96-5131. Incentive Grant Criteria for Drunk Driving Prevention Programs  

  • [Federal Register Volume 61, Number 46 (Thursday, March 7, 1996)]
    [Rules and Regulations]
    [Pages 9101-9104]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 96-5131]
    
    
    
    =======================================================================
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
    
    National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
    
    23 CFR Part 1313
    
    [Docket No. 89-02; Notice 8]
    RIN 2127-AD01
    
    
    Incentive Grant Criteria for Drunk Driving Prevention Programs
    
    AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, (NHTSA), 
    Department of Transportation.
    
    ACTION: Interim final rule; request for comments.
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SUMMARY: This interim final rule amends the regulations on incentive 
    grant criteria for drunk driving prevention programs to reflect changes 
    that were made to the section 410 program by the National Highway 
    System Designation Act of 1995 (NHS Act). As a result of this interim 
    final rule, the Section 410 supplemental grant criterion that requires 
    that States ``deem persons under age 21 who operate a motor vehicle 
    with a BAC of 0.02 or greater to be driving while intoxicated'' has 
    been changed to a basic grant criterion. In addition, the regulation 
    now provides for an alternative method for some States to demonstrate 
    compliance with the basic grant criterion that requires that States 
    have a ``statewide program for stopping vehicles.''
        In today's Federal Register, NHTSA and the Federal Highway 
    Administration (FHWA) have published a separate notice of proposed 
    rulemaking (NPRM), which contains a proposal for implementing a new 
    ``zero tolerance'' sanction program enacted by the NHS Act, which is 
    similar to the Section 410 ``0.02 BAC'' basic grant criterion cited 
    above. NHTSA requests comments regarding the changes made by this 
    interim final rule, and regarding whether additional changes should be 
    made to the Section 410 ``0.02 BAC'' basic grant criterion, as a result 
    of the new ``zero tolerance'' sanction program.
    
    DATES: This interim final rule becomes effective March 7, 1996. 
    Comments on this interim rule are due no later than April 22, 1996.
    
    ADDRESSES: Written comments should refer to the docket number and the 
    number of this notice and be submitted (preferably in ten copies) to: 
    Docket Section, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Room 
    5109, Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 
    20590. (Docket hours are from 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m.)
    
    FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Marlene Markison, Chief, Program 
    Support Staff, NRO-10, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 
    400 Seventh Street S.W., Washington, DC 20590; telephone (202) 366-2121 
    or Ms. Heidi L. Coleman, Assistant Chief Counsel for General Law, 
    Office of Chief Counsel, NCC-30, National Highway Traffic Safety 
    Administration, 400 Seventh Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20590, 
    telephone (202) 366-1834.
    
    SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 410, title 23, United States Code, 
    as amended, established an incentive grant program under which States 
    may qualify for basic and supplemental grant funds for adopting and 
    implementing comprehensive drunk driving prevention programs that meet 
    specified statutory criteria.
        On November 28, 1995, the National Highway System Designation Act 
    of 1995 (NHS Act) was enacted into law. Section 324 of the NHS Act 
    contained amendments to 23 U.S.C. 410.
    
    Statewide Program for Stopping Motor Vehicles
    
        Before its amendment by the NHS Act, Section 410 contained a basic 
    grant criterion requiring that States must provide for ``a statewide 
    program for stopping motor vehicles.'' To qualify for a basic grant 
    under this criterion, States were required to provide:
    
    
    [[Page 9102]]
    
    
        A statewide program for stopping motor vehicles on a 
    nondiscriminatory, lawful basis for the purpose of determining 
    whether or not the operators of such motor vehicles are driving 
    while under the influence of alcohol.
    
