![]() |
The Highway Safety Desk Book
Acknowledgements This publication was made possible through the generous financial contribution of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The Advisory Committee on Highway Safety of the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) also acknowledges the hard work and creativity of the following people and their staffs who contributed articles or information for this deskbook:
- We thank Commissioner Maurice J. Hannigan (retired) and Commissioner Dwight O. Helmick, California Highway Patrol; Director Richard L. Cade (retired) and Chief Legal Counsel Margaret P. White, Idaho Department of Law Enforcement; Superintendent Thomas J. Constantine (retired) and Superintendent James W. McMahon, New York State Police; Director Earl M. Sweeney, New Hampshire Police Standards and Training Council; Colonel Charles M. Robinson (retired), Virginia State Police; Ted Schelenski, 3-M Corporation; Carl Spurgeon, the Motorcycle Safety Foundation; Lt. Colonel Larry N. Thompson (retired), Arizona Department of Public Safety; William Franey, the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws and Ordinances/NBSI; Major Ronald P. Miner (retired) and Officer Robert Wall, Fairfax County, Virginia, Police Department; Lt. Colonel Richard N. Curtis (retired), Ohio State Highway Patrol; J. Michael Sheehan, Chief, Police Traffic Services Division, NHTSA; Director Russell M. Arend of the Institute for Police Technology and Management; Captain Douglas Hancock and Lieutenant Barry L. Peck, Delaware State Police; Colonel Charles W. Henderson, Massachusetts State Police; Major Robert J. Huss (deceased), Lieutenant Richard J. Phillips and Trooper William W. Messing, Washington State Patrol; Roy Lucke and Robert L. Reeder, The Traffic Institute, Northwestern University; the California Department of Trans-portation; and many other contributors.
We also express our appreciation to former Director Ron Sostkowski, Jack Grant, Chuck Peltier, E.J. Kelley, and Carolyn Cockroft of the IACP Division of State and Provincial Police for their work in editing, proofreading, and otherwise bringing this project to fruition; and to the members of the Advisory Committee on Highway Safety whose advice was invaluable at all times during the project.
Introduction This book is intended for police leaders. After all, that's what you are—whether you call yourselves commanders, administrators, executives, or supervisors, you are, first and foremost, leaders. It is intended as a quick and practical compendium of information to assist you in asserting your leadership in one of policing's most important functions, Police Traffic Services.It has been fashionable for some time to emblazon the fenders and doors of police vehicles with slogans calling attention to such aspects of law enforcement as SERVICE and PROTECTION. But how often do we, as leaders, stop and think about how to serve and protect most effectively? Over 188 million motor vehicles and more than 170 million licensed drivers travel over two trillion miles a year on our streets and highways. Hazardous materials in sufficient quantities to blow a small country off the map if stored, transported, or handled improperly pass our doorsteps every day. More people are killed in crashes on our streets and highways in a single year than in the nation's last major war.
In today's mobile society the motor vehicle is the primary tool used by criminals to reach the scene of the crime, and to elude the police. Carjacking, motor vehicle theft, drive-by shootings, drug deals, burglaries, and armed robberies—all involve the use of a motor vehicle. Our entire nation is, indeed, a "nation on wheels," and traffic backups and delays during rush hour result in millions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of productive hours lost to the economy and unnecessary environmental pollution each year. As drivers, citizens are more likely to have direct contact with a police officer than in any other aspect of their lives, and those contacts, both pleasant and unpleasant, shape the community's view of the police, one by one.
All of this adds up to the fact that few areas exist in law enforcement that affect the quality of life for our citizens as significantly as in the rendering of quality police traffic services.
The authors of this deskbook, all members or special consultants to the IACP Advisory Committee on Highway Safety, know from firsthand experience just how confusing and difficult are the problems you face. The many acronyms that describe various traffic safety programs, the myriad of federal agencies that set standards in this area, and the need to devise new and effective means of stretching your limited patrol resources—all add up to headaches for the new police leader as well as the veteran.
We hope that this deskbook, in looseleaf form to facilitate periodic updating, will provide you with a ready source of ideas and information as you go about your duties.
Table of Contents
Part One: Traffic Safety Systems and Terminology Common Abbreviations and Acronyms Used in Law Enforcement Associations and Committees
Part Two: Community-Oriented Traffic Policing Are Effective Traffic Officers an Endangered Species?
- Two for the Price of One
- Community-Oriented Traffic Policing
- Not Mutually Exclusive
- Community Policing and Traffic Enforcement:
Part Three: Setting Policy for Successful Traffic Enforcement Setting Policy for Successful Traffic Enforcement
- The Motorcycle as a Traffic Enforcement Tool
- Unmarked vs Marked Vehicles
- Use of Aircraft for Traffic Enforcement
Part Four: Allocation, Deployment and Evaluation of Traffic Personnel
- Performance Measures for Police Traffic Services
Part Five: Alcohol and Drugs
- Alcohol and Drug-Impaired Driving
- Standardized Field Sobriety Testing
- Roadside Checkpoints
- Highway Drug Interdiction
- Drug Recognition Experts
- DWI Breath Testing Instruments
Part Six: Speed Enforcement
- Speed Enforcement Programs
- The National Maximum Speed Limit
- Speed Measurement Devices
Part Seven: Collision Investigation
Part Eight: Commercial Vehicle and Hazardous Materials Regulation Commercial
- Vehicle Safety
- Hazardous Materials
- Transportation Enforcement
Part Nine: The Driver Licensing System Driver Licensing
- Digital Image Photo Licenses
- Detecting Suspended and Revoked Driver's Licenses
- The National Driver Register
- Motorcycle Licensing Requirements
Part Ten: Protection of Automobile and Motorcycle Occupants and Riders Occupant Protection and Enforcement
- Motorcycle Safety Helmets
Part Eleven: Registration, Title and Inspection Enforcement Motor Vehicle Registration
- Periodic Motor Vehicle Inspection
- Rebuilt and Specially Constructed Vehicles
Part Twelve: Roadway Management through Engineering and Enforcement Enforcement and Engineering Liaison
- Freeway Incident Management:
- Strategies for Relieving Congestion
- The Incident Command System
- Abandoned Vehicle and Shoulder Collisions
- Reducing Crime in Rest Areas
- Preventing Wrong-Way Accidents on Freeways
- Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Safety
Part Thirteen: Pedestrian Safety
Part Fourteen: Public Information and Education Programs
Part Fifteen: Uniformity, Reciprocity and Federal Programs
- Uniformity and Reciprocity of Federal Programs
- Federal Agencies and Grants
- NHTSA Regional Offices
- FHWA Regional Offices
Part Sixteen: Legal Issues U.S. Constitution and Traffic Law:
- Decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court
PART ONE
Traffic Safety Systems and TerminologyCommon Abbreviations and Acronyms Used in Traffic Law Enforcement
The following are some of the more prevalent acronyms used in traffic law enforcement, and their meanings:
ALR/ALS: Administrative License Revocation or Administrative License Suspension. This is referred to in the context of a state statute that permits a police officer to seize a license of a driver who refuses an alcohol test or tests over the legal alcohol limit. The driver is given a temporary license and scheduled for a prompt administrative hearing before the state driver licensing agency. ALR/ALS does not replace criminal court action for driving while intoxicated. The purpose of ALR/ALS is to remove the hazard of the drinking driver from the road in a speedier fashion.
AAMVA: The American Association of Motor Vehicle Admin-istrators.
AAMVANET: The American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators' data services network contains the National Driver Register, Commercial Driver License Information System, and other information of interest to licensing, regulatory, and law enforcement agencies.
AASHTO: The American Association of State Highway Trans-portation Officials.
BAC: Blood Alcohol Concentration. This is measured in driving-while- intoxicated cases.
CAMPAIGN SAFE & SOBER: A two-year NHTSA program to reduce alcohol-related fatalities to 15,400 and increase safety belt use to 75 percent by 1997. These goals will be accom-plished through a combination of enforcement, public information and education, and legislative initiatives.
CARE: Combined Accident Reduction Effort. Operation CARE, a group of state police and highway patrol agencies who conduct unified and concentrated efforts in traffic law enforce-ment along interstate highways, particularly on holiday weekends.
CDL: A Commercial Driver's License issued by a state, entitling a person to operate a commercial motor vehicle weighing in excess of 26,001 pounds manufacturer's gross vehicle weight rating, carries 16 or more passengers including the driver, or carries hazardous materials.
CDLIS: The nationwide Commercial Driver's License Information System, which contains all commercial driver license information including driving histories of problem commercial drivers. It is typically on-line with the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) agencies in the various states.
CHEM-TREK: A 24-hour toll-free telephone service that provides law enforcement and emergency response agencies with information for identifying hazardous materials involved in spills, and recommends mitigation strategies. Chem-Trek is sponsored by the National Chemical Manufacturers' Asso-ciation.
CVSA: The Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance.
DARE: Drug Abuse Resistance Education, a copyrighted curricu-lum. The program, which trains police officers to present anti-drug programs in public schools, was started by the Los Angeles Police Department.
DOT: The U.S. Department of Transportation. Also applies to departments of transportation in various states, such as the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) and the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PENNDOT).
DRE: A Drug Recognition Expert. Trained and certified in the IACP Drug Evaluation and Classification Program, a DRE is experienced in administering a battery of physical tests and clinical observations to suspected drug impaired drivers.
DUI: Driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, a criminal offense in most states and provinces.
DWI: Driving while intoxicated; the same as DUI.
EVOC: Emergency Vehicle Operator's Course. A curriculum developed by NHTSA in cooperation with national police training professionals to teach proper techniques for operation of police and other vehicles in emergency conditions.
FARS: The Fatal Accident Reporting System, maintained by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The system gathers data on all fatal accidents in the United States through reports collected by state-level agencies.
FBINA: The Federal Bureau of Investigation's National Academy located at Quantico, Virginia. The academy offers a command training program for high-level officials of state and local law enforcement agencies, and police officials from foreign countries.
FEMA: The Federal Emergency Management Administration, located at Emmetsburg, Maryland, which provides federal emergency assistance at the scenes of catastrophes and national disasters, operates the National Fire Academy, and publishes the national model curriculum for first responders to hazardous materials accidents.
FHWA: The Federal Highway Administration in the U.S. Department of Transportation, which administers federal highway trust fund expenditures to the individual states, and sets standards for the construction and maintenance of inter-state highways.
FMVSS: Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards as promulgated by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
FOP: The Fraternal Order of Police, a national police organization sometimes involved in labor activities as a collective bargaining agent.
FRA: The Federal Railroad Administration is the entity within the U.S. Department of Transportation which monitors the safe operation of railroads. It develops and enforces rail safety regulations, investigates accidents, manages rail safety and highway-rail grade crossing safety programs.
GCCI: Grade Crossing Collision Investigation, a highway-railroad grade crossing safety awareness program, coordinated through a national railroad safety program, Operation Lifesaver. GCCI provides one to three-day training classes, at no cost to the agency, tailored to specific law enforcement agency needs.
HAZMAT: Hazardous materials, generally used in the context of hazardous materials regulatory enforcement.
HGN: Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus, which uses a phenomenon brought on by alcohol and other substances, to assist in determining the blood alcohol level or drug impairment of suspected drunk drivers by examining the angle of onset of nystagmus, a jerking of the eyeballs.
HSC: The Advisory Committee on Highway Safety of the Inter-national Association of Chiefs of Police, Inc.
IACP: The International Association of Chiefs of Police, Inc.
IADLEST: The International Association of Directors of Law Enforcement Standards and Training (POST).
ICS: Incident Command System, the system used by fire departments and police agencies to organize and implement emergency measures to mitigate major incidents.
IPTM: The Institute of Police Technology and Management at the University of South Florida in Jacksonville, Florida, which conducts law enforcement training programs and operates a radar testing laboratory.
ITE: The Institute of Transportation Engineers.
IVHS: Intelligent Vehicle Highway Systems, a system of computerized hazard detection and warning, trip routing and other capabilities, which interfaces on-board computers in vehicles with on-board radar and electronic roadside warning beacons. J. Stannard Baker Award: An annual award presented by the International Association of the Chiefs of Police and the National Sheriffs' Association to state, county and local police officers and private citizens who have made outstanding contributions to the field of traffic safety. The award is named after the founder of the Traffic Safety Institute at Northwestern University. Winners are selected by the IACP Advisory Committee on Highway Safety and the National Sheriffs' Association.
MCSAP: The Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program, a system of federal funding of state agencies to assist the federal Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety (BMCS) in enforcing motor carrier safety and hazardous materials regulations at the state level.
NDLC: The National Driver License Compact, a program administered by AAMVA in which approximately 43 states participate.
NDR: The National Driver Register, a NHTSA program linked by AAMVANET and maintained by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators.
NHTSA: The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the entity within the U.S. Department of Transportation which provides federal grants to state pass-through agencies for the maintenance of innovative traffic safety programs, conducts research, and sets federal motor vehicle safety standards (FMVSS).
NIST: The National Institute of Standards and Technology, formerly the National Bureau of Standards.
NMSL: The National Maximum Speed Limit as adopted by Congress and the National Highway Traffic Safety Admin-istration Federal Highway Administration, currently 65 mph on most interstate highways.
NSA: The National Sheriffs' Association.
NSC: The National Safety Council.
NTC: The National Troopers' Coalition.
NTSB: The National Transportation Safety Board, which investigates major transportation accidents and makes recom-mendations for improved transportation safety.
NUTI: The Northwestern University Traffic Institute at North-western University in Evanston, Illinois, which conducts research and offers innovative traffic safety training programs, including the so-called “long course,” for commanders of police department traffic bureaus and divisions.
OL: Operation Lifesaver, a nationwide, nonprofit public informa-tion and education program dedicated to reducing crashes, injuries and fatalities at highway-rail grade crossings.
OOT: Officer on the Train, a highway-railroad grade crossing safety awareness program coordinated through a national rail-road safety program, Operation Lifesaver. OOT places police officers aboard trains to radio traffic violations to other officers strategically located at or near grade crossings that have a history of collisions and traffic violations.
Operation Pipeline: An enforcement effort along major highway corridors to identify and intercept drug couriers. The operation commonly uses profiles of typical vehicles and driver behaviors that have been proven in the past to indicate a vehi-cle or driver is transporting narcotics or dangerous drugs.
OPUE: Occupant Protection Usage and Enforcement. A NHTSA program designed to provide police agencies with a model curriculum and programs to promote and enforce the use of safety belts and child safety seats.
OSHA: The Occupational Safety and Health Administration of the U.S. Department of Labor, which sets standards in many occupational safety areas, including the allowable emissions of police traffic radar devices.
OUIL: Operating Under the Influence of Liquor, a criminal charge similar to DWI or DUI.
PBT: A Preliminary Breath Test, usually accomplished by means of an electronic or balloon-style device which determines at roadside whether or not a driver has consumed alcoholic bev-erages, and to what extent.
PMVI: Periodic Motor Vehicle Inspection, generally a statewide program for the safety inspection of vehicles either at state-owned inspection stations or licensed private stations.
PTS: Police Traffic Services.
RSPA: The Research and Special Programs Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation, which is responsible for promulgating the provisions of the Code of Federal Regula-tions pertaining to the transportation of hazardous materials.
SACOP: The State Associations of Chiefs of Police, a division of the IACP.
SAFETYNET: Computerized nationwide data bank maintained by the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program for tracking commercial driver enforcement.
ST:Standardized Field Sobriety Testing, a model curriculum developed by the IACP Highway Safety Advisory Committee and NHTSA for performing uniform and standardized road-side physical tests on suspected drunken drivers, based on medically approved techniques.
STEP: Selective Traffic Enforcement Programs, targeted to the times of day, days of week, locations, and types of violations that cause accidents; an early form of directed patrol but specifically devised for traffic enforcement. : Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), which contains the regulations on the interstate transportation of hazardous materials.
UTCD: Uniform Traffic Control Devices Committee, a group of primarily engineers who maintain and revise the National Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.
UVC: The Uniform Vehicle Code, a model code that is maintained by a standing committee of experts, the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws and Ordinances.
VDP: Violator Directed Patrol.
Associations and Committees
The following is a listing of the associated groups currently active in the highway safety field, together with a brief description of their administrative organization and relationship.
AAMVA (The American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators) This organization represents the driver license and motor vehicle registration agencies in the United States, the District of Columbia, and the Canadian Provinces. The organization is regionalized, with a regional staff member living within each region. Its headquarters in the Washington, D.C., area has a salaried executive director with the full-time task of overseeing AAMVA functions and staff, including the following:
AAMVANET (The American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators Network) is a teletype network that connects all member agencies and several federal agencies. The commercial driver license information system (CDLIS) and the National Driver Register (NDR) are connected to this network. Administrative messages, as well as driver license and registration checks, are available. The Driver License Committee is comprised of the various administrators involved in issuing driver's licenses. Many issues dealt with in this committee have a direct impact on law enforcement.
IRP (The International Registration Plan) is a prorating system of registering commercial vehicles between the states. AAMVA and the private sector work closely with member states to encourage and further enhance this concept. Under the concept, a commercial vehicle is registered in the homestate and issued a plate marked "APPORTIONED." At the time of registration, the applicant declares any other IRP member states in which he intends to operate, and a prorated portion of the registration fee is forwarded to each of these member states.
PTS (The Police Traffic Services Committee) is the only law enforcement group within the AAMVA. This committee is made up of representatives of many of the same agencies that belong to the Division of State and Provincial Police of the International Association of Chiefs of Police, Inc. It is impor-tant to maintain the law enforcement presence at AAMVA in order to have an impact on AAMVA's decisions in the driver licensing and registration areas. The additional benefit of having the support of both the IACP and AAMVA on law enforcement issues is positive. Because the motor vehicle administrators are the dues paying members of AAMVA, however, they generally have sufficient votes to affect any decisions within their own administrations, and the police input, from a practical standpoint, is mostly advisory. The Registration and Title Committee, as in the case of the Driver License Committee, affects law enforcement directly. The issues of whether one or two plates should be issued to a vehicle, what kind of plates should be issued, and how they should be displayed, as well as anti-theft issues affecting the titling of motor vehicles, receive serious consideration by this committee.
AASHTO (The American Association of State Highway Traffic Officials) This association consists mainly of the directors of the public works and highways or transportation agencies in the United States. Their main thrust is in Washington, D.C., where the federal highway trust fund monies are dispensed by Congress. This group is well-staffed and powerful as a lobbying group. Generally, the practical way for law enforcement to have input and dialogue with AASHTO is through a state member agency rather than through the association staff. The Traffic Safety Committee deals with traffic safety issues but mostly from the engineering standpoint. There is no representation from the area of law enforcement on this committee, nor is AASHTO currently represented in any law enforcement groups.
ASLET (The American Society of Law Enforcement Trainers) Headquartered in Lewes, Delaware, this fast-growing association is a loosely knit group of national law enforcement instructors, both free-lance and employed by state and local training institutions and police departments.
CSG (The Council of State Governments) This national organization has representation from the executive level of each state's government.
CVSA (The Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance) Made up of enforcement agencies in many of the United States and Canadian provinces, this federation is responsible for enforcing the state-level equivalence of the federal Office of Motor Carriers Rules, and the Hazardous Materials Regulations contained in Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations. In some states, membership consists of the state police and highway patrol, while in others it consists of the agency that issues contract carrier operating rights, or the state transportation agency that operates the scales used for truck weight and size enforcement, or whatever agency handles the federal Motor Carrier Safety Assistance (MCSAP) Program for that state. To join CVSA, a state must agree to conduct uniform roadside safety inspections of motor carriers and apply a sticker recognized by other member jurisdictions, so as to avoid putting interstate truckers through multiple roadside inspections in different states during the same time frame.
IACP (The International Association of Chiefs o f Police, Inc.) Headquartered in Alexandria, Virginia, the IACP has a membership of nearly 14,000 police executives around the world, and operates with a salaried executive director and paid staff.
S&P (Division of State and Provincial Police) is comprised of 49 state police, departments of public safety, and highway patrol agencies in the United States, plus several provincial agencies in Canada and the Canadian Royal Mounted Police, who also provide traffic enforcement in some provinces in Canada. S&P has a division director and staff at the IACP headquarters. The division is divided into four US regions that also include the contiguous portions of Canada. These regions are the Mountain Pacific, North Central, Southern, and North Atlantic. Each region has a regional chairman, and one general chairman on a nationwide level represents the S&P Division on the executive board of the IACP.
HSC (IACP Advisory Committee on Highway Safety) consists of a cross-section of state and local police commanders who set policy and determine the IACP goals in the area of highway safety. The committee is appointed by the IACP president, and usually contains from 23 to 26 members. The members come from all types and sizes of law enforcement agencies, with consultants and representatives from the private sector as well. Other law enforcement groups, such as sheriffs, and government agencies, such as the Federal Highway Administration and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, are also represented. The committee is staffed by S&P personnel.
