
TRANSPORTATION 13-0 PUBLIC SAFETY 7-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|DeSaulnier, Duvall, |Ayes:|Solorio, Aghazarian, |
| |Carter, Furutani, | |Anderson, |
| |Galgiani, Garrick, | |De La Torre, Ma, |
| |Houston, Huff, Karnette. | |Portantino, Leno |
| |Nava, Portantino, Ruskin, | | |
| |Solorio | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
APPROPRIATIONS 16-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Leno, Walters, Caballero, | | |
| |Davis, DeSaulnier, | | |
| |Emmerson, Furutani, | | |
| |Huffman, Karnette, | | |
| |Krekorian, | | |
| |La Malfa, Lieu, Ma, | | |
| |Nakanishi, Nava, Solorio | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Transfers the responsibility for mandating the
installation of an ignition interlock device (IID) from the
court to the Department of Motor Vehicle (DMV) when a person has
been convicted of driving on a suspended license due to a
driving under the influence (DUI) conviction. Sets forth
provisions governing DMV's IID-related processes, including the
composition of fees to cover costs of administering the program.
Specifically this bill :
1)Provides that a person convicted of driving on a suspended
license, who has one prior conviction for DUI or reckless
driving that was plead after a DUI charge, is to immediately
SB 1388
Page 2
install an IID in all vehicles which he/she owns or operates
for a period of one year. The length of time increases with
each subsequent conviction.
2)Provides that DMV is to advise the court if a person has
failed to show proof of installation within 30 days of DMV
notifying the person of the requirement to install an IID.
3)Requires DMV, upon notice from the court of a conviction of
driving on a suspended license that was suspended because of
DUI, to inform the convicted person of the IID requirements in
this bill.
4)Requires DMV to advise a person who falls under the IID
requirements that installation of the IID does not allow the
person to drive without a valid driver's license.
5)Provides that, after a person is notified by DMV to install an
IID, the following is to be completed within 30 days:
a) Arrange for each vehicle owned or operated by the person
to be fitted with an IID by a certified IID provider;
b) Notify and provide to DMV proof of installation by
submitting the "Verification of Installation" form; and,
c) Pay DMV a fee sufficient to cover the cost associated
with the administration of these provisions, including
start-up costs.
6)Provides that DMV shall place a restriction on the driver's
license record of the convicted person that states the driver
is restricted to driving only vehicles equipped with a
certified IID.
7)Provides that a person notified by DMV to install an IID must
have the device serviced by the installer at least once every
60 days in order for the installer to recalibrate and monitor
the operation of the device.
8)Provides that the installer is to notify DMV if the IID is
removed or indicates that the person has attempted to remove,
bypass, or tamper with the IID, or if the person fails three
or more times to comply with any requirement for the
maintenance or calibration of the IID.
SB 1388
Page 3
9)Requires DMV to monitor the installation and maintenance of
the IID installed.
10)Provides that before a driver's license may be issued,
reissued, or returned to a person after a suspension or
revocation of that person's driving privilege, a fee
sufficient to cover program administration costs of the IID
monitoring must be paid to DMV.
11)Provides that a person who is notified by DMV to install an
IID can, within 30 days of the notification, be exempt from
the requirements if all of the following circumstances occur:
a) A person does not own a vehicle;
b) A person does not have access to a vehicle at his/her
residence;
c) A person no longer has access to the vehicle being
driven by the person when he/she was arrested for a
violation that subsequently resulted in the conviction for
driving on a suspended license;
d) A person acknowledges that he/she is only allowed to
drive a vehicle that is fitted with an operating IID and is
required to have a valid driver's license before he/she can
drive;
e) A person is subject to these requirements when they
purchases or have access to a vehicle;
f) A person's driver's license has been restricted; and,
g) A person complies with the IID requirements immediately
upon commencing ownership or operation of a vehicle subject
to the required installation of an IID.
12)Provides that a person who has been granted an exemption
pursuant to the above and who subsequently drives a vehicle in
violation of the exemption is subject to the misdemeanor
penalties in this bill as well as any other penalties that
apply.
SB 1388
Page 4
13)Makes it a misdemeanor to willfully fail to install an IID
during the time period required, punishable by up to six
months in county jail and/or a fine of not more than $5,000.
14)Establishes that these provisions shall become operative on
July 1, 2009.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Provides it is unlawful for any person who is under the
influence of any alcoholic beverage or drug, or under the
combined influence of any alcoholic beverage and drug, to
drive a vehicle.
2)Provides that it is unlawful for any person, while having
0.08% or more, by weight, of alcohol in his/her blood to drive
a vehicle.