        On June 30, 1992, NHTSA issued an interim final rule to implement 
    this provision. The preamble to the interim final rule stated:
    
        NHTSA is aware * * * that the courts in some States have 
    declared the use of checkpoints or roadblocks to be unconstitutional 
    under their State constitution [ and has, therefore, * * *] 
    attempted in this final rule to provide some flexibility to enable 
    these States to describe other Statewide programs for stopping motor 
    vehicles, using alternative methods * * *
        The agency [, however,] expects most States will meet this 
    criterion by describing their plans for conducting a Statewide 
    checkpoint or roadblock program.
    
        Section 324(b)(1) of the NHS Act amended Section 410 by providing 
    an alternative method of demonstrating compliance with this Section 410 
    basic grant criterion, for those States in which checkpoints or 
    roadblocks have been declared to be unconstitutional. Section 324(b)(1) 
    provides:
    
        A State shall be treated as having met the requirement of this 
    paragraph if--
        (i) the State provides to the Secretary a written certification 
    that the highest court of the State has issued a decision indicating 
    that implementation of subparagraph (A) would constitute a violation 
    of the constitution of the State; and
        (ii) the State demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary 
    that--
        (I) the alcohol fatal crash involvement rate in the State has 
    decreased in each of the 3 most recent calendar years for which 
    statistics for determining such rate are available; and
        (II) the alcohol fatal crash involvement rate in the State has 
    been lower than the average such rate for all States in each of such 
    calendar years.
    
        As a result of the changes made by today's interim final rule, a 
    State may demonstrate compliance with this criterion using an 
    alternative method, under which the State must submit a certification 
    that the highest court of the State has issued a decision, indicating 
    that a Statewide program for the stopping of motor vehicles on a 
    nondiscriminatory, lawful basis for the purpose of determining whether 
    or not the operators of such motor vehicles are driving while under the 
    influence of alcohol, would constitute a violation of the State's 
    Constitution. The State must also provide a copy of the court's 
    decision.
        NHTSA will then, based on data contained in the Fatal Accident 
    Reporting System (FARS) and using NHTSA's method for estimating alcohol 
    involvement, determine the alcohol involvement rate in fatal crashes in 
    the State in each of the three most recent calendar years for which 
    statistics for determining this rate are available and the average such 
    rate for all States in each of these three years.
        The State will qualify, under this criterion, if NHTSA determines 
    that the data show that the alcohol involvement rate in fatal crashes 
    in the State has decreased in each of the three most recent calendar 
    years for which statistics for determining such rate are available, and 
    that the alcohol involvement rate in fatal crashes in the State has 
    been lower than the average such rate for all States in each of such 
    calendar years.
    
    0.02 BAC Per Se Law for Persons Under Age 21
    
        Prior to the enactment of the NHS Act, Section 410 provided that, 
    to qualify for basic grant funds, a State was required to meet five out 
    of six basic grant criteria.1 If a State qualified for a basic 
    grant, it could also seek to qualify for funds under one or more of 
    seven supplemental grants. To qualify under the first of these seven 
    supplemental grants, a State was required to provide that any person 
    under age 21 with an alcohol concentration of 0.02 percent or greater 
    when driving a motor vehicle shall be deemed to be driving while 
    intoxicated.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \1\ To receive a basic grant, States that qualified for section 
    410 funding in FY 1992 could demonstrate compliance with only four 
    out of the five basic grant criteria that were in effect at that 
    time.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        Section 324(b)(2) of the NHS Act amended Section 410 by converting 
    this ``0.02 BAC'' requirement from a supplemental to a basic grant 
    criterion. Accordingly, as a result of the changes made by this interim 
    final rule, the ``0.02 BAC'' requirement remains the same. However, it 
    is removed from the list of supplemental grants (reducing the number of 
    such grants from seven to six), and added to the list of basic grant 
    criteria under Section 410 (increasing the total of basic grant 
    criteria from six to seven).
        To qualify for basic grant funds, States must now meet five out of 
    seven basic grant criteria.2 As before, if a State qualifies for a 
    basic grant, it can also seek to qualify for funds under one or more of 
    the supplemental grants. However, the number of supplemental grants has 
    been reduced from seven to six.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \2\ To receive a basic grant, States that qualified for section 
    410 funding in FY 1992 have two options. They may qualify either by 
    demonstrating compliance with four out of the five basic grant 
    criteria that were in effect at that time, or by demonstrating 
    compliance with five out of the seven current basic grant criteria.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    Interim Final Rule
    