DRE Section (Drug Recognition Experts) has been established with the IACP S&P Division to represent the DREs across the country. DRE training leads to a certification program that establishes minimum skills for detecting and prosecuting the drug-impaired driver.
TAP (Technical Advisory Panel), appointed by the chairman of the IACP Highway Safety Advisory Committee, contains representatives from various disciplines such as prosecutors, chemists, medical personnel, and police officers who are directly involved in the DRE and SFST programs. TAP advises the Highway Safety Committee and assists with keep-ing the DRE and SFST curricula and certification regulations updated.
RATS (Radar Advisory Technical Subcommittee), appointed by the chairman of the IACP Highway Safety Committee, consists of police officers, operators of testing laboratories, and manufacturers of traffic radar and LIDAR (LIght Detec-tion and Ranging) devices, along with a member from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). RATS advises the Highway Safety Committee on the radar testing program, which is overseen by the HSC and involves five testing laboratories across the nation and an established consu-mer product list (CPL) of acceptable radar units. State and Provincial Police Planners consists of planners from the state and provincial agencies, including state police, highway patrols, and departments of public safety, comprising the IACP S&P Division. The group meets annually to discuss mutual issues affecting their agencies. Staff is provided by the S&P Division.
SPADS (The State Police Academy Directors' Association) consists of the commanders and managers of the state police and highway patrol agencies in the United States and Canadian provinces who conduct training academies and are attached to the members of the IACP State and Provincial Division. Annual meetings are held and items of mutual concern are discussed. Staff is provided by the S&P Division.
SACOP (The State Association of Chiefs of Police) is an IACP division consisting of a coalition of state associations representing police chiefs in their states. State police agencies and major city chiefs may belong to some local SACOP associations in addition to being represented independently. SACOP is represented on the IACP Executive Board by a general chairman but has no dedicated staff. The Major City Chiefs is loosely knit group of chiefs from the larger metropolitan areas of the country. Meetings are called to discuss issues of mutual concern and seek solutions. This group has no dedicated representative of this group on the IACP Executive Board nor a dedicated IACP staff; however, because of their prominence and professional competence, individual members usually are represented as individuals on the IACP's Board of Officers.
IADLEST (The International Association of Directors of Law Enforcement Standards and Training) This group is composed of the staffs and directors of the states POST (Police Officer Standards and Training) councils, boards and commissions, and other regulatory agencies that set the standards for police officer certification and training. Membership is also extended to staffs of certified police academies in each state and to similar agencies in Canada and other nations. IADLEST commends model standards for POST agencies and police academies and develops model curricula in many areas, including police emergency driver training and the operation of electronic speed measuring devices, such as radar, photo radar, and LIDAR. The group is well-funded but has no permanent headquarters. The secretariat is located in the office of whoever is the president of the association in a given year.
NAGHSR (The National Association of Governors ' Highway Safety Representatives) These are the state-level administrators who control the federal funds entering each state from NHTSA and, in some instances, the FHWA. Each state is required to have a governor's highway safety representative so that it is represented in this group.
NATIONAL ALERT A nationwide organization of police emergency driver training instructors, NATIONAL ALERT meets periodically, usually at the FBI National Academy in Quantico, Virginia, to discuss matters of mutual interest.
NCSL (The National Conference of State Legislators) This group is composed of speakers of states houses of representatives, presidents of state senates, majority and minority leaders and whips, and influential committee chairmen and members of the various state legislatures. They meet periodically to discuss trends in legislation and to share resources and ideas.
NCUTLO (The National Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws and Ordinances) This group is responsible for maintaining the cutting edge of legislation and for publishing the uniform vehicle code (UVC), a recommended model code used by law enforcement agencies, motor vehicle administrators, and legislators to formulate new traffic laws and ordinances. The goals of the group is (1) to have uniformity among the traffic laws and ordinances of the various states and jurisdictions, so that persons traveling from one state or community to another will not unwittingly find themselves in violation of some unique law that exists only in one jurisdiction; and also (2) to address traffic safety problems with innovative and effective legislation. This group is comprised of a cross-section of voting members, including officials of state agencies, nonprofit organizations, and dues paying private sector representatives, who serve indefinite terms. The secretariat is currently located at the Traffic Institute of Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois. The group meets at least biennially to debate proposed changes to the Uniform Code.
NGA (The National Governors’ Association) This organization consists of the governors of the 50 states and the premiers of the Canadian provinces and their top staffs. Members meet periodically to discuss issues of mutual concern among the states, and to support, propose, or endorse legislation in many areas, including criminal laws and highway safety.
NOBLE (The National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives) Headquartered in the Washington, D.C., area, NOBLE is comprised of African American command officers in law enforcement agencies. It conducts training programs in areas such as cultural diversity and domestic violence, promotes proactive policies to end discrimination in law enforcement agencies, and takes positions on legislation.
NSA (The National Sheriffs' Association) Comprised of the elected law enforcement officials at the county level throughout the United States, NSA has a Traffic Safety Committee and is also represented on the Highway Safety Advisory Committee of the IACP with special consultant status.
NSC (The National Safety Council) This large nonprofit safety organization focuses on the prevention of home and industrial accidents and, in part, on traffic safety. It also franchises a nationwide model defensive driving curriculum, including one targeted at police driver training.
UTCD (The Committee on Uniform Traffic Control Devices) This working committee is composed mainly of traffic engineers employed by state highway departments and departments of trans-portation. It maintains the Manual on Uniform Control Devices, the engineer's bible for the installation of traffic lights, signs, striping, and other traffic control devices. The IACP has one member (and alternate), who represents the law enforcement point of view on the issues discussed. The discussions are lively, and law enforcement has one vote.
PART TWO
Community-Oriented Traffic Policing
Are Effective Traffic Officers an Endangered Species?
Sometimes effective traffic enforcement in certain localities appears as though it has gone the way of the Dodo bird. The next time you take a trip for an hour or more, count how many police you see who have stopped violators or whose vehicles are parked where they can strategically observe the traffic flow. Better yet, observe how many officers pass a stranded motorist without stopping to assist. And when was the last time you noticed an officer in a marked patrol car watching an intersection for stop sign violations, or surveilling a stretch of road for motorists passing over solid lines?
Inconsistent, Untargeted Enforcement
Too frequently, when enforcement does take place, it consists of issuing a batch of citations at a location where motorists may be exceeding the speed limit but accidents are minimal, instead of targeting a location where unsafe actions are contributing to crashes. This type of inconsistent, "here today and gone tomorrow" enforcement only arouses ire and disrespect on the part of the public. Motorists driving at legal speeds tend to be passed as though they were standing still, and traffic control devices are routinely disregarded by some motorists. Is it any wonder that criminals in some jurisdictions no longer hesitate to ply their trade for fear of being stopped by an alert traffic officer? Or that some motorists whose aggressive driving mirrors an aggressive personality are increasingly settling traffic disputes with gunfire? Why should license revocations be a deterrent if the odds against being stopped are so great? And is it any wonder that despite improvements in vehicle and roadway safety and public crusades, the deaths, suffering and lost productivity from traffic crashes still make them America's number-one public health hazard?
Accountability Problems
If you ask your officers how they can drive around for eight hours without making a traffic stop, they will say they are busy running from call to call. Yet more creative use of whatever uncommitted time is available would yield major dividends in the fight against traffic deaths and injuries. Some departments have raised a generation of officers who rely on moving radar for all their traffic activity—if, indeed, they regard traffic work as real police work at all. Officers with this attitude lose the many opportunities presented when serious crimes are detected through a supposedly random traffic stop. They also miss out on the public relations benefits accrued by them personally and by the department from providing a variety of services and a sense of security to the traveling public.
Policy Considerations
Reversing this trend needs to start at the top. As administrators, through our written policies, public pronouncements and personal examples, we need to demonstrate that we believe traffic work is an important part of every uniformed officer's job. We should insist that line supervisors accompany traffic officers on their shifts occasionally, and call them to task if they fail to stop vehicles for not only moving traffic violations but also equipment violations, or if they fail to spend part of each shift on visible traffic patrol.
Making Use of Data
Systems should be in place to review the traffic productivity of our officers, focusing on the number of contacts per hour rather than setting a quota for citations. We need to look at the quality and variety of citations and warnings issued and match them up through an effective traffic records system to be sure the traffic laws are being enforced at the times and places where they can reduce collisions. We must be responsive to public complaints about dangerous traffic conditions. And we need to retrain our field training officers to be sure they acquire the skills that good traffic officers should have, and pass them along to the new officers on the department.
Conclusion
If we allow good traffic work to go the way of the Dodo bird, we will eventually consign the entire patrol function to the same fate, because traffic is such an integral part of visible, alert patrol tactics. Once this type of police work makes it to the endangered species list, it will take more than a couple of additional accredita-tion managers sitting in the office to restore sanity to our troubled streets and highways.
Two for the Price of One
Traffic law enforcement gives officers at the state, local, and county police levels the unparalleled opportunity to save lives. The causal relationship between consistent, goal-oriented enforcement and casualty reduction stands clear and unimpeachable. Traffic enforcement is demonstrably justifiable on its own merits. Yet, today an emerging secondary benefit reinforces the value of roving patrol officers. They have become major crime fighters! America's long-standing reliance on the motor vehicle has put crime literally on the nation's streets and highways. Murderers, robbers, auto thieves, and drug traffickers all travel by motor vehicle. And when they violate traffic laws—a frequent occurrence because criminals typically are preoccupied by their crimes—that familiar police light appears in the mirror. This once meant two things: a short conversation with the officer and a traffic citation. Today, much more can follow.
What happens in those few moments when an officer approaches a violator describes the quiet revolution taking place within law enforcement. Officers more frequently recognize that the violator doesn't quite fit the circumstances. The subject's demeanor, the caliber of responses to questions, a lack of knowledge about the vehicle—these and similar factors noted by the alert, trained observer recommend further investi-gation. And further investigation pays off in criminal arrests. None of this results from mere luck. Specialized training, a growing reservoir of favorable experience and, perhaps most important, the intelligent wariness of the individual combine to transform him from a traffic officer into something more. It's as if we're getting two people for the price of one: an officer skilled in traffic and another knowledgeable in general criminal investigative techniques.
Traffic Enforcement and Crime Reduction
University of Maryland Criminologist Lawrence S. Sherman rein-forces the importance of traffic law enforcement in reducing general crime: “The higher the level of traffic enforcement, the lower the level of robbery. Aggressive traffic enforcement creates a broad general effect of deterrence.” He adds that some crimes—robbery, rape, burglary, aggravated assault, and car theft—can be prevented by a visible police presence. This is precisely what highway patrols and the traffic units within state, county, and local police agencies offer: a visible presence and aggressive traffic enforcement. But the record now shows they provide the added bonus of potential criminal detection. The alert officer, patient and thorough, may capture a felon, recover contraband, or disrupt a crime in progress. For example, a California Highway Patrol officer jotted down the plate number of a Georgia car because he suspected it should have been registered in California. A follow-up check with Georgia authorities showed the car was sought in connection with the kidnaping of a 12-year-old girl. Two weeks later the officer spotted the same car, determined that it was still wanted, called for backup, and made the stop. The result: one kidnapper arrested, one 12-year-old rescued.
A motorcycle officer saw two men running across the freeway, each carrying a large box. They darted into the bushes before he could reach them. Two hours later he sighted the same pair, again sprinting across the freeway and carrying large boxes. This time he arrived just as they disappeared into the shrubbery. He ordered them out, but they emerged empty-handed. A search produced several boxes loaded with small appliances. The pair had systematically shoplifted merchandise from a nearby mall, each time dashing across the freeway to a motel room.A third officer drove by a parked car; nothing appeared unusual, until he saw two heads duck below the window line. He checked the license plate by computer and received the return message that the subjects were considered armed and dangerous. By now the vehicle was moving, and the officer followed, while calling for backup. The pursued vehicle fled at high speed. Moments later the car crashed, and the occupants were captured. Both were wanted on suspicion of kidnaping, armed robbery, rape, grand theft and attempted murder.
Violator-Directed Patrol
In 1987, the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration conducted an “Operation Pipeline” drug interdiction seminar in New Mexico, opening the vista of expanded criminal enforcement by traffic officers. Yet, the troubling echo sounded by those already involved in Pipeline was the required specialization of personnel, meaning that traffic responsibilities had to be reduced proportionately. For agencies already struggling to handle traffic with diminishing uniformed strength, siphoning resources to yet another new program was unappealing. But the concept of drug enforcement made real sense; the challenge became how to mount an unrelenting traffic enforcement effort, while expanding the capacity to conduct criminal investigations. Arizona met this challenge through a program called VDP (Violator Directed Patrol). VDP concentrated uniformed strength in areas with a high frequency of collisions, and it upgraded the criminal investigation training of highway patrol officers— initially in a targeted area, but eventually including all officers. VDP listed simple, practical objectives:
- Provide maximum patrol visibility in areas of high-collision frequency.
- Concentrate traffic enforcement on violations causing the most collisions.
- Develop the ability and the willingness of the individual officer to increase criminal apprehensions, drug seizures, and recoveries of stolen vehicles.
- Work closely with the Criminal Information Bureau by providing criminal intelligence information and referrals on patrol-generated criminal cases.
- Increase, through training, the ability of officers to apprehend criminal violators.
In practice, Arizona found that a VDP project in a given area virtually eliminated collisions, thereby realizing the traffic safety objective. The criminal investigative objective required more time, because the skills being taught were new. Training dealt with a myriad of subjects. Officer safety was stressed, particularly in situations requiring searches or arrests. The fundamental cautions were reemphasized: Wear gloves, watch for needles, and call for backup.
Time was invested in teaching probable cause. A few of the basics: Is the driver the registered owner? Is the driver's ID valid? Are vehicle and driver from the same location? Does the driver know where and when the car was last serviced? Is the car a rental? If so, did the driver rent it? Is the driver authorized on the rental agreement? Is luggage in the vehicle? How long is the trip? Plus many more. As training progressed, one thing became clear; there is no profile of the “typical criminal” or “typical drug trafficker.” Indicators, certainly, but no-cut-and-dried formula. Experience reveals that people and vehicles of every description can be criminally involved.
Any stop begins with a traffic infraction, observed and identifiable. Development of probable cause for suspected criminal activity starts only after the legitimate traffic stop. And very often, it ends with a consent search, another critical element in many investigative sequences. Consent is the key word. The subject must consent, preferably in writing.Arizona's results have been rewarding. The Highway Patrol Bureau (500-plus officers) recovered 600 to 700 stolen vehicles per year before VDP. The figure doubled to 1,413 with VDP. Drug seizures and felony arrests reflected similar increases. All of this was achieved while maintaining the desired emphasis on traffic safety objectives; in fact, Arizona's traffic fatality rate stood at an all-time low. The California Highway Patrol initially became involved in Operation Pipeline because several Pipeline highways traverse the state, notably Interstate Routes 5, 8, 10, 15, and 40. Officers working these highways learned the pertinent identification skills and legal latitudes. So did commercial officers, whose investigative abilities were upgraded through a program known as CONET (Commercial Officer Narcotic Enforcement Team). CONET also counts as full partners the 20 drug-sniffing dogs now fielded by the CHP. Next came training of all field officers, bringing the number of skilled patrol observers to approximately 5,000. The results describe the payoff. The CHP makes more in-custody arrests than any other California police agency, and many of the arrests are of suspected felons.
How VDP Works
The new sensitivity imparted by the training boosted drug seizures and drug arrests, but the trigger mechanism remains a traffic stop. The seemingly minor infraction can start a chain of events leading to a narcotics find. Here are examples:
- 1. The driver of a vehicle stopped for a broken windshield could produce neither a driver's license nor vehicle registration. Prior to storing the vehicle, the officer made a routine inventory. The trunk contained 227 pounds of marijuana.
- 2. An officer issuing a citation was approached by another motorist seeking help to arrange a tow because his car engine was misfiring. The officer noticed that the vehicle displayed no registration stickers. He checked the plate number and discovered the vehicle was listed as stolen. He arrested the ver. A subsequet vehicle search uncovered drug manufacturing equipment, aphphetamine and marijuana.
- 3. Two men aboard a tractor-trailer stopped for a traffic violation exhibited what the CHP calls indicators—not a definition, but a suggestion to investigate further—of possible criminal association. Written consent to search the truck led to the discovery of 1,452 pounds of cocaine, valued at $57 million on the street.
- 4. Cocaine proved to be secreted in a passenger car searched with the driver's consent after being stopped for a traffic violation. A drug-sniffing K-9 quickly located a metal box, disguised as a gas tank, attached to the rear undercarriage. Inside: 20 pounds of the drug.
- 5. A freeway beat officer, going off-duty and heading toward his office, spotted a wrong-side driver on a city street. He made the stop, found the subject was under the influence; a vehicle inventory turned up a hypodermic containing a brown liquid. Interrogation led to an admission that the subject was on parole. The patrol office authorized a search of the subject's home, which uncovered several drug caches, including one in the wife's purse. She also was arrested for possession of narcotics.
- 6. Occasionally, the evidence simply presents itself. Investigating a crash, officers found an Uzi machine gun had been ejected from one vehicle. That dramatic clue led to a search of the suspect's clothing, revealing marijuana and a bundle of cash.
- 7. Finally, a traffic stop of a man driving a rental truck led to a consent search. This time the contraband was not drugs but stolen furniture worth $13,000.
Go Where the Problem Is
Thirty years ago, traffic enforcement emerged from the dark ages of hit-and-miss deployment to the logical and effective strategy of selective enforcement. Go where the biggest problem is; attack the major causes. That's the basic reason drunk driving became such a high enforcement priority and why safety belt enforcement is emphasized today. Effort applied in those two areas produces proportionately greater benefits. Criminal enforcement in those earlier years was mostly a bonus. Felony arrests were infrequent, not because criminals weren't using cars, but rather, the importance of emphasizing criminal enforcement had not yet made itself widely felt within traffic work. The necessity for combining skills began to overtake all police agencies, as phrases such as “cut-back management” and “doing more with less” became familiar. The urgency to run tighter ships is never more obvious than now, when governments at all levels are short of funds. The tendency to expect more of public employees is common and police agencies are not exempt. Criminal investigators now look to road patrols for help in both gathering intelligence and intercepting criminals on the streets and highways.
The reaction of state police and highway patrols has been positive, but their response was restrained because the resource equation seemed out of balance. Shifting emphasis always means shifting resources from one priority to another—or does it? That ultimately proved the key—finding a way to absorb a new responsibility without undermining existing duties. Officers working traffic enforcement, fulfilling a critical safety mission, can undertake the criminal identification task as long as they can handle it in parallel with the basic traffic assignment. History now declares that they can and they do, and that's why the new program works so well.
It also provides an answer to the challenge sometimes issued by irritated motorists reacting to a traffic stop: “Why aren't you out arresting criminals?” We are, but in addition to, not at the expense of, the traffic law enforcement responsibility. Patrolling our streets and highways remains the vital task of protecting public safety, through the proven deterrence of aggressive, intelligent traffic law enforcement. That won't change. What has changed is the level of police officers' capabilities. They just got better. And the public is reaping the benefits.Community-Oriented Traffic Policing
“Community policing” is the watchword of the '90s. More communities are daily jumping on the bandwagon, and reports from consultants examining law enforcement agencies from Boston to Los Angeles are recommending its adoption as the best response to the crime problem. Refinements to community policing's basic concepts, such as Professor Herman Goldstein's “problem-oriented policing” have achieved success in localities as diverse as Newport News, Virginia, and London, England. If this type of policing is being touted as the answer to crime, perhaps it is time to look at its potential impact on a problem that is more preventable and looms much larger in terms of its devastat-ing effect on the public—the daily toll of death, injury and property damage on our nation's streets and highways. In a recent year, according to statistics from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), a highway death occurred every 13 minutes in the United States. In contrast, the FBI Uniform Crime Reports figures indicated one murder every 21 minutes in that same year—that is, 18,967 deaths due to murders versus a total of 40,115 deaths in fatal traffic crashes. Additionally, 3.2 million persons were injured in traffic crashes and economic damage totaled $137.5 billion—more than four times as much as the estimated $13 billion economic loss due to crimes If our mission is truly “to protect and serve,” how better to accomplish this than by making our streets and highways safer for those who use them on a daily basis? Is there a way to apply the concepts of community policing to the traffic problem?
Although the definition of community policing still appears somewhat hazy, the following principles seem to have emerged almost everywhere it has been truly implemented (as opposed to those jurisdictions where it is embraced only in theory):
- 1. An admission that the police alone cannot solve the prob-lem; direct participation by citizens is also required.
- 2. A shift in the focus of problem definition to a customer orientation, and a corresponding concentration on those problems identified by the citizens themselves as being of greatest concern.