3)Makes it a misdemeanor to drive on a license that has been
suspended or revoked because of a driving under the influence
violation.
4)Provides that if a person is convicted of driving on a license
that has been suspended or revoked because of a driving under
the influence violation, the court shall require that person
to install an IID on any vehicle that person owns or operates
and prohibit the person from operating a motor vehicle unless
the vehicle is equipped with a functioning, certified IID.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, moderate one-time costs in the range of $475,000 in
2008-09, to DMV to develop the IID administrative program.
These costs may be reimbursed in 2009-10 by revenue generated
from administrative fees that DMV is authorized to impose on
persons subject to IID installation and use requirements.
Moderate ongoing costs, in the range of $600,000 starting in
2009-10, to the DMV to administer the IID installation and use
requirements. These costs may be covered by above
administrative fees imposed on persons subject to IID
installation and use requirements.
The Assembly Appropriations Committee points out that the size
of the DMV administrative fee depends on the number of drivers
subject to the IID installation and use requirements in future
SB 1388
Page 5
years. If, for example, 20,000 drivers are subject to the IID
installation and use requirement each year, the administrative
fee would have to be set at $30 to cover ongoing costs plus an
additional amount to reimburse DMV for its 2008-09 start-up
costs. This amount would be in addition to any penalties paid
by the person for driving with a suspended or revoked license
and the projected $1,300 the person must pay to have an IID
installed and maintained for one year.
COMMENTS : According to the author, "This bill would transfer
regulatory authority for the administration of mandatory IID
programs from state courts to DMV." This bill would authorize
DMV to require that any driver convicted of driving with a
suspended license due to a conviction for driving under the
influence must immediately install an ignition interlock device
in their vehicle.
Historically, California has sought to reduce drunken
driving-related fatalities and injuries through increased
prevention, stricter sentences and fines, and expanded treatment
for offenders. State law already requires the use of IIDs in
certain circumstances. Despite these efforts, drunken driving
remains a major killer on California roadways. A total of 1,574
people died in alcohol-related crashes in 2005, up from 1,308
deaths in 2001, according to the California Highway Patrol.
An IID is a breath-alcohol testing device, about the size of a
cellular phone, which is installed on the steering column of a
car. The IID prevents the vehicle from being started unless the
driver blows into the device to demonstrate that he or she is
alcohol-free.
Overall, the effectiveness of IID in California can be
considered mixed, based upon numerous studies conducted by DMV.
Such study results suggest that "IIDs are not the "silver
bullet" that will solve the DUI problem, but they are effective
in some situations with some offenders." One group for whom the
devices seem to have little effect is first-time DUI offenders.
First offenders ordered to install an IID had the same risk of
subsequent crash and DUI conviction as first offenders not
receiving an IID. The results of this outcome study found that
first offenders were more hostile to IIDs and regarded them as
less useful, compared to repeat offenders."
SB 1388
Page 6
Opponents of this bill, such as the California DUI Lawyers
Association raise concerns about converting the administration
of the ignition interlock sanctions to DMV and eliminating
judicial discretion and suggest that "SB 1388 does not designate
an effective process by which a driver may report changes to
their circumstances or problems with the IIDs."
Opponents point out that it is "unclear who a driver should
contact if an interlock device is experiencing technical
difficulties which are limiting the operation of a vehicle, is
it an interlock device manager at DMV? Is it a hearing officer?
Moreover, if a driver has to request a modification of the
order, how does a person get an on-the-record hearing before a
DMV official? This is especially troubling because there are
only 12 DMV traffic safety offices in California."
Under current law, a driver need only return to a Superior Court
and set a hearing before the appropriate judge to raise issues
of concern or to request a modification of an order.
Critics point out that this bill "eliminates the discretion
without justification and places greater strain on the resources
of DMV, without the guarantee of adequate access for drivers to
raise problems with interlock devices."
Related legislation: SB 1190 (Oropeza) reduces from 0.20% to
0.15% the blood alcohol content which triggers heightened
consideration by the court to order installation of an ignition
interlock device. That bill is currently on the Assembly Floor.
SB 1361 (Correa) requires installation of an IID, as specified,
for all offenders convicted of a DUI under certain conditions.
Those conditions include where there is a high blood alcohol
content for a first offender and for a second or subsequent
offender. That bill is currently on the Assembly Floor.
AB 2784 (Feuer) requires a person convicted of DUI, to install
an IID in order to be reissued a license, receive a restricted
license, or receive a reinstated license. That bill is
currently on the Senate Floor.
Analysis Prepared by : Alejandro Esparza / TRANS. / (916)
SB 1388
Page 7
319-2093 FN:
0006622