        This notice is published as an interim final rule. Accordingly, the 
    changes to Part 1313 described above are fully in effect and binding 
    upon the notice's publication. No further regulatory action by NHTSA is 
    necessary to make these changes effective.
        To ensure that States are able to apply for grant funds in fiscal 
    year 1996 under an implementing regulation that reflects the statutory 
    amendments contained in the NHS Act, these changes have been made as an 
    interim final rule, without prior notice and opportunity to comment. 
    These changes do not impose any additional requirements on States. In 
    fact, they provide additional flexibility to States that wish to apply 
    for Section 410 grants this fiscal year. In addition, the changes made 
    to the regulation, simply reflect the statutory amendments enacted by 
    the NHS Act.
        NHTSA requests comments on these changes. All comments submitted in 
    response to this notice will be considered by the agency. Following the 
    close of the comment period, NHTSA will publish a notice responding to 
    the comments and, if appropriate, will further amend the provisions of 
    Part 1313.
        NHTSA also requests comments on the issues described below, which 
    involve changes the agency is considering for adoption in future 
    rulemaking, but which have not been made in today's interim final rule.
    
    New Zero Tolerance Sanction
    
        As explained more fully in a separate notice of proposed rulemaking 
    (NPRM), published in the notices section of today's Federal Register, 
    Section 320 of the NHS Act added a new Section 161 to title 23, United 
    States Code, to create a new zero tolerance sanction program, which 
    requires the withholding of certain Federal-aid highway funds from 
    States that do not enact and enforce a ``zero tolerance'' law. The 
    ``zero tolerance'' requirement contained in Section 161 is similar, but 
    not identical, to the ``0.02 BAC'' grant criterion contained in Section 
    410.
        Section 410 provides that, to qualify for funding under the ``0.02 
    BAC'' grant criterion, a State must provide ``that any person under age 
    21 with a BAC of 0.02 percent or greater when driving a motor vehicle 
    shall be deemed to be driving while intoxicated.'' Section 161 provides 
    that, to avoid the withholding of Federal-aid highway funds, a State 
    must enact and enforce ``a law that considers an individual under the 
    age of
    
    [[Page 9103]]
    
    21 who has a BAC of 0.02 percent or greater while operating a motor 
    vehicle in the State to be driving while intoxicated or driving under 
    the influence of alcohol.''
        In the NPRM, NHTSA and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 
    the agencies responsible for jointly administering this new sanction 
    program, state that:
    
        The agencies believe that, while Congress intended to encourage 
    all States to enact and enforce effective zero tolerance laws, it 
    also intended to provide States with sufficient flexibility so they 
    could develop laws that suited the particular conditions that exist 
    in those States. Accordingly, the statute prescribes only a limited 
    number of basic elements that State laws must meet to avoid the 
    withholding of Federal-aid highway funds.
    
        NHTSA and FHWA propose in the NPRM that, to avoid the sanction, 
    States must demonstrate that they have enacted and are enforcing a law 
    that: (1) Applies to all individuals under the age of 21; (2) sets a 
    BAC of not higher than 0.02 percent as the legal limit; (3) makes 
    operating a motor vehicle by an individual under the age of 21 above 
    the legal limit a per se offense; and (4) provides for primary 
    enforcement.
    