- 3. An emphasis on proactive, rather than reactive, policing, replacing a total preoccupation with 9-1-1 calls with efforts targeted at particular problems.
- 4. The identification and implementation of a range of non-traditional approaches.
- 5. The redirection of officers from their cruisers into more direct contact with the community, along with the dele-gation of decision-making authority to the patrol officer's level.
Let's examine these principles and see how community policing strategies can be applied.
Admitting the Need for Citizen Help
Although our streets and highways have grown relatively safer over the past decade, with the death toll per 100 million miles dropping, an increase in licensed drivers and registered vehicles, as well as congestion, is clogging both our arterial and our city streets. Traffic crashes remain the leading accidental cause of death in the U.S., and are responsible for a major negative impact on our economy. Most state, county, and local police departments are understaffed, and can use all the help they can get. Just as Neighborhood Watch programs have helped discourage residential burglaries and led to the apprehension of criminals, so can group and individual action by citizens lead to the identi-fication of unsafe streets and highways and the apprehension of drunken and drugged drivers, as well as those whose total disrespect for law and order leads them to drive after their licenses have been suspended or revoked. A few states have experimented with REDDI (Report Every Drunk Driver Immediately) toll-free telephone lines where citizens can report drunk drivers, but we have only begun to scratch the surface of available citizen assistance and involvement. Our crime prevention officers need to team up with our traffic officers and let participants in Neighborhood Watch know how to report dangerous drivers. Taxis, public utility vehicles and others with commercial two-way radio communications, drivers with cellular phones and truckers with CB radios can all be enlisted in the war on dangerous driving.
Having Our Customers Identify Problems
Social scientists have discovered that, in terms of its effect on the quality of life in the United States, the fear of crime is perhaps as important as the presence of crime itself. Similarly, practitioners of community policing have found that helping residents clean up neighborhoods of such nuisances as abandoned cars and dilapidated buildings allows people to feel safer on the streets, instills more pride in communities, and gets citizens in the habit of working with the police. Just as people fear a gang of roughnecks on the street corner or the presence of a neighborhood drug hangout, so do they fear for the safety of their children playing near the street if their neighborhood is plagued by screeching tires at all hours.
Thanks to interstate speed limits and monitoring criteria, traffic enforcement effort in recent years has been diverted to the interstate system. Citizens who do not respect the arbitrary 55 mph speed limits posted in areas selected because of population figures rather than traffic hazards, have come to regard speed violations as trivial. We must try to restore respect for traffic laws by deploying more officers to the locations where the citizens themselves are troubled by dangerous drivers. We must teach our officers to rely on more than just a radar gun. People will feel safer—and those prone to disobey the law will be more effectively deterred—if some of the low-profile radio cars now sitting at crossovers could spend more of their time in high-visibility activities, such as monitoring solid lines, stop signs and school bus stops; sitting in locations where neighbors complain about careless drivers; and frequently checking vehicles with defective lighting equipment while patrolling an area characterized by licensed drinking establishments.
Targeting Proactive Enforcement
As police departments move away from the notion that all calls for service, regardless of their nature, require an immediate response by uniformed officers in radio cars, and adopt differential response strategies that permit the use of directed patrols designed according to crime analysis, we need to examine our traffic records systems, as well. Do our traffic records adequately identify the times of day, days of the week, locations and violations that are causing the most serious traffic crashes? Do the traffic citations issued indicate adequate enforcement against these types of violations, or are our officers simply looking for easy targets?
In developing directed patrols, we need to be sure that traffic enforcement is one of the priorities, and that it is targeted toward the known causes of crashes and the traffic problems of most concern to our citizens. We must also encourage our officers to stop and direct traffic whenever possible at locations where congestion poses an annoyance to the traveling public.Using Nontraditional Approaches
Saturation enforcement and the issuance of traffic tickets have traditionally been the primary means used by police to make our streets and highways safer. However, just as proponents of community policing have employed a broad range of strategies and involved other government and private agencies to attack the crime problem, these strategies will also alleviate traffic problems. If available manpower does not permit adequate enforcement at a location where illegal left turns are causing accidents, why not team up with the Public Works Department to erect temporary barricades or some other solution? Why not convince the city to condemn and tear down a vacant building to make room for a left-turn storage lane? The possibilities are limitless, just as they are in any other form of community policing.
Delegating Authority
In these days when risk management and national accreditation are moving us closer to a painting-by-the-numbers style of law enforcement, we must find new ways to empower our employees to work on innovative solutions within the community and make it clear that they will not be penalized for doing so. We must replace enforcement strategies that too often lead to officers sporadically “swooping down out of nowhere” to ticket citizens in response to a commander's once-a-month concerns about activity, or a loud complainer who gets the right ear at headquarters. Enforcement can be efficient and still not be effective, but effective enforcement by its very definition is always efficient. We need to move our officers out into the community, both to perform high-profile stationary observation at strategic times and locations and to make them available and approachable to citizens who wish to exchange valuable information on neighborhood problems, crime and otherwise. It is no longer a viable excuse to say that our officers “don't have the time”; indeed, we cannot afford not to develop this type of interactive policing.
Conclusion
Near the beginning of the twenty-first century, it appears that any economic recovery may be shallow and gradual, and that police departments will find it difficult to obtain the resources they need for the demanding jobs that lie ahead. With deaths, injuries and property damage from traffic crashes eclipsing all other accidental causes of human suffering and economic loss, we cannot afford to neglect the traffic problem. By adapting community policing strategies to traffic enforcement, we can “work smarter” and obtain more community support for our efforts.
Community Policing and Traffic Enforcement: Not Mutually Exclusive
Many jurisdictions around the world are embracing the concepts of community policing and problem-oriented policing as a means to draw the police and the public closer together and to make the most efficient use of scarce resources.
Citizens want law enforcement to help them with many concerns, including street-level drug usage, deteriorating neighborhoods, and crimes of violence. Community policing and problem-oriented policing each posit the theory that the problems of crime and disorder in the community cannot be solved by the police alone. The roots of these problems go deep into our culture and times. We need commitment, involve-ment, and support from the total community as we go about the task of reducing fear and making a safer environment. These new policing styles also realize that the officer on the beat or in the squad car, delivering direct police services to the people, is often in the best position to recognize problems and must be given reasonable latitude to develop innovative and nontraditional solutions to these problems, in concert with the community.
The IACP Highway Safety Advisory Committee is concerned that, in adopting these new policing strategies, communities do not overlook the number one public safety problem today, in terms of deaths and serious injuries and its impact on the quality of life: traffic crashes. Nationally in the United States, more than 40,000 people are killed in traffic crashes each year, and 3,200,000 are injured. Thus, traffic deaths remain by far the largest single cause of accidental death. Traffic crashes cost U.S. society $137.5 billion a year in economic loss—including uninsured work losses, vehicle damage costs, and cargo loss— and outstrip cancer, heart disease, AIDS and all other causes of deaths for Americans age one to 44 years. The situation is similar in most other industrialized nations.
As we redouble our efforts to improve policing methods and obtain more community support and involvement, let us make sure that traffic enforcement is not neglected. Without safe streets and high-ways, we cannot truly say we are reducing the level of community violence and fear, and making the streets safe for our citizens.
PART THREE
Setting Policy For Successful Traffic Enforcement
As the head of a law enforcement agency, you have the responsibility to provide guidance and direction to your employees in accomplishing the goals of your organization. As well, you should encourage them to participate actively in establishing a standard of professionalism that will bring credit to them as individual officers and to you and your organization. Deaths, injuries, and economic losses from traffic crashes consti-tute the number one public health problem in nearly every country in the free world. A successful police administrator will use the “bully pulpit” of policy making to ensure that his officers place the proper priority on traffic enforcement activities.
Defining Your Agency's Mission
Begin at the very basic level of your agency's mission statement, and make a value statement as well. Make certain that the mission and value statements contain strong wording that clearly tell both the public and the members of the department that traffic enforcement is seen as a vital component of any community or service-oriented policing effort, and the responsibility of every uniformed officer, regardless of rank or assignment. Run your department according to a management-by-objectives or total quality management approach that includes a long-range strategic plan, and that traffic is represented in this plan. To emphasize this perspective at the operational level, traffic productivity should be an aspect of the periodic personnel evalua-tions of all uniformed officers. Data should be collected on which to base these evaluations. To avoid accusations of setting a quota for enforcement, base your evaluation criteria on all self-initiated contacts, and do not overemphasize citations. First-line supervisors should take corrective action whenever an officer spends an appreciable amount of time on the road without making a reasonable number of self-initiated traffic contacts. Likewise, mid-managers should hold first-line supervisor's feet to the fire to ensure they're carrying out their responsibilities. A component of each field training officer program should include sufficient emphasis on traffic activities. When writing policies for your department, consult the standards contained in the manual of the Commission for Accreditation of Law Enforcement Agencies, Inc (CALEA). That way, even if your department is not presently accredited, should you desire to become accredited at some future date, you will have a lot less work to do to conform your policies to CALEA standards.
Concentrating Your Efforts
When you begin reviewing or developing traffic policies, concen-trate first on the highest liability areas, which include pursuits, high-risk vehicle response, road blocks and forcible stopping tactics, and drunk and drugged driver enforcement. Other important areas affecting traffic safety operations include fleet accident review, transportation of prisoners, fuel economy, and vehicle specifications and equipment. Liability for you and your department arises either when you do not have a policy or when a existing policy is inadequately explained through training or is not enforced. The policy and procedure manual should consist of procedural guidelines your members will use to perform their daily duties, as well as the policies themselves, which will be short descriptions of agency goals in particular situations. Detailed procedures for carrying out the policies should be explained clearly and concisely. When writing policies, make sure you focus on the expected results, not just the methods to be used in performing the task.
Operation of Emergency Vehicles
Training in the operation of emergency vehicles is one of the most important issues currently facing police administrators. Adequate training must be maintained to ensure that your officers are able to operate department vehicles competently during the response to an emergency and in pursuit situations. In addition, it is essential to develop a comprehensive emergency vehicle operations policy that is specific to your particular agency, not simply borrowed from elsewhere. Train each member of your department within the parameters of your particular agency's policy regarding both emergency response and pursuit. Make sure your instructors are well acquaint-ed with the policy and that their lesson plans conform to it. Do not have an unwritten response or pursuit policy—your members need to know where you stand on the issue and what guidelines they must follow in these situations. Your pursuit policy, when developed, should describe specifically how your department members are to conduct themselves when faced with a pursuit situation. The policy must address such issues as a clear, concise definition of the term “pursuit,” because a realistic definition encourages compliance.
Provide a precise description of the conditions under which your officers may initiate a pursuit. Pursuit should be discouraged for minor nonmoving violations. Limited pursuit is acceptable for moving violations. Pursuit is generally acceptable for serious moving violations. The policy should indicate how a pursuit is to be initiated, including the emergency warning devices to be utilized, and notification of a supervisor and/or communications center.
The duties of the primary and other available units should be spelled out in the policy. The primary unit should focus on the pursued vehicle, and other units should focus on obstacles and other motorists. Your policy should prohibit the operation of several police vehicles in a convoy fashion during a pursuit. When more than one vehicle is involved in a pursuit, the additional vehicles should follow along at near-legal speeds and merely position themselves to be of assistance once the pursuit is terminated. Depending on the size of your department, the number of street supervisors and watch commanders available, and the size and capability of the communications center, you should consider making a supervisor responsible for monitoring the progress of a pursuit. This supervisor should have the authority to terminate the pursuit at any time he feels the dangers inherent in the pursuit outweigh the value of apprehending the pursuit vehicle. Factors to be considered by both the supervisor and the driver of the pursuit vehicle should include the nature of the original violation, road and weather conditions, the nature of the pursuit locale, and the likelihood of success compared with the danger to the public. Reasons for discontinuing the pursuit should include loss of visual contact, increased danger to the public, or obtaining enough identification to apprehend the violator at a later date. Forcible stopping techniques should only rarely be used to terminate a pursuit, because the U.S. Supreme Court has stated in Brower v. Inyo County that they constitute deadly force under some circumstances. Deadly force should only be used in the apprehension of someone who has committed a felony involving force or violence and all other means to effect their apprehension have failed, or when reasonably believed necessary to save the lives of other innocent citizens.
The technique of boxing in the pursuit vehicle between two patrol vehicles is extremely dangerous, not only to the suspect but to the operators of the patrol vehicles. Apprehending a motorist for traffic violations is seldom worth risking a whiplash injury, or worse, to a police officer. Under no circumstances should forcible stopping techniques such as rolling roadblocks or ramming be used, unless the officers have specifically received classroom and hands-on training in these techniques. When stationary roadblocks are set up, ample advance warning should be given to other motorists, and an escape route should be allowed for the pursued vehicle. Otherwise, if the pursued vehicle becomes involved in a crash at a road block and its driver or passenger is killed, the question will always arise as to whether or not deadly force was authorized. The use of hollow spikes sold by various police supply houses may be an acceptable alternative, but only when the use of such a technique is legally justified and the officers have been trained in its use. Once a fleeing motorist has been apprehended, additional use-of-force considerations come into play. An unfortunate incident can happen when police officers, high on adrenaline after a lengthy high-speed pursuit, confront an errant motorist. An instance that occurs all too frequently involves a police officer who attempts to remove a motorist forcibly from a vehicle at gunpoint and accidentally discharges his weapon. It is always preferable to wait for sufficient assistance before removing a motorist from a vehicle at the scene of a high-risk stop and to use the “contact/cover” principle, where one armed officer provides the firepower and an unarmed officer conducts the handcuffing and search. Because of the ease with which modern semiautomatic weapons will discharge, it is extremely important that officers be trained in the “on target-on trigger, off target-off trigger” principle of handling firearms. By exposing officers to scenario-type training with periodic retraining in these techniques, officer self-discipline will be attained. It is also necessary to have a supervisor proceed to the scene as quickly as possible and assume control of the situation.
3-1-6 Response to Emergency Calls
Every police department should develop a response policy that provides assistance to officers when they are responding to various calls for service. For instance, when responding to an accident, a call for assistance, or any emergency requiring officers to arrive at the scene as quickly and safely as possible, they should be required to activate their emergency warning devices and pay attention to state motor vehicle laws, including the conditions under which they may legally ignore traffic signals, the procedure to be followed when they do ignore the signal, and conditions under which they may exceed the maximum posted speed limits or disregard regulations governing direction of movement or turning in specified areas. Stress to the officers, both in the policy and during training sessions, that the emergency vehicle exemptions do not relieve the driver of an emergency vehicle from the duty to drive with due regard for the safety of all persons; nor do these provisions protect a driver from the consequences of reckless disregard for the safety of others.
Operating a police vehicle either in pursuit or in response to an emergency call is extremely dangerous under conditions where the vehicle will be going the wrong way down a one-way street, entering a freeway entrance ramp from the opposite direction, or otherwise disregarding normal traffic flow conditions. Due to the extreme dangerousness of these tactics, they are seldom permissible. Policies should also provide that responses to non-injury crashes, service calls not involving a crime in progress, and other non-emergency situations should be accomplished at or below the speed limit, with regard to existing roadway and traffic conditions.
Mandatory Report On Pursuits
Your policy should require police officers to make a written report on every pursuit, whether successful or unsuccessful. These reports should be entered into a data bank to determine the extent to which your officers are engaging in high-speed pursuits, and the percentage of these actions that result in crashes. The report should also be reviewed by supervisors to ensure that departmental policy was followed.Fleet Accident Review
Officers should be given the opportunity to have their peers and supervisors review the events surrounding any fleet accidents in which they are involved. Also, they should be allowed to be present at that review and offer any explanation of the event they think is necessary. When preparing an accident review procedure, you should specify how the accident is to be investigated. In some instances, it may be appropriate to have the accident investigated by another law enforcement agency having jurisdiction in the area. On occasion, however, it may be appropriate for your department to conduct its own internal accident investigation. Your policy should address the various situations, and clearly describe under which option the investigation is to be conducted, as well as the routing of any investigative reports for supervisory review. In the event that not all of your department fleet accidents are reviewed routinely by an accident review board, your policy must clearly describe the procedure for reviewing the reports and the protocol to be followed for convening an accident review board if deemed appropriate.
The policy should provide a framework for the members of the accident review board to be empaneled, including membership of the panel, and inclusion of peers, supervisor participation, and testimony from the involved officer and an accident reconstruc-tionist, as well as the time frame for preparation of the report, notation of any training deficiencies or employee negligence and violations of the law. The policy should emphasis that any disciplinary action taken as a result of the report will be separately considered and is not the responsibility of the board. The duty of the board is simply to determine whether or not the accident was avoidable and if there are training or retraining implications.
Transportation Of Prisoners
The purpose of a prisoner transportation policy is to provide guidelines to your employees when they are moving prisoners or persons in custody from one place to another. The following are several issues that should be addressed by such a policy. To comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the policy should explain the procedures to follow when taking into custody persons with a physical disability. Include the inspection of the department vehicle for possible presence of weapons at the beginning of the shift, following the transportation of a prisoner, and at the conclusion of the shift. A policy on the transportation of juveniles and female prisoners should be developed. If a prisoner of the opposite sex must be transported and no officer of the same sex is present, require the transporting officer to contact communications and have the name of the prisoner recorded, along with the time the transport began and the mileage, time and location at the conclusion of the transport.
Your prisoner transport policy should require that the safety screen be in place and the rear seat door handles deactivated. The policy should also cover situations when it is unavoidably necessary to transport prisoners in a vehicle without a cage. All prisoners should be handcuffed with the handcuffs double-locked, with their hands behind their backs and palms facing outward. Exceptions to this are special situations such as transporting a prisoner obviously in a state of pregnancy, with a physical disability, or with injuries that could be aggravated by standard handcuffing procedures; or handling one who is violently resisting arrest or manifests mental disorder such that he poses a threat to himself or to the public. In the latter case, other devices such as strait jackets are required. Prisoners should never be handcuffed to any part of the vehicle, and the procedure of “hog tying” prisoners by handcuffing their arms through their legs should never be utilized because of the problem of prisoners dying from positional asphyxia.
If any type of chemical weapon has been used on a prisoner at the time he was taken into custody, the prisoner should be decontaminated prior to transport, if possible, and monitored closely by the transporting officer for any signs of illness.
Seat Belt Use
All departments should have a mandatory seat belt use policy for the protection of the officers, the prisoners they transport, and the welfare of the general public, as well as for the purpose of reducing worker's compensation claims and injuries by members of your work force. The law enforcement cop-out that safety belts “prevent me from exiting my vehicle quickly at an emergency situation” is a myth that portrays safety belts as unsafe and should not be tolerated. Officers can get in and out of a car using the seat belt almost as quickly as those who do not. Seat belts hold the driver in place so that he is less likely to lose control in a minor collision or during a pursuit. In a vehicle equipped with automatic shoulder harnesses, it is doubly important that the lap belt be fastened because of instances where motorists wearing only the shoulder harness have been decapitated in a crash. Even if a vehicle is equipped with air bags, the seat belts are important to hold the driver behind the wheel and prevent injuries in side and rear collisions. The legal ramifications of allowing your officers to disregard the seat belt in a police vehicle are far-reaching and generally negative. Any decision to implement a non-mandatory seat belt policy should be made only after consultation with the department’s legal advisor.
Fuel Economy
In times of budget restraints, fuel economy is essential for efficient operation of the department. You need to plan for those events that may require a cutback on active patrol.
Computerized records of the fuel mileage of various vehicles will indicate drivers whose uneconomical driving habits may make them candidates for additional training in economical driving. Various policies, such as “park, talk and walk,” as well as those that encourage an officer to avoid excessive idling of the vehicle's engine, are important to be in place and enforced. Even in states with a cold climate, devices are available that will recirculate the heat from the heater core of the vehicle and keep the interior of the vehicle warm for a period of time even with the engine shut off.
Vehicle Purchase Policy
In many cases, your vehicle purchase policy will be dictated by a centralized purchasing agency, which may have little or no knowledge of police vehicle requirements.
Develop a rapport with people in the centralized purchasing agency to make them more aware of your needs and requirements. You might even invite for a purchasing agent to go on a ride-along with an officer to gain a fuller appreciation of how the police vehicle is the officer's “place of business” for eight or more hours a day, as well as the fact that the exposure to high-speed driving conditions in all kinds of weather makes police officers more likely than the general public to be exposed to a crash. The size and weight of a vehicle is still an important factor in surviving a crash. This fact, in addition to the need to transport prisoners, is more than ample justification for the purchase of full-size police vehicles.
When deciding the type of vehicles to be purchased, a state police or highway patrol may require a different type than those driven by city police. The size of the engine will also depend on your individual needs. Certain units, such as K-9 or SWAT teams or vehicles that must patrol country roads, may have special requirements such as those met by vans, four-wheel drive vehicles, and station wagons.