    Impact of New Zero Tolerance Sanction on 0.02 BAC Criterion
    
        The proposed requirement under the new zero tolerance sanction 
    differs from the current requirement under the Section 410 ``0.02 BAC'' 
    grant criterion. Currently, to qualify for a Section 410 grant under 
    the ``0.02 BAC'' grant criterion, in addition to the requirements 
    listed above, a State must provide for a 30-day suspension or 
    revocation. The 30-day suspension or revocation period must be a 
    mandatory hard suspension or revocation (i.e., it may not be subject to 
    hardship, conditional or provisional driving privileges). To 
    demonstrate compliance with this criterion, States must submit a law 
    that provides for each element of the criterion, except that States 
    with laws that do not specifically provide for a 30-day suspension 
    period may submit data showing that the average length of the 
    suspension term for offenders meets or exceeds 30 days.
        As stated above, today's interim final rule changes the Section 410 
    ``0.02 BAC'' grant criterion from a supplemental to a basic grant 
    criterion. It does not, however, change the criterion itself or the 
    method for demonstrating compliance.
        If the proposed ``zero tolerance'' regulation published in today's 
    NPRM is adopted without change, and no further changes are made to the 
    Section 410 ``0.02 BAC'' grant criterion, the following situation could 
    result: a State could enact and enforce a law that would permit it to 
    avoid the ``zero tolerance'' sanction, but not enable it to qualify for 
    a Section 410 grant under the ``0.02 BAC'' grant criterion.
        The current Section 410 ``0.02 BAC'' criterion was first adopted in 
    an interim final rule, dated August 9, 1994 (59 FR 40470), which 
    requested comments from the public. In response to that notice, one 
    commenter (Advocates for Highway Safety) expressed concern that the 
    criterion was not strict enough. Advocates stated:
    
        We are not convinced * * * that a 30-day period of suspension is 
    sufficient to make an effective impression on under age 21 drivers. 
    * * * We believe that there is a strong argument for requiring a 90-
    day suspension for under age 21 supplemental grants even for states 
    that meet the basic grant criteria without an ALR law.
    
        Two commenters (the Michigan Department of State Police and the 
    National Association of Governors' Highway Safety Representatives 
    (NAGHSR)) considered the 30-day hard suspension requirement too strict. 
    NAGHSR expressed the view that the 30-day requirement was not contained 
    in the Section 410 statute, and its inclusion in the regulation made it 
    unnecessarily difficult for States to qualify for Section 410 funds.
        In light of the comments that NHTSA received in response to its 
    interim final rule dated August 9, 1994, and the proposed 
    implementation of the new ``zero tolerance'' sanction program 
    established by the NHS Act, NHTSA is requesting comments regarding 
    whether to make further revisions to Part 1313. Specifically, NHTSA 
    requests comments regarding whether it should retain different 
    requirements under the ``zero tolerance'' sanction and the Section 410 
    ``0.02 BAC'' grant criterion, or whether it should amend the Section 
    410 ``0.02 BAC'' criterion to be the same as the ``zero tolerance'' 
    sanction requirement.
    
    Written Comments
    
        Interested persons are invited to comment on this interim final 
    rule. It is requested, but not required, that ten copies be submitted.
        All comments must be limited to 15 pages in length. Necessary 
    attachments may be appended to those submissions without regard to the 
    15-page limit. (49 CFR 553.21.) This limitation is intended to 
    encourage commenters to detail their primary arguments in a concise 
    fashion.
        Written comments to the public docket must be received by April 22, 
    1996. All comments received before the close of business on the comment 
    closing date, will be considered and will be available for examination 
    in the docket at the above address before and after that date. To the 
    extent possible, comments filed after the closing date will also be 
    considered. However, the rulemaking action may proceed at any time 
    after that date. Following the close of the comment period, NHTSA will 
    publish a notice responding to the comments and, if appropriate, NHTSA 
    will amend the provisions of this rule. NHTSA will continue to file 
    relevant material in the docket as it becomes available after the 
    closing date, and it is recommended that interested persons continue to 
    examine the docket for new material.
        Those persons desiring to be notified upon receipt of their 
    comments in the docket should enclose, in the envelope with their 
    comments, a self-addressed stamped postcard. Upon receiving the 
    comments, the docket supervisor will return the postcard by mail.
        Copies of all comments will be placed in Docket 89-02; Notice 8 of 
    the NHTSA Docket Section in Room 5109, Nassif Building, 400 Seventh 
    Street, SW., Washington, DC 20590.
    
    Regulatory Analyses and Notice
    
    Executive Order 12778 (Civil Justice Reform)
    
        This interim final rule will not have any preemptive or retroactive 
    effect. The enabling legislation does not establish a procedure for 
    judicial review of final rules promulgated under its provisions. There 
    is no requirement that individuals submit a petition for 
    reconsideration or other administrative proceedings before they may 
    file suit in court.
    
    Executive Order 12866 (Regulatory Planning and Review) and DOT 
    Regulatory Policies and Procedures
    
        The agency has determined that this action is not a significant 
    regulatory action within the meaning of Executive Order 12866 or 
    Department of Transportation Regulatory Policies and Procedures. 
    Section 410 is a voluntary program. In addition, the changes made in 
    this interim final rule merely reflect amendments contained in Public 
    Law 104-59. Accordingly, a full regulatory evaluation is not required.
    
    Regulatory Flexibility Act
    
        In compliance with the Regulatory Flexibility Act (Pub. L. 96-354, 
    5 U.S.C. 601-612), the agency has evaluated the effects of this action 
    on small entities. Based on the evaluation, we certify that this action 
    will not have a significant impact on a substantial number of small 
    entities. Accordingly, the preparation of
    
    [[Page 9104]]
    
    a Regulatory Flexibility Analysis is unnecessary.
    
    Paperwork Reduction Act
    
        The requirements relating to the regulation that this rule is 
    amending that States retain and report to the Federal government 
    information which demonstrates compliance with drunk driving prevention 
    incentive grant criteria, are considered to be information collection 
    requirements, as that term is defined by the Office of Management and 
    Budget (OMB) in 5 CFR Part 1320.
        Accordingly, these requirements have been submitted previously to 
    and approved by OMB, pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 
    3501, et seq.). These requirements have been approved under OMB No. 
    2127-0501. A request for an extension of this approval through 11/30/98 
    is currently pending.
    
    National Environmental Policy Act
    
        The agency has analyzed this action for the purpose of the National 
    Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) and has 
    determined that it will not have any significant impact on the quality 
    of the human environment.
    
    Executive Order 12612 (Federalism Assessment)
    
        This action has been analyzed in accordance with the principles and 
    criteria contained in Executive Order 12612, and it has been determined 
    that this action does not have sufficient federalism implications to 
    warrant the preparation of a federalism assessment. Accordingly, the 
    preparation of a Federalism Assessment is not warranted.
    
    List of Subjects in 23 CFR Part 1313
    
        Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse, Grant programs--transportation, Highway 
    safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
    
        In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA amends 23 CFR Part 1313 as 
    set forth below:
    
    PART 1313--INCENTIVE GRANT CRITERIA FOR DRUNK DRIVING PREVENTION 
    PROGRAMS
    
        1. The authority citation for Part 1313 continues to read as 
    follows:
    
        Authority: 23 U.S.C. 410; delegation of authority at 49 CFR 
    1.50.
    
        2. Section 1313.5 is amended by removing the word ``six'' in the 
    introductory text and by adding paragraphs (c)(4) and (g) to read as 
    follows:
    
    
    Sec. 1313.5  Requirements for a basic grant.
    