Despite the unfavorable collision record of motorcycles, with proper vehicle selection and intensive training, motorcycle patrols can be extremely effective in rapidly transporting officers through congested traffic conditions to the scene of an emergency. They also provide an extremely low-profile way to apprehend habitual traffic violators who have acquired the knack of spotting a conventional cruiser, as well as a means of escorting dignitaries or leading parades.
If unmarked vehicles are utilized in your fleet, your policy should provide that totally unmarked vehicles driven by plainclothes officers should never be used to stop a motorist except under extreme emergency conditions. Likewise, they should undertake a pursuit only under the most extreme conditions, and then should relinquish the pursuit at the earliest possible opportunity when a marked unit is available.
When an unmarked unit stops a motorist, especially a female motorist late at night, it may be advisable to dispatch a marked unit to the scene as soon as possible to take over the situation.
Vehicle Specifications
You should analyze the needs of your department before preparing vehicle bid specifications. You will want to survey departments of similar size and demographic makeup to determine how they rate specifications for their vehicles. You may wish to look at items such as fuel economy, acceleration, the availability of air bags, and top-end performance.
The protocol for acceptance or nonacceptance of bids should include developing a formula that considers not only the bid price but also the performance capabilities of the vehicle. For example, the formula might give 100 points for the base price, meaning the bidder with the lowest price gets 100 points in the bidding process. Then, vehicle dynamics could account for up to 20 points, acceleration, 30 points, braking deceleration, 10 points, top speed, 30 points, ergonomics and capability of accommodating communications gear, 10 points, and fuel economy by city EPA standards, 10 points.
You may want to specify certain items of equipment such as undercoating, gas shocks, a power seat, power door locks, wiring and ignition main power, ashtray relocation for radio equipment, cruise control, silicon radiator hoses, bumper guards front and rear, locking gas caps with three keys, power windows, power disconnect for the rear windows, an anti-theft system, and built-in radio wiring in your acceptance formula.
Suspension Systems
Suspension systems in police package vehicles are conducive to fast cornering and turning, and allow the driver to take severe bumps without interfering with the control of the vehicle. If you do not specify a police suspension on your vehicles, you sacrifice ease of driving, officer comfort, ability to pursue and apprehend, and good tire wear characteristics.
Ease of Maintenance
Although a minor consideration in most instances, maintenance might cost you a lot of money if you bid a foreign or non-standard vehicle. An inconvenience such as an inaccessible oil filter can be an expensive proposition when you have a fleet of several cars with the same problem.
Studies and Testing
The Michigan State Police testing program is probably the best in the nation for testing police vehicles from every U.S. and some foreign manufacturers. Copies of these studies are available on an annual basis from the Michigan State Police and from the Bureau of Justice Assistance's Technology Assessment Program.
Vehicle Equipment
The following cautions and concerns apply to the purchase of police vehicle equipment.
Strobe Lights.
If you will be patrolling areas afflicted with a lot of fog, rain or other inclement weather, you should give consideration to using strobe lights mounted on the exterior of the vehicle. Strobe lights also draw less current and are easier on the battery. However, unless strobe lights are properly set up, they can be extremely blinding to both motorists and the officers themselves, and there have been concerns that strobe lights flashing at a certain frequency may trigger seizure-type disorders in some individuals. Devices are available to control the intensity of strobe lights.Radar.
If your vehicle is equipped with radar, certain safety precautions should be provided to prevent unnecessary expo-sure of the officer to microwave radiation. Current information indicates that modern radar sets emit less radiation than a cellular phone or a portable radio. However, it is still advisable to make sure that the radar antenna is always pointing away from the driver or passengers, and if a hand-held radar set is utilized, that it is turned off and stored on the seat when not in use, never in the lap of the driver. All radar equipment within the vehicle should be properly secured to protect the officer in the event of an accident or high-speed emergency operations.Siren.
A siren should be placed in a location to the front of the vehicle to minimize noise levels when broadcasting on the car radio.Color.
Studies have shown that a white color is the most visible for patrol vehicles. There are many schools of thought regarding the painting, striping and coloring of police vehicles. The key here is distinctiveness: You want your vehicles to be readily identified by the public and to instill a sense of pride in the department and the community.Cage.
Equipping your patrol vehicles with a cage and roll bar will provide safety for both the officers and any prisoners that are transported.Tires.
Tires should be the type that is speed rated for highway patrol or city work, as is appropriate. With the advent of air bags in both the passenger and driver side of modern patrol vehicles, the mounting of needed equipment becomes more difficult. Under no circumstances should these safety devices ever be disconnected. The radio and other equip-ment needs to be placed in a location where the officer can readily access it without taking his eyes off the road. If that is not possible, then position them a little lower so that the sense of touch can get the officer into the system or using controls that he needs in order to function properly. Many police equipment manufacturers now produce mounting racks that are compatible with air bags. We hope this brief outline of items to be taken into consideration in the area of traffic enforcement policy will be of value to you. Additional information may be obtained by reading the periodic model policies issued by the IACP Policy Center and the Citizens for Effective Law Enforcement.The Motorcycle as a Traffic Enforcement Tool
Motorcycle units are a specialized enforcement tool capable of many diverse assignments. A decision to activate a specialty unit of this nature requires long-term management commitment because the expense of such a unit and the use of personnel is often questioned. A successful motorcycle unit requires the assignment of qualified personnel, quality equipment and appropriate manage-ment direction. Such a unit can contribute significantly towards extremely effective public relations, the resolution of specific problems that cannot be handled by a normal patrol vehicle, and additional career opportunities for line personnel.
Goal Orientation
The motorcycle unit should not be the result of a haphazard management decision. If you are considering a unit for a medium-to large-size law enforcement agency, plan for an entire detachment or squad consisting of at least six motor officers and a sergeant. Anything less is really not cost-effective or productive. (Such assignments as DARE motorcycles will not be included in this discussion, as this type of vehicle is used for a special safety education assignment.)
Patrol Activities
A motor unit should be used in conjunction with accident problem areas, citizen complaints, special emphasis patrols, or other specific assignments. As a normal practice, the unit should not be assigned to work during the hours of darkness. This type of unit works best when it is highly visible. Citizens see one motorcycle in an area, and they comment to their friends and neighbors that they have seen a motorcycle working that specific place. However, when four motorcycles are observed working an area, the same civilians will report seeing a “dozen motorcycles stopping every violator.” The motor units are so versatile they can work traffic in all directions and have the ability to get to the violator in congested traffic areas. Ideal work assignments for motor units are speed and HOV (restricted commuter lane) enforcement areas, but they can be used for almost any type of assignment. For prisoner transportation purposes, however, consideration must be given to the proximity and availability of conventional patrol units.
The key to patrol assignments is repetition. First, identify the problem and problem area. Assign the motor unit to the location for a week; then return to the problem area once or twice the following week and periodically each month after that. The motor-ing public will associate that area with motorcycle enforcement. The motor unit thus becomes extremely effective in solving that specific problem. This type of enforcement must be done as a unit to be effective.
Training
Training is a must. If your agency cannot train or have the motor officer trained properly, do not consider a motor unit. A minimum of two weeks of motorcycle EVOC (Emergency Vehicle Operations Course) training should be mandatory, and a yearly recertification program is highly recommended. Without the proper training and a commitment to officer safety, your program would be prone to failure. The commitment is costly, but the results are worth it.
Cost
A motorcycle unit is expensive to equip and to maintain. The motorcycles need servicing every 2,500 miles; tire changes should be required approximately every 5,000 miles; and motorcycles are susceptible to all kinds of minor problems. Having a local service facility and a spare motorcycle for every six officers will eliminate down time for servicing.
Many agencies, such as the Washington State Patrol, assign each motor officer both a motorcycle and a patrol car. This arrangement provides greater versatility to the trooper and the department.
If you will be moving motorcycles around the state for different functions, motorcycle trailers or other forms of transportation are recommended. Typically, two motorcycles are transported per trailer, and the motor officers and their gear occupy the patrol vehicle that is performing the towing operation.
Shifts
A motorcycle unit works best on a weekday shift assignment. Traffic congestion is heavier during the normal work week, and the versatility of the motorcycle is at its full potential. Weekend shifts should be reserved for special events, such as dignitary protection, holiday weekends or special events. The motorcycle unit should avoid late-night shifts or any activity after the hours of darkness. The decreased nighttime visibility of the police motorcycle detracts from its effectiveness, and the added visibility restriction placed on the operator can lead to unnecessary patrol vehicle collisions.
If the department has enough motorcycle units, consider placing your detachments on a 4/10 work schedule to allow for reduced overtime due to court appearances, and increased coverage during the morning and afternoon rush hours.
Inclement weather can reduce the effectiveness of the motorcycle unit. If the temperature drops below 35 degrees Fahrenheit, the motor officer risk factor increases dramatically. Motorcycles, by their very nature, are a single-track, articulated vehicle and need to lean in order to complete a turn. Any type of contaminated surface will reduce the cornering coefficient of the roadway enough to present a hazard to the officer. Alternative transportation should be available to the motor officer during cold weather conditions. Rain is generally not a problem if the proper equipment is provided to the motor officer.
Equipment
Due to the restricted space on the motorcycle, special equipment is needed. Typically, the side saddlebags are used for storage and the rear center box is used for the radio equipment. An absolute necessity is a communication system designed for the weather conditions experienced by the motorcyclist. Helmet transmission capabilities greatly improve the officer's ability to communicate. Each officer needs to be assigned a hand-held radar unit to assist with speed enforcement. The unit supervisor should be provided with a portable cellular phone. Specialized clothing, such as jackets and rain gear, will help to protect the officer during tour of duty.
A biannual equipment inspection should be conducted to monitor the condition of the motorcycle units. The motorcycles should be assigned on a permanent basis to a specific officer, who should be riding the same motorcycle every day. Each motorcycle handles a little differently, and the officer can be held responsible for both the mechanical and cosmetic condition of the motorcycle if the units are assigned to specific individuals.
Public Relations
Motorcycle units are an effective public relations device. They can be formed into a motorcycle drill team, displayed at local or state fairs and at shopping malls to assist in spreading the law enforcement message, and used as a recruiting tool. Children love to sit on the motorcycle. Both the parents and the children are left with a positive image of your department and its personnel.
Personnel
Motorcycle assignment is not for everyone. Officers considered for the assignment should have at least four years of line experience. In addition, they should be self-motivated, mature, safety-oriented, capable of making good decisions, and physically able to handle the assignment. The selection criteria should not be based on riding experience, which has little merit if a good training program is in place. An inexperienced rider will often outperform the experienced rider at the end of the training period. Respect for the motorcycle and the department's goals outweighs riding experience.
Concealed vs. Visible Patrol Tactics
Using unmarked patrol cars as part of any comprehensive traffic enforcement program is a valid consideration, as well as the decision of when to apply hidden, concealed, or highly visible patrol tactics. While some of the issues, such as stealth, uniformity and safety seem obvious, others, such as legal, philosophical and fiscal concerns, may be more subtle.
Marked Vehicles
- Advantages:
- Fully marked patrol vehicles provide high visibility to the motoring public and serve a two-fold purpose: Not only is a deterrent factor provided, but the public can readily identify a source of help during time of need.
- paramount value is the physical protection provided by a fully marked patrol car. A light bar, spotlight and full markings offer maximum visibility, whether the officer is conducting a routine traffic stop or providing assistance along the highway. At the scene of traffic collisions or any blockage of the roadway, the protection provided by fully marked units is most valuable. Its presence not only offers physical protection to the officer and citizens at a scene but so warns aproaching traffic.
- The fully marked patrol car also keeps liability to a minimum. It is obvious and indisputable in its authority. While the full markings and light bar offer an important safety element in a pursuit, they also ensure compliance with statutory requirements for felony charges of eluding pursuit (i.e., the defendant knew that it was a police officer attempting to stop him).
- Disadvantages:
- The light bars on the marked vehicle, because of wind resistance, negatively affect acceleration and top speed as well as fuel economy.
- By virtue of their high visibility, fully marked vehicles create a “halo effect” within their immediate vicinity.
- Violations, especially flagrant ones, occur less frequently in their presence. Experience indicates that the duration of the “halo effect” is relatively short-lived in the absence of the marked vehicle.
Unmarked Vehicles
- Advantages:
- Unmarked patrol cars offer, to some degree, stealth and anonymity. Within a police fleet, they can be valuable for travel, inconspicuous transport details, and non-line and supervisory or command transportation, as well as traffic functions.
- As a traffic enforcement tool, unmarked vehicles may expose the officer to more frequent as well as more flagrant violations.
- They can be especially valuable when used in the capacity of an “emphasis patrol” where chronic violators are being targeted.
- Excessive speed, truck violations, radar detector reliance and erratic drivers can all be targeted with the unmarked patrol vehicle.
- As previously noted, improved performance and economy are also a benefit of the patrol vehicle operated without the light bar.
- Oddly enough, according to one Illinois survey, the semi-marked vehicle (no light bar) actually holds one safety advantage over the fully marked vehicle. This survey indicates that not only were proportionately fewer semi-marked vehicles involved in collisions, but they averaged less damage than their marked counterparts. The explanation suggested for this phenomenon was that police officers assume that roof-mounted emergency lights project unchallenged authority. When the light bar is removed, the officer has to become a more cautious driver.
- Disadvantages:
- Among the concerns with the totally unmarked vehicle are that they offer less visibility when responding to an emergency or when protecting an accident scene or traffic stop, especially when 360- degree protection or visibility on a high-speed highway from some distance down the road is required. Some argue, however, that the difference in safety at an accident scene is not as statistically significant as one might assume.
- The unmarked vehicle does not immediately project the authority that the fully marked vehicle does. This reality may present particular problems in certain situations, such as a pursuit, where it is necessary to warn oncoming traffic of the presence of the police vehicle, or when stopping lone female occupants or persons who are carrying valuable cargo. The possibility of someone impersonating a police officer is greater in jurisdictions where unmarked units are used for traffic patrol.
- The incorporation of unmarked vehicles into a police fleet also decreases the uniformity of the fleet, and makes it more difficult to investigate citizen complaints of officer misconduct with official vehicles.
Additional Considerations
When comparing the marked to the unmarked vehicle, one must consider to what degree the patrol vehicle will actually be “unmarked.” “Totally marked” would suggest full, uniform markings, light bar, A spotlight, door seals and official plates. “Semi-marked” vehicles would be the same BUT with light bar removed—“low profile” vehicles. The “traditional” unmarked car could be considered a vehicle with a standard police package and equipped with no light bar or markings, with varied color but official plates. “Totally unmarked” vehicles are those with varying make, style and color; no markings; and undercover plates. These have tradi-tionally been limited to undercover, investigative, or administrative use. Departmental philosophy, goals, and objectives should all be addressed when considering the use of unmarked cars as well as the percentage of their inclusion in the fleet.
The expense considerations regarding fleet selection are many. They include, but are not limited to, purchase price, resale value, operating expense, economy, uniformity of servicing, outfitting expense, and safety and liability. Each individual department, considering its specific philosophy, goals, and objectives must evaluate the pros and cons of each traffic enforcement tool and select the vehicle that best serves its specific needs.
Concealed vs. Visible Patrol Tactics
Attractively marked police vehicles can be an important component of a community policing or service-oriented policing effort. Through the use of color schemes, logos and slogans, they can be used to project a professional, or even caring, image for the police department. Many police departments have even gone to the expense of establishing “store front police stations” at various locations within their jurisdictions. Such departments, who also park a fully marked police vehicle in a strategic location, where it can surveil vehicular and pedestrian traffic and be seen by motorists and pedestrians, will often find that people will stop and report crimes or suspicious circumstances to the officer. Moreover, the more visible police officers are as they go about their everyday duties, the more they create an impression of “omnipresence” and the more they are likely to slow down speeders and deter both traffic and criminal violations. In many cases, it seems to make little sense for an agency to go to great expense to bedeck a police vehicle with art work and markings, and then encourage hidden enforcement tactics that undo the deter-rent effect of the markings.
The public also sometimes tends to resent what they consider unfair tactics on the part of the police, particularly in a jurisdiction where enforcement efforts are more sporadic than consistent. Unmarked cruisers and “in-the-hole” enforcement techniques making use of concealed or hidden observation may leave a bad taste in the public's mouth. Even the most solid citizen may drive down the road flashing their headlights on and off to warn approaching motorists that a police vehicle is parked in a concealed location. Citizens also sense a double standard when they see police vehicles parked in the breakdown lane at night and running radar with their lights off; they instinctively know that, in most jurisdictions, there is no traffic code exception that legalizes such tactics.
When a law enforcement agency deviates from highly visible tactics, they may adopt either “concealed” tactics—in which the vehicle is not parked in a highly visible location but is nevertheless visible if the motorist is sharp-eyed—or “hidden” tactics whereby a deliberate effort is made to conceal the police vehicle from view. Concealed or hidden tactics may be justified when on the lookout for a wanted person or in an area where regular, visible patrols have been ineffective in getting a particular traffic problem under control. If unmarked cars are to be used as a regular component of traffic enforcement, the agency should consider posting signs that advise motorists that the police patrol with unmarked cars. The agency should also adopt operating procedures that inform the officers how to identify themselves when making traffic stops, and how to handle situations where the person they are attempting to stop may doubt the identity of the officers.
Related Articles and Studies
Hardnett, Cynthia. Review of Monocolor and Bicolor Emergency Vehicle Warning Lights. Springfield, Illinois: Illinois Department of Law Enforcement Unpublished Report, September 1984).
“Illinois Police Study Finds: Fewer Accidents, Lower Costs Without Roof-Mounted Lights.” NAFA Bulletin, (December 1984) 12-35.
Raub, Richard A. Removal of Roof-Mounted Emergency Lighting From Police Patrol Vehicles: An Evaluation. Springfield, Illinois: Illinois Department of Law Enforcement (Unpublished Report), November 1984.
Stoica, Ted L. Evaluation of Semi-marked Police Vehicles. Springfield, Illinois: Illinois Department of Law Enforcement, April 1983.
Stoica, Ted L. “Police Vehicles: Visabars on State Police Cars.” The Police Chief, September 1984, pp. 24-32.
Use of Aircraft in Traffic Enforcement
Fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters are increasingly being used for traffic enforcement. Aircraft equipped with time/distance measur-ing devices are an especially effective means of dealing with serious moving traffic violations, especially on the interstate highway system. Helicopters are particularly useful in monitoring pursuits and preventing the escape of pursued vehicles, as well as hovering over and illuminating the scenes of nighttime felony traffic stops and conducting surveillances involving drug couriers. All types of aircraft are useful in managing congestion at highway crash scenes and special events.
Speed Enforcement
A “Bear in the Air” can easily apprehend frequent and habitual speeders who rely on radar or LIDAR detectors and citizens' band radios to escape detection, as well as many other types of violations, such as driving while intoxicated, improper passing, and following too closely. By timing the progress of a vehicle between measured points marked along the highway, the computed speed is the violator's average speed over a distance of a quarter mile or more, whereas radar gives more of an instantaneous measurement of speed at a given point. Thus, a driver caught by an aerial/ground team can hardly claim that he briefly speeded only to pass another vehicle or dodge an obstruction in the road. Statistics show that a combined air/ground team can enforce traffic laws more efficiently than ground units alone, consume less fuel, and provide increased productivity per hour of patrol.
Controlling Public Reaction
When an agency begins using airborne enforcement, it can avoid a negative public reaction by inviting the media to witness enforcement activities. If careful statistics are kept on all activities to guard against claims that expensive aircraft are primarily used to ferry dignitaries around, and if strict guidelines are established as to who can ride in the planes and for what purposes, complaints can be averted. Judges, key legislators, and news media representatives should be invited to observe a routine mission for themselves. Statistics will reveal that the typical speed of violators cited is far in excess of what the average citizen would consider reasonable. In fact, the aircraft will usually prove to be most effective in apprehending flagrant violators, including those traveling at nearly triple-digit speeds. By reducing high-speed pursuits, these apprehensions are accomplished with maximum consideration for the safety of other road users. Finally, aircraft can be instrumental in hunting for escaped prisoners, spotting forest fires, delivering emergency blood supplies to distant hospitals, and marijuana eradication activities. The press and the public need to be made aware of these potential benefits.
Legal Authority
The mission statement of the aircraft unit should contain legal authority for all flight operations including transportation. Most police agencies possess the authority to conduct aerial operations when directly related to a law enforcement function; however, they may lack authority for other operations such as executive transportation. Many agencies are mandated to provide security as well as transportation for governors, mayors, and other officials, and that mandate gives them legal authority to utilize law enforce-ment aircraft.
Organizational Structure
Most law enforcement aviation divisions are managed by command staff officers who have aviation experience because when managing a fleet of aircraft and crew members requires making decisions specific to aviation and federal regulations. These decisions may be based on knowledge of requirements for licensing, training, flight experience, aircraft maintenance, and inspection intervals. An aviation manager must also possess the experience necessary to make decisions regarding specific flight requests, with consider-ation given to suitability of aircraft, runways, weather, and other related data.
Equipment Selection
The majority of law enforcement support missions can be accomp-lished with light, fixed-wing aircraft. Such aircraft can fly at reduced air speeds safely and efficiently for long periods of time, and are far more fuel and maintenance efficient than rotary-wing aircraft (helicopters). Should a mission require vertical take-off and landing or the ability to hover, then rotary-wing aircraft are the only option. Fixed-wing aircraft are used almost exclusively for highway enforcement activities. They are fuel efficient and far less fatiguing on crew members than helicopters, and can be utilized for a variety of missions including photography and transportation. Generally, high-wing aircraft are chosen for these purposes, as the crew has an unrestricted view of the ground when flying at low altitudes. Mission requirements will generally dictate equipment selection; however, multi-engine turbo-prop aircraft are preferred for most short to medium-length missions. Their jet engines offer high reliability and improved take-off performance over reciprocating engines, and their pressurized cabins and de-icing equipment provide all-weather capability. Light, reciprocating twin-engine aircraft are generally a poor selection for multi-person transportation because they do not possess the above capabilities. Aircraft selection is best accomplished through the use of industry consultants, who can provide a wide range of data to aid in your decision process.
Personnel Selection
Commissioned law enforcement officers tend to be effective crew members because their missions routinely require decisions and actions consistent with accepted law enforcement practices. It is generally more effective to train an experienced police officer as a crew member than to train an aviation professional to think and act as a police officer. Most law enforcement agencies have a pool of police officers who have flight experience from which to select crew members.
Maintenance
Aviation departments with one or two light, fixed-wing aircraft may prefer to have their maintenance contracted by a local vendor, while those with helicopters, turbo-props, or multiple fixed-wing aircraft will more effectively provide their own in-house maintenance. The Alaska Division of State Troopers is an example of an agency that requires an in-house maintenance capability. The vast area that the troopers patrol makes the use of aircraft an everyday necessity, and their maintenance crews are capable of tearing down a plane to the basic airframe and completely overhauling it. All maintenance personnel should possess the required federal licenses and receive training for each aircraft they service, even though these may not be federal requirements. When considering the purchase of the first aircraft, an agency should research the ongoing costs—such as the requirement to rebuild an aircraft after a given number of hours of operation—and make sure an adequate operating budget is requested.
Contracted Maintenance Services
Agencies with one or two light fixed-wing aircraft may wish to contract with a vendor for maintenance. This contract should provide for 24-hour call-out, record keeping, FAA or federal document preparation, appropriate logbook entries, and parts procurement.
Transportation Activities
All transportation activities should be directly related to a police function or be mandated by specific laws such as the “requirement to provide transportation for governors,” to avoid criticism of misuse. While aircraft are a necessary and efficient means of transportation, they are, at times, viewed by the public as extrava-gant if utilized for unnecessary transportation. All flights—most importantly all transportation flights—should be recorded on an individual flight sheet with all pertinent data such as destination, crew, flight times, and authorization.
Training
All crew members should receive scheduled flight training that includes an initial instruction course and an annual refresher program for each aircraft flown. Industry standards for complex aircraft crews call for full-motion simulator training for initial courses, as well as annual refresher programs for complex aircraft. The complexity of the national airspace system, more critical insurance industry standards, and increasingly complex aircraft require higher training standards. Progressive managers realize that safety is paramount to program longevity, and those agencies that incur accidents historically have not continued to support aviation programs. A strong training program cannot be overemphasized.
Operations Manual
Each aircraft enforcement unit should have an operations manual detailing conduct for all operations, from flights to aircraft maintenance. Contents should include job descriptions, division orders, flight operations, aircraft maintenance, health, and safety.
Operational Costs
To provide a basis for reimbursement, as well as future budget planning, operating costs per hour should be computed for each aircraft flown. Many agencies make their aircraft available to other governmental agencies on a reimbursement basis, a practice which helps offset operating costs.
Exempt Operations
Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) regulations in the United States provide for certain government aircraft to operate outside of federal requirements for airworthiness, registration, licensing, and some maintenance standards if declared “public use aircraft.” While there may appear to be advantages in doing so, this provi-sion should be used with caution as it can result in degradation of standards.
Insurance
Many government agencies are self-insured and do not purchase additional insurance for their aviation operations. They may feel protected, but should liabilities arise, generally there is no provision to replace damaged equipment. This results in the governmental entities having to re-appropriate funding to cover losses—funding which is sometimes difficult to achieve. Additional or excess insurance for equipment and passengers, therefore, is strongly recommended.
PART FOUR
Allocation, Deployment and Evaluation of Traffic Personnel
The Police Allocation Manual
How many officers do you need for your patrol function? Most chiefs would like to answer this question by saying, “As many as I can get.” Unfortunately, with the fiscal restraints facing law enforcement today, few chiefs are likely to be offered as many officers as they want. In fact, in addition to being asked to justify the number of additional officers being requested, chiefs are often being asked to account for the number they already have. Justifying the number of officers needed for patrol is not an easy task. Agencies serving jurisdictions with similar populations may have very different patrol officer needs based on the geographic size of the community, community demographics, the number and size of adjacent communities, the road network, and the historical role of the police in the community. What chiefs need is a formula or model that can take local circumstances into account and provide justification for staffing levels.
Development and Use of the PAM
Recognizing the need for chiefs to justify patrol personnel needs, the Northwestern University Traffic Institute, under contract to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, has developed means for providing that justification. The result was the develop-ment of the Police Allocation Manual and its companion, the Police Allocation Manual User's Guide (referred to hereafter as the Manual and the Guide, respectively, and collectively as the PAM). There are three sets of these volumes, one each for state, county and municipal-level law enforcement agencies.
Purpose of the Manual
PAM is designed to be used by law enforcement agencies whose mission includes the delivery of patrol and traffic services. The Manual may be used to determine staffing levels for a traffic division with limited patrol coverage or for a patrol division with traffic responsibilities. The Manual is designed to help agencies address the following questions:
- What is the total number of officers, field supervi-sors, and command personnel required to provide acceptable levels of patrol and traffic services?
- How should a total number of patrol officers be allocated by geographic regions or time periods to maximize agency productivity?
Field Usage
Based on field experience, the PAM has been found to provide both immediate and long-range benefits. The procedures in PAM provide agencies with a logical and explicit format in which to frame requests for additional staff and/or staff deployment. In addition, it is anticipated that the manuals will serve as catalysts for stimulating further discussion and research in staffing and allocation for law enforcement agencies. The most recent version of the Manual is derived from earlier editions that were based on a review of procedures used by law enforcement agencies throughout the United States and Canada. The framework and rationale presented in the Manual are the result of a distillation process that identified the “best” procedures, and then modified and blended those procedures into a comprehensive model for determining appropriate patrol staffing levels and deployment patterns. The PAM model uses time-based procedures. The model deter-mines staffing and allocation requirements based on the time required for four major officer activities:
- Reactive Time. Time spent on Calls for Service (CFS) activities. The major CFS activities for many agencies are traffic accidents and reports of criminal incidents.
- Proactive (Self-Initiated) Time. Time spent on self-initiated activities—such as traffic enforcement, motorist assists, or completing field interrogation cards.
- Proactive (Patrol) Time. Time spent patrolling highways and neighborhoods to provide “visibility” for general deterrence and “availability” for self-initiated activities and timely response to reactive time activities.
- Administrative Time. Time spent on activities that are not reactive or proactive—on-duty court time, meals, auto maintenance, training, or agency administrative duties.
The central formula in the PAM model determines the average number of on-duty officers required per day. The formula is:
Avg. No. of Officers Officers Req'd + Avg No. of Reactive Patrol On-Duty Activities (Nr) Activities (Np) Officers = Required Min. Avg No. of Min Per Day Per Hr Per Ofr for - Per Hr Per Ofr for Self-Int. Act. (ms) Admin. Act. (ma)
Many of the procedures in the PAM model are used to determine appropriate values for N , N , m , and m . r p s a
How To Use the Manual
The Police Allocation Manual consists of four chapters and one appendix. Chapter 1 provides a brief introduction to the purposes and uses of the Manual. Chapter 2 describes the PAM patrol staffing and allocation model. Chapter 3 contains eight work sheets, each with instructions, that provide a step-by-step process for determining patrol staffing levels. Chapter 4 contains one work sheet for determining patrol staffing allocations over several geographic areas or time periods. Appendix A contains work sheets that can be used as alternatives to the procedures presented in Section 5.2 in Chapter 3. Additional information about the PAM procedures can also be found in the companion document, the Police Allocation Manual User's Guide. The Guide presents implementation, data definition, and data collection strategies used by the field test agencies. Also included in the Guide is a summary of key input values and numerical results obtained by the agencies that field tested the Manual. The appendix materials in the Guide include a list of the input data required to use the PAM model (Appendix A), a glossary of key terms and notation (Appendix B), a detailed example showing all nine work sheets in completed form (Appendix C), and derivations of all key formulas used in the model (Appendix D).
Copies of the Manual and Guide are available from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Contact Mr. David Seiler at 202/366-4913
Alcohol and Drug Impaired Driving
Alcohol and drugs are part of virtually every culture worldwide. These
cultures have evolved over hundreds, even thousands, of years. With the use of
these potentially mind-altering substances comes also abuse. Modern societies
are mobile societies, and automotive travel is the principle means of
movement. For those empowered to ensure safety on the highways, there is an
irrecon-cilable conflict between substance abuse and safe driving.
The cost of this conflict is high, and its greatest impact is, perhaps, on
future societies. NHTSA reports that drunken driving crashes are a leading
cause of death among young people in the United States. Between 1982 and 1993,
266,291 deaths in this country were alcohol-related—one fatality every 30
minutes. Alcohol-related crashes cost Americans 46 billion dollars a year.
Similar statistics on the effect of drugs on driving are difficult to find.
Many drug-impaired drivers are never detected or, when detected, are arrested
as alcohol-impaired only. If involved in crashes, they are not chemically
tested for drugs other than alcohol. Conservative estimates suggest that
thousands die and tens of thousands are injured annually as a result of
drug-impaired driving. In a 1988 study by the University of Tennessee Medical
Center that analyzed urine samples of crash-injured drivers, drugs other than
alcohol were detected in 40 percent of the samples.
Many drug users routinely abuse more than one drug simultaneously. This
practice, known as “poly-drug use” may be more common than single drug use in
certain settings. Many drug abusers drink alcohol to disguise their use of
drugs. In a study of drugged driving arrests by the Los Angeles Police
Department, 47 percent had consumed alcohol and some other drug. Poly-drug use
can produce a synergistic impairment of the user's ability to drive. This
condition is particularly deadly and is prevalent among younger drivers. A
study of 440 drivers, ages 15 to 34 years old, who were killed in California
during a two-year period detected alcohol and marijuana in one-third of the
victims. More than half had consumed a drug or drugs other than alcohol.
To reduce the highway mortality rate from alcohol and drug impairment
requires altering culturally rooted behaviors. Behavior-al change may best be
accomplished through ongoing programs of vigorous enforcement, coupled with
ambitious education and information activities. Thus, there is a broad range
of issues involved with alcohol and drug enforcement on the highway. Effective
DWI Statutes.
The effectiveness of a DWI statute is measured by its ability to deter
impaired driving. The National Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws and
Ordinances (NCUTLO) provides a standard in its Uniform Vehicle Code (UVC) by
which each jurisdiction may measure its own statutes. Five essential
components are identified in the Uniform Vehicle Code's model DWI statute:
emphasis on driving ability, statutory blood alcohol concentration limits,
compulsory chemical testing, significant punishment upon conviction, and
administrative license suspension.
While substances affect different individuals in differing degrees, laws
should emphasize the impairment of the driver—not the type, legal or illegal,
or even the amount of the substance ingested. The effects of alcohol
consumption are well known. Although they vary with the individuals consuming
it, all persons are thought to be impaired by alcohol when its concentration
in the blood (BAC) reaches 0.08 percent. Statutes should provide that
presumptive evidence, per se, exists to suggest that a driver's ability to
operate a motor vehicle is impaired when his BAC exceeds 0.08 percent.
The law should require all drivers to submit to a chemical test, or tests,
at the option of the arresting officer, to determine the level of alcohol
and/or drugs in their blood, as a condition of holding a driver's license.
Consent to a chemical test should also be implied when a driver is
incapacitated or killed while driving a motor vehicle.
In order to deter impaired driving, the penalty must be sufficient to
outweigh the relatively low risk of apprehension. This punish-ment should
include a substantial fine, imprisonment for repeat offenders, and a lengthy
license revocation with no provision for “drive to work” licenses or similar
provisions that water down the effect of the license revocation. Research by
social scientists has indicated that license revocation is the most effective
deterrent to drunken driving.
In addition to motor vehicle license revocations through the court system,
the process can be speeded up through an administrative license revocation
(ALR) law where the police officer is empow-ered to seize the license of any
person who refuses to submit to a chemical test or who tests above the legal
limit. The person is issued a temporary license valid for not more than 30
days. The motor vehicle licensing agency holds an administrative hearing and
imposes a license revocation if it finds by a preponderance of the evidence
that the person was driving with a BAC in excess of the legal limit or refused
to submit to a chemical test. Many ALR statutes also provide for license
revocation for any person under the age of 21 driving with any measurable or
detectable amount of alcohol, which the Uniform Motor Vehicle Code defines as
a BAC of 0.02 or greater. Other organizations and authorities recommend the
more literal definition of 0.00, because the drinking age is now 21 years in
nearly all states, and this age group largely represents novice drivers.
Alcohol and the Commercial Driver
The National Transportation Safety Board studied alcohol and drug
involvement in heavy truck accidents in which the drivers were killed; 33
percent of the victims tested positive for drug abuse. These drivers had
consumed alcohol, marijuana, cocaine, over-the-counter stimulants, opiates,
PCP, or a combination. In addition to DWI, the study indicated that these
drivers were also more likely to violate other laws. They were more likely to
have prior alcohol or drug histories, were more likely to violate federal
hours of service regulations, and more likely to drive with suspended or
revoked licenses. The U.S. Department of Transportation responded to the
dangers posed by DWI in commercial vehicles through changes in the uniform
Commercial Driver License (CDL) requirements in Title 49 of the Code of
Federal Regulations. 49 CFR prohibits commer-cial operation with a BAC of 0.04
or greater. Regulations prohibit driving within four hours of consumption of
any alcoholic beverage. DOT has instituted a mandatory drug testing program
among motor carriers, who are required to randomly drug test 50 percent of the
average number of interstate operators each year. All 50 states have
incorporated the federal regulations into their state motor vehicle laws,
thereby making them enforceable by authorized law enforcement officials at the
state level.
Specialized DWI Enforcement Strategies
Enhanced DWI patrol is a general term for a variety of strategies and
techniques that dedicate manpower for DWI enforcement. This includes roving
DWI patrols and saturation patrols in a targeted geographical patrol area. The
target areas are identified by a high incidence of DWI or DWI accident rates.
Often, saturation patrols are coordinated with several agencies and
jurisdictions to multiply their effectiveness and to share resources. This is
particularly effective where booking procedures can be consolidated, or if a
particular agency possesses specialized equipment such as a Breath Alcohol
Test (BAT) Mobile. BAT Mobiles are motor homes outfitted with breath testing
instruments and serve as mobile police stations. They can be brought to the
scene in rural areas or stationed on-site at sobriety checkpoints.
The sobriety checkpoint is a highly visible enforcement mechanism. All
motorists approaching a designated area of highway are stopped and briefly
investigated for signs of intoxication. Its purpose is to maximize deterrence,
by increasing the risk percep-tion of motorists who drive while impaired by
alcohol or drugs. Evidence suggests that sobriety checkpoints can reduce the
number of alcohol-related accidents.
The legality of these checkpoints has been challenged in the courts on the
grounds they violate the Fourth Amendment prohibition against illegal search
and seizure. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld their constitutionality in 1990 in
the case of Michigan Department of State Police v. Sitz. The Supreme Court
ruled that the Fourth Amendment does not forbid the initial stop and brief
detention, without individualized suspicion, of all motorists passing through
a highway checkpoint established to detect and deter drunk driving, conducted
in conformity with guidelines on operation, site selection, and publicity.
Despite the federal ruling, certain states have since enacted legislation or
interpreted their state constitutions in such a manner as to forbid these
checkpoints.
NHTSA and the IACP Highway Safety Advisory Committee have published
operational guidelines that police administrators should consider in order to
ensure that sobriety checkpoints are legal, effective, and safe. These
guidelines stress that checkpoints should be part of an ongoing program to
deter impaired driving, should have judicial support, and should conform to
department policy. The location should be pre-selected by management based on
statistics, and there should be special warning devices, visible police
authority, chemical testing logistics, contingency planning, effective
detection and investigation techniques, operational brief-ings, comprehensive
public information and public education efforts, and post-incident critiques
based on data collection and evaluation.
Standardized Field Sobriety Testing
The Standardized Field Sobriety Test (SFST) is a battery of three tests
administered and evaluated in a standardized manner to obtain validated
indicators of impairment and establish probable cause for arrest. These tests
were developed as a result of research sponsored by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and conducted by the Southern California
Research Institute. A formal program of training was developed and is
available through NHTSA to help police officers become more skillful at
detecting DWI suspects, describing the behavior of these suspects, and
presenting effective testimony in court. Formal administration and
accreditation of the program is provided through IACP. The three tests of the
SFST are:
These tests are administered systematically and are evaluated according to
measured responses of the suspect.
HGN Testing Divided Attention Testing In the walk-and-turn test, the subject is directed to take nine steps,
heel-to-toe, along a straight line. After taking the steps, the suspect must
turn on one foot and return in the same manner in the opposite direction. The
examiner looks for seven indicators of impairment: if the suspect cannot keep
balance while listening to the instructions, begins before the instructions
are finished, stops while walking to regain balance, does not touch
heel-to-toe, uses arms to balance, loses balance while turning, or takes an
incorrect number of steps. NHTSA research indicates that 68 percent of
individuals who exhibit two or more indicators in the performance of the test
will have a BAC of 0.10 or greater. In the one-leg stand test, the suspect is
instructed to stand with one foot approximately six inches off the ground and
count aloud by thousands (One thousand-one, one thousand-two, etc.) until told
to put the foot down. The officer times the subject for a 30 seconds. The
officer looks for four indicators of impairment, including swaying while
balancing, using arms to balance, hopping to maintain balance, and putting the
foot down. NHTSA research indicates that 65 percent of individuals who exhibit
two or more such indicators in the performance of the test will have a BAC of
0.10 of greater. The effectiveness of SFST in court testimony and evidence
depends upon the cumulative total of impairment indicators provided by the
three-test battery. The greater the number of indicators, the more convincing
the testimony. Because SFST is administered according to national standards
and is supported by significant research, it has greater credibility than mere
subjective testimony.
Alternative Testing Methods
Sometimes, an officer will encounter a disabled driver who cannot perform
the SFST. In such cases, some other battery of tests such as counting aloud,
reciting the alphabet, or finger dexterity tests may be administered. Several
appellate court decisions have indicated that, if you administer a test that
requires the subject to respond orally in other than a routine
information-giving fashion, such as requiring them to indicate the date of
their sixth birthday, and if they are in custody at the time, you should
administer the Miranda warning first, because you are seeking information from
them that is testimonial or communicative in nature.
Roadside Checkpoints
Roadside checkpoints provide law enforcement personnel with a ready means
to monitor and check drivers' licenses, vehicle regis-trations, vehicle
equipment, and the public vehicle identification numbers (PVINs) mounted on
the dashboards of vehicles and readily visible through the windshield. Because
some courts and licensing authorities now issue restricted licenses to
offenders, roadside checks allow officers to monitor compliance with
court-ordered and statutory restrictions. Law enforcement personnel can
contact increased numbers of vehicle operators without first having to make
traffic stops. Roadside checkpoints also enable officers to conduct vehicle
registration inquiries and detect uninspected or unsafe vehicles. A primary
tool used by drug couriers to transport illegal drugs is a vehicle registered
to someone other than the operator, such as a leased vehicle. Vehicle
registration checks often thwart attempts to transport significant quantities
of illegal narcotics and cash. The roadside checkpoint also affords us a means
to quickly review vehicle safety equipment and ensure compliance with special
equipment. An officer can determine compliance with regulations pertaining to
tires, exhaust, safety belts, mirrors, glass, lights, and related equipment.
Vehicles not in compliance can be removed from the roadways or issued
citations or defective equipment repair orders.