    * * * * *
        (c) * * *
        (4)(i) A State shall be treated as having met the requirement of 
    this paragraph if the highest court of the State has issued a decision 
    indicating that implementation of paragraph (c)(1) of this section 
    would constitute a violation of the constitution of the State and NHTSA 
    determines, based on data contained in the Fatal Accident Reporting 
    System (FARS) and using NHTSA's method for estimating alcohol 
    involvement, that the alcohol involvement rate in fatal crashes in the 
    State:
        (A) Has decreased in each of the 3 most recent calendar years for 
    which statistics for determining such rate are available; and
        (B) The alcohol involvement rate in fatal crashes in the State has 
    been lower than the average such rate for all States in each of such 
    calendar years.
        (ii) To demonstrate compliance under this paragraph in each fiscal 
    year the State receives a basic grant based on this criterion, the 
    State shall submit:
        (A) A certification that the highest court of the State has issued 
    a decision indicating that a Statewide program for the stopping of 
    motor vehicles on a nondiscriminatory, lawful basis for the purpose of 
    determining whether or not the operators of such motor vehicles are 
    driving while under the influence of alcohol, would constitute a 
    violation of the State's Constitution; and
        (B) A copy of the court's decision.
    * * * * *
        (g) Per se law for persons under age 21. (1) Provide that any 
    person under age 21 with an alcohol concentration of 0.02 percent or 
    greater when driving a motor vehicle shall be deemed to be driving 
    while intoxicated and shall be subject to the temporary debarring of 
    all driving privileges for a term of not less than 30 days.
        (2)(i) To demonstrate compliance in each year the State receives a 
    basic grant based on this criterion, a Law State shall submit a copy of 
    the law, regulation or binding policy directive implementing or 
    interpreting the law or regulation, which provides for each element of 
    the per se law for persons under age 21 criterion.
        (ii) For the purpose of this paragraph, ``Law State'' means a State 
    that has a law, regulation or binding policy directive implementing or 
    interpreting an existing law or regulation which provides for each 
    element of the per se law for persons under age 21 criterion.
        (3)(i) To demonstrate compliance in each year the State receives a 
    basic grant based on this paragraph, a Data State shall submit a copy 
    of the law, regulation or binding policy directive implementing or 
    interpreting the law or regulation, which provides for each element of 
    the per se law for persons under age 21 criterion and data showing that 
    the average length of the suspension term for offenders under this law 
    meets or exceeds 30 days.
        (ii) The State can provide the necessary data based on a 
    representative sample. Data on the average length of the suspension 
    term must not include license suspension periods which exceed the terms 
    actually prescribed by the State, and must reflect terms only to the 
    extent that they are actually completed.
        (iii) For the purpose of this paragraph, ``Data State'' means a 
    State that has a law, regulation or binding policy directive 
    implementing or interpreting an existing law or regulation which 
    provides for each element of the per se law for persons under age 21 
    criterion, except that it does not specifically provide for the 
    temporary debarring of all driving privileges for a term of not less 
    than 30 days.
    
    
    Sec. 1313.6  [Amended]
    
        3. Section 1313.6 is amended by removing paragraph (a) and 
    redesignating paragraphs (b) through (g) as paragraphs (a) through (f), 
    respectively.
    
        Issued on: February 29, 1996.
    Ricardo Martinez,
    Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
    [FR Doc. 96-5131 Filed 3-6-96; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 4910-59-P
    
    

Document Information

Effective Date:
3/7/1996
Published:
03/07/1996
Department:
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Entry Type:
Rule
Action:
Interim final rule; request for comments.
Document Number:
96-5131
Dates:
This interim final rule becomes effective March 7, 1996. Comments on this interim rule are due no later than April 22, 1996.
Pages:
9101-9104 (4 pages)
Docket Numbers:
Docket No. 89-02, Notice 8
RINs:
2127-AD01: Incentive Grant Criteria for Drunk-Driving-Prevention Programs (Section 410)
RIN Links:
https://www.federalregister.gov/regulations/2127-AD01/incentive-grant-criteria-for-drunk-driving-prevention-programs-section-410-
PDF File:
96-5131.pdf
CFR: (2)
23 CFR 1313.5
23 CFR 1313.6