Site selection is an important aspect of roadside checkpoints. Sites should
be selected for their ability to provide for the safety of the public and the
police. A safe site requires adequate visibility for approaching motorists,
and ample space to park police and violators' vehicles without blocking
driveways to nearby residences or business establishments. Further examination
of a vehicle may be necessary, and allowing it to remain in the roadway can
constitute a traffic hazard. Sites should also be assessed for daylight and
night operations, taking into consideration the previous factors.
DWI Sobriety Checkpoints
DWI sobriety checkpoints are a special form of roadside safety checks.
While some states have ruled such checkpoints illegal under their state
constitutions, the majority and the U.S. Supreme Court have found checkpoints
to be legal when conducted in a manner minimally intrusive on the rights of
the traveling public.
Site Operations
Generally, roadside sobriety checkpoint locations should be determined by
law enforcement commanders or first-line super-visors, rather than being
selected on an ad hoc basis by the line officers who conduct them. To deter
drinking drivers, advance publicity of a checkpoint is advisable. Warning
signs should also be placed along the highway to notify motorists in advance,
and adequate lighting should enable the motorist to quickly spot the
checkpoint and react. The warning devices on vehicles and reflec-torized
equipment worn by officers should be deployed. Be sure that oncoming motorists
are not blinded by the lights of police cruisers or other stopped vehicles.
Provide ample room and a safe location to pull vehicles over, by officers in
full uniform and readily identifiable. Briefly greet each motorist and explain
the purpose of the stop. After a brief conver-sation and, perhaps, a check of
the driver's license, registration, inspection sticker, and equipment,
determine whether or not the driver appears to be impaired. If not, quickly
wave the motorist on his way. Motorists selected for further investigation on
the basis of articulable suspicion should be pulled off the road in a location
where additional inquiry can be conducted.
If articulable suspicion of DUI exists, a PBT (preliminary breath testing)
device can be employed. Some PBT devices are so sophisticated that they no
longer require the motorist to blow into them, but operate as “sniffers” to
check for the presence of volatile substances when passed in front of the
driver's nose and mouth. If alcohol or controlled substances are detected and
the driver appears impaired, administer a field sobriety test, and place the
driver under arrest, to be transported to a breath testing site, or a
“Batmobile” (a portable breath tester set up in a police van).
When stopping vehicles for roadside checks, devise a system that prohibits
the constitutionally impermissible random stopping of vehicles and complies
with the provisions of the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Delaware v. Prouse.
This case can be complied with by either stopping every vehicle, so that each
driver has an equal chance of being stopped, or by stopping of every tenth or
every twentieth vehicle so that the officer does not exercise individual
discretion in deciding which vehicle is to be stopped, and all cars have an
equal chance of being selected. Compliance with these suggestions will result
in a constitutionally permissible roadside inspection procedure in most
jurisdictions.
Highway Drug Interdiction
Highway drug interdiction is a strategy to intercept the flow of illegal
drugs and related currency during transport along public highways.
Interdiction includes procedures as routine as observing the interiors of
vehicles stopped for traffic violations and as deliberate as developing
psychological profiles of suspects, behav-iors, and vehicles. Federal law
provides for the seizure and civil forfeiture of any assets, including
vehicles connected to illegal drug trafficking.
Operation Pipeline/Convoy
The U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) is the coordi-nating agency
for highway drug interdiction activities. They administer Operation
Pipeline/Convoy, which provides training, accumulates seizure data, and
provides information to interested law enforcement agencies throughout the
United States. Operation Pipeline began in 1983 as a joint effort between the
New Mexico State Police and the New Jersey State Police. The program
continually expanded and now Operation Convoy has been developed to target
tractor-trailer transport of drugs. Operation Pipeline/Convoy encourages a
coordinated response from law enforcement agencies at all levels to deter the
flow of drugs within the continental United States.
The EPIC Data Base
The DEA's El Paso Intelligence Center (EPIC) maintains a data-base called
State Operation Pipeline Seizures (STOPS). It provides 5-1-14 easy access to
information relating to date, location, highway, vehicle, occupants,
destination, concealment methods, and firearms encountered in seizure
incidents. Operation Pipeline reports significant seizures of drugs and
currency to law enforcement agencies through weekly teletype messages. An
intelligence database, Zones of Drug Intelligence Activity (ZODIAC), shares
intelligence information relating to transportation of drugs and related
currency. EPIC is accessible 24 hours a day for database inquiries about
persons or vehicles that have been involved in seizures or arrests.
Training Availability
Operation Pipeline/Convoy provides training to state and local law
enforcement agencies upon request, through dedicated DEA funding. This
training is provided by DEA agents and the U.S. Department of Transportation
at locations provided by the state or local agency. The program also produces
a variety of printed reference materials for law enforcement agencies, and
DEA, DOT, and EPIC annually host a commercial vehicle drug interdiction
networking conference to promote interagency cooperation and share
information. For information regarding any DEA-sponsored program, contact your
nearest DEA office.
Drug Recognition Experts
Often the behavior of suspects is abnormal for alcohol impairment alone, or
field or breath tests indicate that the suspect's BAC is lower than the level
of impairment suggests. Either of these observations is common when
encountering poly-drug users. Most jurisdictions have laws that prohibit DWI
by alcohol, drugs, or a combination.
Drug recognition experts (DREs) are officers who have been specifically
trained to recognize the effects of drug impairment. The DRE examines such
suspects and makes trained observations to determine whether to request a
blood or urine test, and to guide the laboratory technician toward general
categories of drugs to look for in analysis of the sample. The DRE's
examination also provides evidence of observable drug effects to help confirm
the lab analysis. Recognizing Drug “Signatures”.
DREs are trained to recognize distinguishable “signatures” of certain
categories of drugs, identified through five observations by the DRE: vital
signs (pulse, temperature, and blood pressure); psychophysical responses
(coordination of mind and body); signs of administration of drugs (such as
injection sites); eye responses (horizontal and vertical gaze nystagmus, eye
convergence, and pupil size under varying light intensities); and physical and
behavioral characteristics (such as muscle rigidity or flaccidity,
hyperactivity).
A DREs observations cannot substitute for the chemical test or lab
analysis. Only such analysis by qualified forensic chemists can accurately
identify or quantify a particular drug. This analysis is an important step in
the acquisition of gathering evidence in drug-related cases.
History of the DRE Concept
The DRE concept was designed and tested by members of the Los Angeles
Police Department in the 1970s, and has been practiced in that department and
many others since 1982. Reliability and validity studies were conducted by the
Johns Hopkins University Medical Center. The DRE techniques have been
recognized by NHTSA since 1984, and the IACP Highway Safety Advisory Committee
developed and has administered national standards for training and
certification of DREs since 1989. At this writing, more than 3,000 trained
DREs work in more than 100 programs in nearly half the states.
NHTSA Prerequisites
NHTSA has individual, departmental, and jurisdictional prerequi-sites for
training of DREs. The trainees should already be proficient in using
standardized field sobriety testing techniques and should demonstrate a
commitment to DWI and drug enforce-ment. The sponsoring agency should make an
ongoing commit-ment to deterring impaired driving and provide the command
support to allow the DRE to function at maximum effectiveness. Finally, the
jurisdiction where the DRE will operate must have a legal and political
framework consistent with effective enforcement of drug-impaired driving
violations.
NHTSA has also established specific prerequisites as part of its DRE
training curriculum. The student must be employed or under the direct control
of a public criminal justice agency or an institution involved in providing
training services to officers of law enforcement agencies. He must achieve the
learning objectives of a two-day pre-school, demonstrate proficiency in the
use of the SFST, possess good communication skills or a demonstrated ability
to testify in court, and be willing to serve as a DRE upon completion of the
training. The department must have an active drug enforcement and DWI
enforcement program; be proactive in training officers in SFST consistent with
IACP guidelines; maintain records of individual officers' SFST activities;
have access to adequate chemical testing resources, adequate facilities, and
equipment to support the drug evaluation and classification examinations;
maintain a management information system capable of accurately tracking
alcohol and drug enforcement activities; and have the firm support and
commitment of the chief law enforcement officer and other appropriate
officials.
The state or community must have laws that permit analyses of chemical
samples obtained from persons suspected of impaired driving; allow the
arresting officer to specify the type of test or tests to be given to
suspected impaired drivers (blood, breath, or urine); and specifically provide
testing for drugs other than alcohol. Local prosecutors must demonstrate a
willingness to intro-duce SFST evidence in DWI cases and to participate in the
training to become familiar with drug evaluation and classification
procedures. Local judges must demonstrate willingness to accept SFST evidence
in court and to consider DRE evidence in alcohol and drug cases. Finally, the
political leadership of the jurisdiction should express support for the DRE
program.
DRE Training and Certification Process
Once the prerequisites have been met, DRE training is a three-step process.
Phase I is a two-day orientation to the techniques and procedures for
evaluating drug-impaired suspects. Phase II is seven days of instruction in
drug evaluation, physiology, effects of drugs, and legal considerations. At
its conclusion, students are required to pass a written exam. Phase III
consists of supervised field training and working with actual drug-impaired
suspects. After a student has competently performed a minimum of 12 suspect
evaluations identifying three of the seven different drug categories, he must
complete a comprehensive written examination before obtaining IACP
certification. Certified DREs must renew their certification every two years.
Recertification requires each DRE to perform a minimum of four acceptable
evaluations since the date of the last certification, successfully complete
eight hours of IACP-approved recertification training, and submit updated
documentation of DRE activity. A DRE will be decertified if he fails to
maintain standards and certification requirements, or demonstrates substantial
unethical or unprofessional behavior.
DWI Breath Testing Instruments
NHTSA annually publishes a list of breath testing instruments rigorously
examined for accuracy and approved by NHTSA for their ability to accurately
determine breath alcohol concentration, and thus blood alcohol concentration.
The department of health or other appropriate agency in each state reviews the
NHTSA list and test results, and issues a list of devices approved for use by
law enforcement agencies in that particular state.
Captured Samples
Exhaled air can be categorized into essentially three types of samples:
tidal breath air, reserve breath air, and alveolar breath air. Tidal breath
air is air exhaled in the course of normal breath-ing. It is the most shallow
of the three types. Reserve breath air is exhaled when the body is exerted. It
is produced through deeper breathing than tidal breath air, but great volumes
of air are both inhaled and exhaled with little residence in the lung.
Alveolar breath air is deep lung air. Since breath testing instruments are
intended to measure indirectly the concentration of alcohol in the blood, it
is essential for accuracy that the breath sample captured by the instrument
for analysis be representative of the air in the alveoli of the lung, because
it is in the alveoli that the 2100:1 equilibrium ratio between alcohol in the
breath and alcohol in the blood occurs.
Infrared Instruments
Infrared breath measuring instruments operate on the principle that each
chemical compound has unique infrared energy absorption characteristics. Ethyl
alcohol absorbs energy in the 3.42 micron region of the infrared spectrum. The
amount of alcohol contained in a sample can be calculated by observing energy
loss when a known energy is applied to the sample. In the infrared devices,
infrared energy is projected through a breath sample. A photo-detector
identifies a decrease in wave amplitude caused by the absorption of energy by
the alcohol. The amount of energy absorbed is equal to the breath alcohol
concentration. The greater the alcohol concentration, the lower the wave
amplitude. A computer on the instrument determines the breath alcohol content
based upon the amount of energy loss, and then applies the 2100:1 conversion
ratio to provide a digital readout of the suspect's blood alcohol content.
Because infrared instruments are based upon infrared absorption spectra,
which are chemically unique, they cannot be influenced by compound such as
acetone, which may have some chemical characteristics in common with ethyl
alcohol. In fact, some infrared instruments also provide data on the
concentrations of other compounds contained in the breath sample as well as
that of alcohol.
Wet Chemical Instruments
When infrared instruments are not used, law enforcement generally uses wet
chemical instruments, which operate on the basis of color changes produced
through the chemical reaction of ethyl alcohol with chromate salts. These
devices obtain a measured volume of alveolar breath and pass that sample
through a known volume and concentration of a solution of chromate salt and
acid. Chromate salt is yellow. As it reacts with the alcohol in the breath
sample, it is chemically altered, resulting in a lighter color. The higher the
alcohol concentration, the greater the color change.
A wet chemical instrument measures the difference between the light
transmittance of a standard chromate\acid solution and the light transmittance
of a sample solution. The difference in transmittance measured is directly
proportional to the amount of alcohol in the breath sample.
Preliminary Breath Testing Instruments
PBT instruments are portable instruments for the purpose of BAC screening
as part of the pre-arrest field testing. The suspect driver blows for several
seconds through a plastic or glass tube, and the PBT provides an instantaneous
determination of blood alcohol content.
In most jurisdictions, the legal basis for the use of these instruments is
contained in the implied consent laws. While results of a PBT generally are
not admissible as evidence of DWI, they do provide officers with additional
objective information to establish probable cause for arrest and further
chemical testing. They also help to detect persons who may be suffering from
an illness or injury such as diabetes or head injury and are in need of
chemical treatment, but would otherwise be mistaken for an intoxicated person.
There are essentially three types of PBTs: electro-chemical, semi-conductor,
and disposable chemical.
In electro-chemical PBTs, alcohol in the breath is absorbed into a fuel
cell where it is oxidized, producing electrical current. The higher the
alcohol content of the breath, the greater the current output of the fuel
cell. By measuring the current produced, the instrument determines the breath
alcohol content, and the BAC conversion is displayed with the aid of a
computer chip. In semi-conductor PBTs, alcohol increases the electrical output
of the semi-conductor. By measuring the voltage output, the breath alcohol
content can be determined and the BAC conversion is displayed.
Disposable chemical PBTs are glass or plastic tubes containing a measured
amount of the chemical, which is reactive with alcohol. As the suspect exhales
through the tube, alcohol contained in the breath reacts with the chemical
contained within. The greater the breath alcohol content, the greater the
chemical reaction observed.
Non-Invasive or Passive Alcohol Sensors
Passive alcohol sensors (PAS) are instruments that detect the presence of
alcohol in normally expelled breath. They require no cooperation from the
driver. During the roadside interview of the driver and examination of
documents, the officer places the PAS within six inches of the driver's mouth.
It contains a small fan which samples the ambient air for examination. An
electro-chemical mechanism analyzes the air for the presence of alcohol. Some
instruments are concealed within a flashlight and can be used as a passive or
active detector. NHTSA studies indicate these devices are effective during
sobriety checkpoints when the decision whether or not to continue breath
testing must be made quickly.
Speed Enforcement Programs
When police administrators decide to initiate a speed enforcement program,
they must be willing to take a comprehensive look at the community or patrol
area, including its accident data, arrest statistics, criminal activity,
demographics, and geography. They should also listen to the opinions of rank
and file police officers, traffic safety experts and community leaders, and
hold frank discussions with judges, prosecutors, and those who could fund such
a program. Long regarded as a factor contributing to collisions, speed can
take two forms: exceeding the posted speed and going faster than conditions,
such as heavy traffic or poor weather, permit. Speeding has been found to be
directly related to the severity of vehicle crashes. As speed increases, the
potential for injury also increases. The speeder has less time to react to a
hazard since his vehicle is covering more distance than it would at a slower
speed. Speed also increases total stopping distance.
Higher speeds also contribute to the severity of crashes. There is a
greater chance of death and disabling injuries when speed increases. The
National Severity Crash Study did an intensive investigation of crashes from
1977 to 1979 and found that a possibility of a fatality increases dramatically
as the speed of the vehicle increases. The study showed that a driver with a
change of speed going 50 m.p.h. was twice as likely to be killed as one with a
change in speed going 40 m.p.h.
Planning the Enforcement Program
In order to plan an enforcement program, a problem must be identified—if a
problem does not exist, there is no need for a program. Once the problem is
identified, specific goals and objectives must be established. Basing a
program on revenue enhancement should be resisted at all costs. This approach
is doomed before it starts. Eager financial analysts may quickly see the
potential for revenue to feed some government body, but that is not the
fundamental basis for any speed enforcement program.
A formal written agency policy should be adopted for speed enforcement
programs, and every aspect of it should fit the program. An important part of
any program is to have the public share the commitment to the policy. Further,
a policy without the organization's commitment to carry it out is a paper
tiger and will not accomplish any of its stated goals.
The policy should address the necessary training for implementa-tion and
also should also include a section on evaluation. Over time, this policy will
need to be further defined and changed. If no formal evaluation mechanism
exists, you will have no way to argue the success of the program or defend it
against its critics.
Role of Traffic Records Systems
Any speed enforcement program must be supported by a traffic records system
to provide a variety of statistical measures concerning speed enforcement. The
speed enforcement program will be just one component of that system, which
should be a data-driven comprehensive system for all traffic records. The
primary component of a traffic records system is a detailed crash history.
Before beginning any enforcement program, a study should be performed to
determine where, and why crashes are occurring. This information can often be
obtained from the state Department of Transportation or by review and
tabulation of crash reports submitted by officers. Once a determination has
been made as to the worst locations and the primary causes of crashes,
commanders can formulate plans for enforcement efforts.
A study of speed variance should be done on selected roadways in order to
see if a speed enforcement program is needed and, if so, on exactly which
roadways. Speed variance is the distribution of all speeds on a roadway
compared to its average speed; the larger the variance between the speeds of
vehicles using the roadway, the greater potential for collisions. As speed
increases above the average speed, there is a greater likelihood of a crash.
Another aspect in deciding the necessity of a speed enforcement program is to
compare the actual speeds to the posted speed limits. The reaction time to a
hazard is approximately three-fourths of a second; when the speed limit is
exceeded, the potential for a crash increases because a vehicle will approach
a hazard much more quickly than if the speed limit is obeyed.
Speed limits take into account a variety of factors such as geogra-phy,
roadway design, general safety, and the type of area such as school zones.
When these speed limits are compromised, then the factors which helped justify
the limits are compromised as well.
Benefits of A Program
A speed enforcement program can do more for a police department than just
controlling speeding and reducing collisions. Speed enforcement provides
probable cause to stop a vehicle. Once stopped, the occupants can be asked a
number of questions and further investigation can be conducted. Criminal
charges can result from vehicle stops that started with speeding: possession
of stolen property, unlawful flight, possession of stolen vehicles or illegal
drugs, illegal immigration, and other traffic charges such as DUI and driving
after suspension.
Public Information Aspects
Some of the problems associated with a speed enforcement program can be
reduced, although never eliminated, if a careful and deliberate public
information and education campaign is initiated before the program begins.
Contacting the media is only one way this can be accomplished. Driver
education classes and opportunities for public speaking are other ways.
Publicizing the training that the officers receive will also emphasize the
program. Mall displays and public events are additional ways to acquaint the
public with the program.
A police administrator should be prepared for negative feedback on a speed
enforcement program. There are always those who will quickly criticize a
program or bring up some scandal involving a police department and speed
enforcement. Realizing this fact, the police administrator must continue to
relate the program to concise goals.
Internal Problems
In addition to objections from the public, police officers themselves may
resist a speed enforcement program. Some officers will call speed enforcement
“robot work” and not relate their individual efforts to the total law
enforcement mission. These problems will be difficult to address.
Avoid setting quotas. Rotate personnel frequently. Officers can schedule
speed enforcement for limited hours in a day to reduce monotony. Another
method is to combine a speed enforcement program with a DUI enforcement
program. The speed enforcement program can be put in place during times when
drunk driving is likely to occur. This combination of programs will be varied
and receive greater support.
Cost Considerations
The cost of setting up a speed enforcement program can vary from a few
hundred dollars to tens of thousands of dollars, depending on the complexity
and extent of a program. An initial consideration is the type of detection
devices that will be used to detect speeders. In addition to the many choices
and manufacturers of units, discounts are also available for large purchases.
Often police departments can collaborate on equipment bids to get the best
price.
The equipment will need technical service. If a police department does not
have staff to do this, the costs must be budgeted. Most of the administrative
costs of the program can be absorbed into the existing staff. If your
department has a weak data support system, this shortcoming will also need to
be addressed in cost considerations. Finally, a department having difficulty
implementing a speed enforcement program because staffing may have to budget
for overtime.
Expect additional court expenses when a speed enforcement program is
implemented. These are difficult to estimate; however, good training should
limit the number of challenged cases.
Speed Enforcement Grants
A police department can offset some costs for speed enforcement programs by
applying for and receiving federal funds. In 1966, the Highway Safety Act was
established under Title 23 of the U.S. Code, thereby making funds available to
each governor's highway safety representative to assist states and localities
in organizing their highway safety programs. Section 402 funds are available
for speed enforcement programs. Currently, eight areas are targeted for safety
programs. These programs often need matching funds and must meet criteria
established by NHTSA.
Two other federal sources of funds, Section 408 and Section 410, assist
alcohol traffic safety programs. As with the 402 programs, these programs also
have specific criteria that must be met to qualify for the funds.
The National Maximum Speed Limit
In 1974, the 55-mph national maximum speed limit was initiated throughout
the country by the U.S. Congress as a temporary conservation measure in
response to the oil embargo by certain oil-producing countries. Initially,
traffic fatalities were dramatically reduced; in 1975 the 55 mph speed limit
was made permanent. To qualify for federal-aid highway projects, states had to
certify that they were enforcing the 55-mph speed limit.
In 1978, Congress amended the law to require states to achieve certain
levels of compliance or risk losing up to 10 percent of their federal highway
construction funds. Originally, this compliance limit was set at 70 percent,
but was later reduced to 50 percent in 1982. The legislation required each
state to set up a monitoring program for checking compliance.
In 1987, Congress amended all the 55 mph legislation to allow states to
raise the limits to 65 mph on some interstate highways and some rural
non-interstate highways.
ISTEA Legislation
In 1991, the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA)
allowed the 65 mph areas to become permanent, provided that certain criteria
were met. In addition, a formula was developed for states to determine their
compliance with the 55 mph areas. This formula included not only weighted
speed violations, but information on fatalities and serious injuries occurring
on these Nationally Monitored Speed Limit Roadways (NMSL). This legislation
also gave the Department of Transportation's secretary the authority to
include other appropriate factors in the formula. ISTEA also mandated that
data be collected on a scientifically random basis and that this collection
take into account the risk of motor vehicle accidents and the different
classes of highways. States have to submit quarterly reports on surveyed
speeds, including median speed, average speed, the 85th percentile speed, and
the vehicle miles traveled on each type of 55 mph roadway.
A word about 85th percentile speed is in order. Traffic studies have shown
that speed on a roadway resembles a bell-shaped curve. The standard deviation
can be determined by the difference between the average speed and the 85th
percentile speed. The difference contains 35 percent of the distribution. This
information is used in determining the maximum allowable amount of
noncompliance in the different highway categories: NMSL Road Category 5 mph 10
mph 15 mph 55 mph Freeways 43% 19% 5% 65 mph Freeways 19% 5% 1% 55 mph
Non-freeways 27% 9% 2%
The states are then classified into four types and given maximum allowable
scores:
Maximum Allowable Scores
These scores are the result of the compliance formula. An adjustment is
allowed for speedometer variability, sampling vari-ability, and equipment
error.
Beginning in FY '94, states not complying with the formula were subject to
the transfer of funds as a penalty for non-compliance. Each state is required
to have a speed monitoring plan in accord-ance with the Speed Monitoring
Program Procedural Manual. This plan requires each state to have a number of
speed monitoring stations. Non-compliance is penalized by a transfer of
federal highway aid funds from highway construction projects to Section 402
funds (highway safety projects). This transfer will be 1.5 percent of the
funds apportioned to the state, and these funds must be used for safety
programs with an emphasis on speed enforce-ment. However, if a state's
fatality rate is 20 percent below the national fatality rate, this factor can
be used by the secretary to reduce the amount of transferred funds.
The IACP Position
This legislation has been the subject of debate between the states and the
federal government. The IACP and others have taken positions in opposition to
this legislation. The IACP feels that in some instances the NMSL has diverted
enforcement resources from other roads with higher death tolls and from even
greater traffic safety hazards such as the drunken driver. The IACP officially
favors a reasonable national maximum speed based on actual hazards, and favors
incentive payments to states that exceed the minimum requirements, rather than
the penalty transfer approach.
Another criticism has been that the 55 mph urban interstate limits are
unrealistic in some locations because they depend on population figures rather
than on road and traffic hazards. Various studies seeking to prove that the 55
mph limit has had a long-term positive effect on highway safety have come up
with mixed results. Given the present federal law, however, more than local
considerations are at stake whenever a police administrator considers a speed
enforcement program, because a state has much to lose by not complying with
the federal law and regulations. The administrator, therefore, must always
implement speed enforcement programs with an eye to these federal mandates.
Speed Measurement Devices
Four primary speed measurement devices are currently used by police
departments: speedometer clocks, radar, average speed computers, and LIDAR
(LIght Detection and Ranging). Two additional types used to a lesser extent
are aircraft and photo radar. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages.
Speedometer Clocks
Although often neglected in today's age of technology, speed-ometer clocks
are the least expensive method of clocking speeders and can be extremely
effective. Radar and LIDAR detectors are useless against an officer who is
proficient in speedometer clocking.
The patrol car speedometer is used to pace vehicles. The most important
component of this method is an accurate speedometer that is certified by the
factory. A speedometer can be calibrated several ways: fifth wheel attached to
the rear of the vehicle; using a stopwatch that has been certified to clock
the patrol car over a measured course; or using a dynamometer, which allows
the patrol vehicle wheels to rotate in place while the speedometer is checked
against the device for discrepancy (probably the best method and also the most
expensive).
The advantage to the dynamometer method is that it can be combined with
maintenance procedures so the patrol officer does not have to certify the
speedometer while on patrol. Using the dynamometer also allows more
administrative control.
Radar
An acronym for “Radio Detection And Ranging,” radar involves the
transmission of electromagnetic waves that reflect off a moving object. When
the wave is reflected, it changes frequency and is interpreted by the radar
unit in a speed calculation. This change is referred to as the Doppler effect
or Doppler shift. Radar is used in a stationary or moving mode.
Although this is the most popular technology for speed enforcement, using
radar has been extensively litigated throughout the country. Recently, police
officers and others have raised health issues concerning the risk of cancer
from using these devices. All recent evidence indicates these claims are
groundless, but litigation is still pending. Since most cancer studies involve
longitudinal research, 20 or more years may pass before scientists lay this
issue to rest.
Average Speed Computers
Mounted in the patrol car, an average speed computer is a device that uses
a programmed computer to measure speed by dividing the distance traveled by
the time it took to travel the distance. Whereas radar and LIDAR devices are
primarily used to measure maximum speed, average speed computers measure
average speed over a specified distance. Average speed computers can be used
in both a moving and stationary mode. Since it does not use electro-magnetic
waves, it is undetectable by radar detectors. The most common brand of this
technology is VASCAR. reg.
LIDAR
Laser or LIDAR (Light Detection And Ranging) has recently been adapted for
law enforcement use in speed measurement. LIDAR devices use an infrared light
wave emitted at frequencies that allow the beam to be focused into an
extremely narrow target area. The devices are usually used in the hand-held
mode. They can be used through the glass with reduced range; therefore, an
open window or exterior use is preferred.
LIDAR has become more popular with the proliferation of radar detectors.
Detection of laser beams is possible but the benefit of devices that detect
the laser beam is limited. This is due to the fact that when the device
intercepts the laser beam, this corresponds to the clocking of the vehicle
with the LIDAR device. In addition, most of these LIDAR devices are mounted
inside the vehicle, a location which reduces their ability to detect the laser
beam. The theory behind laser technology is that speed is calculated by
dividing the distance by the time of the light pulses of the laser ( S=D/T of
light pulses).
Aircraft
This method of speed enforcement uses the combination of ground-based units
and a fixed wing airplane. A measured course is identified by painted lines on
the pavement. This method of enforcement is based on the formula Speed =
Distance/Time. As vehicles travel on the measured course, a stopwatch is
activated in the airplane. Once the course is completed, the speed is
calculated and, if the vehicle was speeding, the description is broadcast to
the ground units. The vehicle is pulled over and the vehicle and speed are
verified. The aircraft, typically the high-wing design that allows an
unobstructed view of the ground, can also be used for marijuana eradication
activities, emergency transport, traffic monitoring, surveillance, and other
law enforcement programs.
Photo Radar
A extension of regular radar, this technology uses photography to capture
the vehicle and license plate when the violation occurs. The date, time, and
speed can be superimposed onto the photograph. Some can also capture the image
of the operator in the picture. Photo radar can be used in manned or unmanned
applications. It is usually used in jurisdictions where specific legislation
permits its use and where vehicles have both front and rear plates.
Drone Radar
This method uses an unmanned radar station to trigger motorists' radar
detectors. The theory is that when the detector alarms sound, the drivers will
slow their vehicles down because they will not know where the police officer
is. These units can be mounted in moving vehicles, concealed in highway signs,
or installed in highway work vehicles and many other locations. The FCC and
NHTSA have regulations that must be met in order to use this method of speed
enforcement. Overuse of this method will reduce its effectiveness.
Testing Programs for Speed Measurement Devices
Each manufacturer of a speed measurement device has a method of certifying
their units. All the manufacturers' guidelines should be followed. In
addition, a technician, either employed or retained by a police department,
should certify the units at least annually because most new devices come with
a one-year certification from the factory. An annual check will help in
quality assurance of the devices. There may also be legislative requirements
in different jurisdictions which should be followed. A judicial ruling may
create a certification schedule in a given jurisdiction as well.
The IACP also has a testing program using regional testing laboratories
located in; Warrensburg, Missouri; Davis, California; East Lansing, Michigan;
and Jacksonville, Florida. This program was set up in the late 1970s after
police radar had been in existence for several years. NHTSA and the LESL (Law
Enforcement Standards Laboratory), a division of the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST), entered into a cooperative agreement to
develop performance and safety standards. In 1982, the IACP began to publish
the results of this testing. Most of the manufacturers of radar units submit
units for testing and their products are listed on IACP's Consumer Products
List (CPL).
To be listed on the CPL, a manufacturer submits its new units or prototypes
to a testing laboratory. When the model passes, 200 production units must then
be submitted for Critical Performance Testing (CPT), at the manufacturer's
expense, before any units are sent to the field for actual enforcement use. In
addition, three times a year, four units off the shelf are tested at the
manufacturer's expense. If the testing reveals that insufficient units are
passing, more units will be tested. If the failure rate is too high, then the
units are recalled by the manufacturer and removed from the CPL.
If police departments do not have technicians available to test in-service
units, the IACP radar testing program can provide this service at a minimal
expense.
Safety Precautions
Department policies should specify certain safety procedures to be followed
when operating police traffic radar. The antenna should be pointed away from
the officer, and the unit turned off when not in use. A hand-held unit should
not be placed between the legs when transmitting, or in any other location
close to the body. However, the testing process to qualify for the CPL has
shown that the typical police traffic radar unit emits less radiation than
cellular telephones or hand-held portable radios. Some police departments have
gone the extra step to mount the radar antenna outside the patrol car to avoid
excessive exposure to microwave radiation bouncing off objects in the
vehicle's interior. This method is even more popular as today's police
vehicles come equipped with driver and passenger-side air bags, thus limiting
the amount of equipment that can be mounted on the dashboard.
The recent use of LIDAR or laser devices is being studied by IACP and NIST,
with certification standards due as of this writing. The Michigan Speed Task
Force has developed standards for the use of laser in its state and maintains
a list of approved units. A Class 1 unit is recommended for safety and has the
lowest classification of risk. Since a laser unit emits light waves, a eye
safety issue has been raised. The Class 1 designation should make the unit
safe for the eyes, but certain precautions are in order. Officers should not
look directly into the aperture of the devices at a distance of closer than
eight inches for an extended period of time. Precautions such as this should
be discussed thoroughly during training.
A police department should keep both maintenance and calibration records
for all units. These files should be kept for the life of the unit.
Speed Enforcement Policy
Every police department utilizing a speed enforcement program needs written
policies and formal training guidelines. The policy should contain a statement
identifying at what levels discretionary mandatory enforcement will take
place. In some departments less a certain number of miles per hour over the
posted limit is allowed discretionary enforcement and any speed over this
amount requires a mandatory ticket. If you set such a requirement as this,
recognize that not all motorists have accurate speedometers, and the tolerance
should allow for at least normal speedometer error. Some departments allow
their officers to issue warnings at differing speeds depending on time of day
and road, traffic and weather conditions. Still other departments determine
the 85th percentile speed—that is, the speed at which 85 percent or greater of
all traffic is traveling below, and set a tolerance for each roadway depending
on that figure. All policies should include a monitoring function to ensure
compliance.
A policy should include the following areas:
There also should be tickler files for the recertification of radar and
LIDAR units and formal maintenance procedures.
Officer Training
The initial officer training can be conducted by the manufacturer of the
unit to qualify officers as instructors. If a new mode or unit is being used,
the manufacturer should agree to be available for court testimony in order to
obtain case law on the unit as a valid measure of speed detection. In addition
to manufacturers' guidelines, police departments should supplement this with
their own training. NHTSA publishes a textbook entitled Basic Training Program
In Radar Speed Measurement for both instructors and trainees. Other
publications are also available to assist with instruction. It is important
not only that the device is appropriate for speed enforcement, but that
officers are qualified to use the units properly.
Purchase Guidelines
Purchasing guidelines for speed detection devices must take price,
reputation, and service into account. Government purchasing and bid laws will
also influence the purchase. All units purchased should be on the IACP
Consumer Products List. Individual needs also must be taken into account. One
department may want a padded radar dashboard unit because of safety
considerations, while another might want the unit with the top painted white
to reflect heat. Each of these concerns needs to be negotiated with the
company representative.
You may also wish to contact other police departments in the area to find
out what units they are using and to determine if a larger purchase will
affect the price. Mounting considerations in the new police vehicles may also
dictate the type of unit that can be purchased. A department should try to
obtain a unit or two for a trial basis so that line officers can comment on
the units that they prefer.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Different Speed Enforcement Devices
Speedometer. Radar. LIDAR. Average Speed Computers. The disadvantage of the average speed computer is that it is permanently
mounted in the patrol car. Reaction time by the operator could affect the
determination of speed, although proper training can resolve this problem. If
any error occurs in the operation of the unit, it should be to the benefit of
the offender. Since some jurisdictions use fixed sites, roadways may need to
be marked by the highway department.
Aircraft enforcement uses the same basic formula that average speed
computers use, but the measurement is usually accomplished by a certified
stopwatch or a computer. The main advantage to this method is that it is very
difficult to detect. Research by the Maine State Police has indicated that the
actual productivity of combined ground/air enforcement exceeds those of ground
enforcement units alone, and that aircraft enforcement is actually a very
efficient means of apprehending violators. In addition to the extra manpower
required on the ground, aircraft enforcement has other disadvantages. The
roadways must be marked and the area must also be free of any obstructions so
as not to interfere with the identification of any suspected violator.
A police department will probably not purchase an aircraft solely for the
purpose of apprehending speeders. The initial cost to pur-chase and then
maintain an aircraft are expensive—one of the main disadvantages of using
aircraft. More likely, traffic enforcement is one of many duties for which an
aircraft will be used. Traffic enforcement is only one facet of the total
mission for an aircraft.
Finally, this method requires additional officers for court testimony. Some
agencies will attempt to limit the necessity to have aircraft crews testify in
court by having officers from the ground accompany the pilot so they can
testify when the case comes to court.
Photo Radar.
Collision Investigation
Too often today, police agencies fail to investigate traffic collisions
because of a lack of personnel and a shift in priorities. When this happens,
we fail to “protect and serve” as we should.
Purposes of Investigating and Reporting Collisions
Ideally, a collision should be both investigated and reported. Police
administrators must be mindful of the purposes of investigating and reporting.
The ultimate purpose is to make our roads and highways safe. More immediate
purposes are to combat criminal activity, promote safety, and ensure just
results in civil litigation.
Detecting At-Fault Drivers
Although investigation frequently reveals who is primarily responsible for
the collision, sometimes technical reconstruction is required. The at-fault
driver can be charged with the violation(s) that caused the crash and, if
convict-ed, can be punished or given remedial driver training. If the number
of previous violations is sufficient for suspension of the driver's license,
the individual can be taken off the road. If every collision is not
investigated as a matter of policy, many individuals who should be charged
will slip by and may become involved in other, possibly fatal, crashes.
Detecting Incompetent Drivers
A crash may be caused by a driver's physical or mental deterioration
through illness or age. The investigator can request retesting to determine if
that individual can still drive safely, if restrictions should be imposed on
him, or if his driving privilege should be suspended or revoked. In the
absence of an investigation, such a driver would continue to be a highway
menace.
Apprehending Criminals
Finally, the crash vehicle may be stolen or being used for an unlawful
purpose—transporting drugs or even abducting a kidnap victim. If the crash is
not investigated, the stolen vehicle or contraband might never be recovered
nor the abducted person rescued. The driver may be evading arrest or
recapture. If injured in the crash, the driver may be unable to flee and can
be apprehended by the officer arriving at the scene. Without an investigation,
these criminal acts might not be discovered and penalized, thereby causing the
deterrent value of our laws to be eroded and making enforcement more
difficult.
Motor Vehicle Homicides
Vehicles have been used to cover up or carry out a homicide. A body lying
on the road and showing signs of having been run over by a vehicle may look
like an ordinary hit-and-run, when actually the victim was murdered earlier in
some other location by some other means. A driver found at the bottom of a
gorge pinned behind the steering wheel may appear to have fallen asleep and
driven off the roadway, whereas he was really bludgeoned unconscious, buckled
loosely into place behind the wheel, the accelerator pedal jammed in open
throttle position and the selector lever pulled into DRIVE to send the vehicle
over the brink. To the unpracticed eye, the injuries from the beating might be
mistaken for those received from the impact of the vehicle with the bottom of
the gorge. The victim's death may have resulted not from the previous blows
but from internal injuries at impact. Unless such so-called “accidents” are
thoroughly and critically investigated, sometimes with the help of a forensic
pathologist, the foul play might not be discovered, and the perpetrators might
get away with their crime.
Uninsured and Unlicensed Drivers
The above purposes of collision investigation are the most familiar to the
public. Such cases are highlighted regularly on television and in the
newspapers. Yet, other purposes that may not receive any publicity are
essential to traffic enforcement and contribute toward making our roads safer.
An investigation may reveal that the driver has no liability insurance
coverage or a valid license. A victim suffering property loss, injury, or
death of a family member may find it costly, difficult, or impossible to
receive compensation, without the findings of a collision investigation.
Defective Equipment
Equipment problems also cause collisions. The crash vehicle may be
uninspected and have a leaky exhaust system or worn brake linings or pads. It
may not meet the design and equipment standards mandated by law. This is
especially important for heavy commercial vehicles, whose greater size and
weight make them especially formidable in a crash; or for a taxi or bus, whose
deficiencies can expose many riders to injuries or even death. Without an
investigation, such vehicles might not be taken off the road.
Vehicle Design Defects
Investigations may uncover problems in the design of the vehicle or
equipment. It may be prone to roll overs, have its fuel tank located where it
is particularly vulnerable, or come equipped with tires susceptible to failure
when underinflated. With no policy requiring the investigation of every
collision, such findings might never come to light or be recorded; inherently
dangerous designs would never be corrected. When the reports and the
statistics do not support the charges, a record of the investigations of all
crashes gives manufacturers a means to defend against wrongful accusations of
faulty product design.
Roadway Defects
An investigation can reveal problems with the roadway design or conditions,
or with traffic control devices. Such problems may have contributed to similar
accidents in the past and continue, unless reported to the Department of
Transportation. How many times have drivers skidded off a wet pavement while
negotiating an incorrectly banked curve, or sideswiped a car when attempting a
last-second lane change on a highway with confusing or awkwardly placed turn
arrows, or an exit sign hidden by an overgrown shrub? Insurance Settlements.
Unrelated to safety but important to those affected, an investigation can
provide a means for civil litigation to help the aggrieved parties recover
just compensation, and establish a basis for insurance companies to determine
payments for property damage, personal injury, medical expenses, and
disability. A perceptive, well-trained officer will detect crashes that have
been staged to bilk insurance companies—a crime now of such proportions that
it adds substantially to the cost of insurance for every motorist. If law
enforcement settles for a filed report based solely on a telephone
conversation between the desk sergeant and the driver, insurance fraud will
flourish.
Collision Reporting
A collision should be properly investigated by a qualified officer; it is
also important to file a standard accident report for every collision. These
reports allow the federal and state governments and law enforcement agencies
to compile statistics to assess objectively the effectiveness of police
traffic enforcement. The concept of selective traffic law enforcement rests on
data that shows the violations that actually cause serious crashes, and the
locations and times when they are most likely to occur. These statistics also
help the police gauge the level of enforcement within each area of their
jurisdictions, beef up high collision areas, and move units from one location
to another as required. Insurance companies use these statistics to sort
collisions by sex, age, location and demographics, to aid in setting rates.
Levels of Investigation
The severity and circumstances of a collision will determine the proper
level of investigation. In their order of complexity, the levels are usually
called at-scene investigation, advanced (techni-cal) investigation, and
reconstruction.
At-Scene Investigation
Basic to any collision is an at-scene investigation. Ideally, the first
responding officer will conduct this and file a standard accident report.
Certain evidence, such as incipient skid marks or temporary view obstructions
(a vehicle parked on the shoulder at the time of the crash), tend to be
short-lived. The sooner they are recorded, the better. But the officer's first
task is to make the collision scene safe and prevent a second accident.
Traffic must be immediately redirected by means of cones and flares. Next, the
officer must care for the injured, summoning a rescue unit if needed, and then
observe and record facts pertaining to the collision. These include all
measurements, such as the length of tire marks and the final rest positions of
collision vehicles and bodies from permanent reference points; the drag factor
of the roadway surface; view obstructions; the condition of the collision
vehicles, including lamps and tires; the condition of the roadway, traffic
signs and signals; and the weather and environmental conditions (daylight or
nighttime). A field sketch should be made to show the direction of travel of
the vehicles and the location of all relevant objects. To document damage, the
officer should photograph the vehicles and the collision scene, and permit
measurements to be made from the photos if necessary. Photos are particularly
persuasive in court. Finally, the officer should check all drivers for
indications of intoxication or other impairment, interview all drivers and
witnesses, and record their addresses and telephone numbers.
The at-scene investigation is concerned primarily with data gathering and
recording. It may also involve some interpretation of the collected data. For
example, from the skid mark measurements and the drag factor, the officer can
calculate the minimum speed of the vehicle at the beginning of the skid.
Ideally, every officer should be qualified to conduct an at-scene
investigation. An officer can become qualified by attending and successfully
completing a state-approved course. Such courses generally consist of
classroom and hands-on training of 40 to 80 hours. They may be conducted by a
municipal police department, a county sheriff's office, the state highway
patrol or state police, a POST council, or by a private law enforcement
training organization or institute.
Application of Technology to At-Scene Investigation
The Washington State Patrol and other agencies have discovered that the use
of LIDAR devices in their distance measurement mode can save considerable time
at crash scenes, provide more accurate measurements, clear the roadway and
restore the traffic flow in a speedier fashion, and return the investigating
officer to patrol duties. Using LIDAR for crash measurements requires the
proper training of the officers who will use it; in addition, laser targets
must be developed, carried in the patrol vehicle, and deployed at locations
where the point of object to be measured from does not present an adequate
target for the LIDAR device.
Advanced (Technical) Investigation
Whereas an at-scene investigation should be conducted for every collision,
an advanced investigation is undertaken only for serious collisions. Its
purpose is to collect additional data for determining charges to be brought
against one or more of the individuals involved, or for litigation reasons, or
for laying the foundation for the next level of investigation, reconstruction.
Unlike the at-scene investigation, which is initiated immediately or as
soon as practicable after the collision, the advanced investigation may take
place at a later time. Data, including that from the at-scene investigation,
will be interpreted as well as collected. Since much of the evidence at the
scene may already have disappeared, the advanced investigation may depend
heavily on the completeness and accuracy of the data recorded in the at-scene
investigation. The advanced investigation may be conducted by the same officer
who conducted the at-scene investigation. He is expected to determine the drag
factor of the skid surface(s) and the minimum initial speed of each vehicle
(unless already caluculated in the at-scene investigation); determine
time-distance relationships and solve momentum problems match marks on the
roadway with the parts on the vehicle causing this damage to determine the
point of impact; determine what is impact damage to the vehicle and what is
contact damage; match the damaged areas of the vehicles to determine the
principal direction of force (PDOF); correlate injuries with the parts of the
vehicle impacted by the occupants (occupant kinematics); determine if
headlamps and other lamps were ON or OFF at impact; determine if any fire
damage occurred before or after impact; determine if a mechanical or
electrical failure contributed to the accident (this may require the help of a
specialist); and prepare a scale drawing of the scene from measurements and
notes made at the scene or, if necessary, from photos (photogrammetry).
Officers can receive advanced investigation training by successfully
completing a state-approved course at this level. The length of this training
is up to 80 hours, and includes classroom instruction and hands-on activities.
A prerequisite is usually the completion of a basic collision investigation
course, such as at-scene investigation, or several years' practical experience
in at-scene investigation.
Collision Reconstruction
Reconstruction is the highest of the three major levels of investigation,
and is usually undertaken only in support of litigation or research. Its main
purpose is to determine how the collision occurred. It deals primarily with
direct and immediate causes of the crash. These frequently entail behavioral
errors on the part of the drivers. The findings are mostly objective,
supported by the facts uncovered or determined by investigation at any of the
three levels. The purpose may be extended to attempt a determination of why
the collision happened (called “cause analysis” and sometimes regarded as a
separate and even higher level of investigation). This phase looks at all the
circumstances of the crash in order to identify the probable and possible
contributing factors. The findings are to some extent speculative. Take, for
example, a case where two vehicles crash head-on. The direct cause is that one
vehicle suddenly crossed the center line and encroached on the opposite travel
lane, placing this vehicle in the path of an on-coming vehicle. The probable
indirect cause may be that the driver of the encroaching vehicle fell asleep,
inasmuch as the collision occurred at 3:00 a.m., and the driver had been
driving continuously since the previous noon.
Reconstruction expands on all the principles of at-scene and advanced
investigation. In addition, it includes impulse, or the force exerted by each
vehicle upon the other, and energy loss through crush, or the extent of
deformation of the vehicle caused by the impulse. It may involve experiments
to ascertain performance and other capabilities of the vehicle, or to
determine driver and pedestrian behavior. Reconstruction entails assembling
all the technical data required to build a case for court. Among the duties of
the reconstructionist are the following: cooperating closely with the
attorney, if litigation is involved; interpreting photos, information
contained in field notes, and all other recorded data from the at-scene and
advanced investigations; matching paint, glass and vehicle parts found at the
scene to the vehicle being sought after its driver fled; determining the
driver of each vehicle; determining occupant movement (occupant kinematics)
and how injuries were received; checking all calculations made previously and
perform any additional calculations required; reaching conclusions as to how
the collision occurred; being able to prove the conclusions or offer
persuasive evidence in support of them; and preparing scale diagrams of the
scene, vehicle and body positions, time-distance relationships, and momentum
vectors as needed for the courtroom presentation.
Although a reconstructionist usually has greater depth of knowledge and
broader experience than an investigator qualified only in at-scene or advanced
investigations, and can make more inferences from existing data, he is very
dependent on the thoroughness and quality of the investigations conducted at
the scene, and may have to work largely with the evidence that has been
preserved and recorded earlier. Officers can receive training in
reconstruction by attending a state-approved course of up to 80 hours in
length. Such a course combines classroom instruction with hands-on activities.
The pre-requisite is usually successful completion of a state-approved course
in advanced (technical) investigation.
Use of Statistical Databases
Computers make it easy to gather many facts into a database. Today, highway
safety databases are available to government, law enforcement agencies,
insurance companies, or any interested party. Their scope ranges from highly
specialized to very broad. Several are compiled by the National Center for
Statistics and Analysis (NCSA) operated by the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA). NHTSA's Fatal Accident Reporting System (FARS),
established in 1975, collects and tabulates data on fatal accidents from all
50 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. NHTSA contracts with
each state government to provide information on fatal crashes within the
state. Using a standard format, analysts input data directly into NHTSA's
central data file by microcomputer and modem. Each crash report has 90 coded
elements that are reported on three forms:
Although FARS is focused strictly on fatalities, its data may be used in
evaluations pertaining to a wide range of issues, among them, legal drinking
age legislation, motorcycle helmet legislation, repeat offenders, restraint
use, 65 mph speed limit, safety design of cars and light trucks, and safety of
large trucks on the highway.
NHTSA's General Estimates System (GES), was established in 1988 to identify
highway safety problem areas, provide a basis for regulatory and consumer
initiatives, and form the basis for the cost/benefit analyses of highway
safety programs. It covers approximately 45,000 crashes per year of all
severities, from property damage through fatals, reported on roads throughout
the United States, and involving all types of vehicles. Coders contract-ed to
NHTSA enter the data directly from a sampling of police collision reports. The
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) also operates a number of database
systems, especially those dealing with commer-cial vehicles.
Selective Enforcement Programs
Among the police traffic safety programs shaped by conclusions drawn from
statistical databases, Selective Traffic Enforcement (STEP) probably has the
widest recognition. This program addresses the kinds of traffic violations
that are major causes of collisions, and concentrates enforcement at those
locations where most of these violations and resulting collisions occur, at
the times of day and days of the week when their incidence is the highest.
With the limited resources available to law enforcement, the program attempts
to maximize the productive use of officer time to achieve a meaningful
reduction in fatalities, injuries and property damage. The STEP program relies
on the existence of an effective traffic records system. The system should be
uniform within the state so that the data is recorded uniformly and
facilitates proper analysis. Data from collisions should be analyzed as well
as data from citations issued and reports generated by traffic officers. A
data-base provides an objective guide to designing the program. It indicates
where a problem actually lies, not where somebody thinks it lies. A program
not matched to the problems pointed out by data will miss the mark, and can
never bring good results.
In establishing an STLE program, an agency should appoint an effective
manager. He should adopt practical measures that address the problems
identified by the data, assign the required number of officers to each
identified high collision-frequency location, and provide them with proper
equipment. The agency should continue to collect data after implementation of
the program, and use the resulting updated database when evaluating the
program. Regular evaluation is essential to keep abreast of changes in
violation and collision patterns, to discard a program revealed to be
ineffective, and to introduce modifications to further improve an already
effective program.
Liaison of Law Enforcement with Traffic Engineering and Roadway
Maintenance
Although the police can control the drivers and vehicles on the roadways
through enforcement and thereby make the roadways safer, they cannot directly
remedy unsafe roadway design and markings or perform needed roadway
repairs—functions that are also basic to roadway safety. They are nevertheless
in a position to observe and discover these unsafe conditions, and report them
to the local Department of Transportation, or whatever government office is
responsible for traffic engineering and trafficway maintenance. Certain
collision data contained on the standard collision report form used statewide
by all law enforcement agencies—number and types of vehicles involved,
location, time of day, day of week, and violation(s) causing the collision—are
reported to the state. The state tabulates and analyzes this information and,
if the referral procedure is working, informs the Department of Transportation
of any problems in their jurisdiction. If correcting the problem is complex or
would involve a major change, the DOT may first initiate an engineering study
to determine if correction is feasible and how best to carry it out. Since the
referral procedure sometimes gets bogged down, the police agency that has
observed an unsafe trafficway condition, or reported a collision in which an
unsafe trafficway condition was a contributory cause, should contact the local
DOT office directly by telephone or memo. The effectiveness of this informal
referral system depends on the dedication of both the reporting police agency
and the local DOT office, and on the degree of rapport that exists between
them. For law enforcement officers the lesson here, as in many other aspects
of police work, is that law enforcement cannot accomplish every objective on
its own. Good liaison and good relations with other organizations are
essential.
Through the cooperative efforts of the groups specializing in each of the
areas discussed in this chapter, our highways will be made safer.
Commercial Vehicle Safety
Commercial vehicle safety became a national priority only a few years ago.
Before that, state and provincial authorities developed safety programs
independently. The resulting welter of conflicting requirements created
confusion for commercial vehicle operators, and an uneven effect upon highway
safety.
Background
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations: In 1986, the U.S. Department of
Transportation's Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) responded to the
proliferation of state programs by adopt-ing the Commercial Motor Vehicle
Safety Act. This act defined new national standards for commercial drivers,
the equipment and maintenance of vehicles, and the fitness of operating
companies. These standards are now incorporated in the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR), Title 49. FHWA policy encourages states to enforce
uniformly these regulations for both interstate and intrastate drivers and
carriers. Federal regulations tend to focus on interstate transportation,
whereas intrastate regulation becomes largely a state and local
responsibility. Safety considerations dictate consistent application of
commercial enforcement and inspection efforts in both realms.
Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program: The FHWA also administers
the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP), which provides grant
funding to states seeking to enhance their commercial enforcement efforts,
particularly those addressed to the safe movement of hazardous materials. A
practical impact of MCSAP grants is significant expansion of on-highway truck
inspections. The awarding of MCSAP funds hinges on state submission of
detailed state enforcement plans (SEPs), which must permit the state to adopt
and consistently enforce federal commercial vehicle regulations or equivalent
state rules; maintain state and local spending for commercial vehicle safety
programs at levels existing prior to receipt of the grants; and emphasize
enforcement of state and local laws related to commercial vehicle operation.
The Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance: Several states recognized
the urgency of devising uniform commercial vehicle inspection procedures, and
in October 1980, they formed the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA).
This organization grew rapidly and now numbers 49 states, 10 Canadian
provinces, Mexico, two U.S. territories, and the commercial vehicle industry.
The alliance seeks enforcement and inspection compatibility between
jurisdictions, which permits reciprocal acceptance of inspections performed by
member jurisdictions. A vehicle subjected to roadside inspection in one state
is issued a CVSA windshield decal, which is recognized by the other states for
90 days, thus avoiding unnecessary and repetitive inspections. Because CVSA
has become the major arbiter of commercial vehicle inspection procedures
throughout North America, the FHWA and other national organizations accept and
recommend the use of CVSA Standards.
SAFETYNET: SAFETYNET is the information arm of MCSAP. This automated
network accepts safety data collected through MCSAP by participating states,
and makes it available to other participating jurisdictions.
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations
Federal regulations deal with commercial (truck and bus) drivers, operating
companies, and vehicles. Drivers were brought under the umbrella of the
federally required but state-issued commercial driver's license (CDL). A CDL
requires advanced levels of knowledge and operating skill. Bus and truck
drivers must demonstrate behind-the-wheel capability in the types of vehicles
they seek to operate. Specific license endorse-ments are required to haul
hazardous materials or to drive passen-ger transport vehicles, double/triple
trailers, or tank vehicles. The written knowledge exam for a CDL tests not
only the fundamental areas of driving rules and safety considerations but also
an understanding of air brake systems, hazardous materials, and pre-trip
inspection procedures. Drivers may hold only a single CDL issued by their home
states, thus ending the formerly common practice of obtaining multiple
licenses to circumvent license suspensions or revocations in a particular
jurisdiction. CDL information is centralized in the Commercial Driver's
License Information System (CDLIS), which is accessible to state motor vehicle
licensing agencies. Applicants for a commercial license can be routinely
checked through CDLIS. Federal standards also define circumstances that can
lead to revocation of the CDL. Carriers are subject to federal on-site review
of vehicle inspection and maintenance procedures and records, driver
qualifications and hours of service compliance, accident histories and related
subjects. Carriers receive a “safety fitness” rating—certain aspects of the
company's operating authority can be terminated for carriers judged
unsatisfactory. Some states maintain similar or more restrictive statewide
inspection and rating systems, which generally reach more carriers more often
than the federal system. Carrier evaluations form an essential element of an
overall commercial vehicle safety program.
Police officers who are unfamiliar with commercial vehicle enforcement
frequently find it difficult to recognize who is the motor carrier when
stopping a truck on the highway. In some cases involving an owner/operator,
the driver and the carrier may be one and the same. In other cases, the
carrier may be a third party other than either the driver or the owner of the
vehicle. The motor carrier will generally be licensed with an ICC (Interstate
Commerce Commission) or the U.S. DOT identification number conspicuously
displayed on the outside of the vehicle. Vehicles must conform to federal
requirements for equipment, markings, placarding, and operating condition.
State requirements sometimes are more stringent than the federal ones. Most
commercial vehicle inspections are conducted by state authorities, whether
on-highway or in-terminal.
Commercial Vehicle Enforcement Programs
Effective commercial vehicle enforcement programs include three major
elements:
Road patrol officers need no additional training to enforce truck moving
violations such as speeding and unsafe lane changes. But for officers making
even cursory checks of commercial vehicle equipment, maintenance and loading,
special knowledge is essen-tial, along with instruction in assessing the
validity of truck registrations.
On-highway enforcement historically is complicated by trucker reliance on
CB radios and other communications techniques to thwart patrol officers.
Counter-strategies have sprung up. One of the more effective is police use of
specially marked vehicles (patrol cars of different makes, models, colors, and
markings) not readily identifiable as patrol cars. Some states employ
completely unmarked vehicles, an equally helpful tool. Truckers who try to
bypass weigh stations and safety checkpoints can be counteracted by additional
patrol units on parallel routes, or chase cars.
The growing use of commercial vehicles to transport illegal drugs
emphasizes the possibility that a traffic stop may harbor the potential for a
major drug seizure. How to recognize that potential, and how to proceed in a
fashion that does not jeopardize subsequent prosecution, requires special
training in commercial vehicle drug interdiction techniques.
Commercial Vehicle Inspections
Many states have standardized their commercial vehicle safety checks of
trucks and buses, utilizing the CVSA standards. Under CVSA, there are five
levels of inspection. Level I, the most thorough inspection, includes both
vehicle and driver and requires approximately 42-48 minutes without placing
the vehicle out of service. Trucks and buses that pass receive a CVSA decal,
valid for 90 days. During that period, member jurisdictions typically waive
repeat inspections, concentrating instead on vehicles without decals. This
in-depth inspection is called the North American Uniform Driver/Vehicle
Inspection Program (NUDVIP), also labeled North American Standard, or NAS.
Other levels of inspection are less pervasive and require less time, except
Level V, the in-terminal inspection of a vehicle, which can be as detailed as
NUDVIP and result in the issuance of a certificate. The driver of a vehicle
bearing a valid CVSA sticker might be subject to a “driver only inspection”
that, among other procedures, checks his license, log book, safety belt use,
driver sobriety, and the vehicle checklist completed by the driver.
A program of complete commercial vehicle safety must include size and
weight limits, vehicle equipment, compliance with permit and federal motor
carrier regulations requirements, towing, load and securement, and special
vehicles, such as school buses, if applicable, and farm labor vehicles. A
comprehensive program reaches commercial vehicles in several possible
locations to ensure reasonably thorough coverage, and contacts carriers via
terminal inspections. Vehicles are typically inspected and weighed at major
scale/inspection facilities, and by roving commercial vehicle enforcement
officers. Other facilities may include platform scales, pit scales, and
multiple sites.
Terminal inspectors check driver timekeeping records and hours of service,
maintenance procedures and vehicle condition, compli-ance with hazardous
materials regulations, and safety practices of passenger stage carriers and
hazardous materials transporters. Everyone involved in the inspection process,
from uniform police officers to civilian inspectors, must have completed the
training pertinent to their assignments.
Some state agencies maintain computerized information on carriers and
shippers, collating vehicle inspection data, accident and hazardous material
histories, incident histories, on-highway enforcement information, and
terminal inspection findings in one central database. SafetyNet, the FHWA
database, attempts a similar national approach, utilizing information made
available from the states. Driver and Vehicle Exam Reports that reflect the
North American Standards of FHWA and the out-of-service criteria of the CVSA
form the base for the federal SafetyNet information system.
Data Collection From Commercial Vehicle Citations
Various data are used as part of a national strategy to focus inspections
on audits of commercial motor carriers. Crash statistics and information, as
well as complaints, are collected to identify those carriers in most need of
attention. The Congress has mandated that the Federal Highway Administration
collect citation data from state and local law enforcement agencies to be
included in this decision-making process.
State-level police agencies are being asked to report moving violations to
the FHWA and to collect this information from county and local agencies as
well. A major concern of state police agencies is how to modify citation forms
to include the U.S. DOT number, or some other carrier identification, since
this data needs to be tracked to the motor carrier rather than to the
individual driver. Another issue is how to transmit the data to FHWA. Pilot
projects were set up in several states to measure the effectiveness of this
data in triggering terminal audits of motor carriers to uncover safety
violations, as well as to determine the technical and administrative problems
involved in capturing the data.
Hazardous Materials Transportation Enforcement
The U.S. Department of Transportation estimates that four billion tons of
regulated hazardous materials move annually in America, much of it on
highways. That huge and growing volume increases a chance that an accident or
incident will release a harmful product, requiring a specialized response.
Federal emphasis on the safety of hazardous materials trans-portation, echoed
strongly by the states, seeks to prevent spills and the crashes that can
result in spills, and to increase state and local capability to handle spills
with the least adverse consequences for people and property.
In 1986, the Office of Technology Assessment compiled a bell-wether report
on hazardous materials movement in America and concluded that most hazardous
products are transported without incident, yet the potential remains for
catastrophe. Singled out as a foremost problem were people who are poorly
trained, who don't coordinate well, or who fail to communicate thoroughly. For
police and fire departments—the first responders to a hazard-ous materials
incident—the most uncomfortable statistic was that only one in four uniformed
personnel had received adequate train-ing to deal with a hazardous material
spill.
Today, that percentage has increased, but training remains a cardinal issue
for law enforcement, particularly police traffic agencies, whose personnel
invariably will be the first arrivers at any highway incident.
Federal Regulations
Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations contains the general
requirements for hazardous material transportation in America. It classifies
and defines hazardous materials; lists packaging requirements including
design, testing, and labeling; describes vehicle loading, marking, and
placarding requirements; explains shipping papers; lists necessary emergency
response information; lays out employee training specifications; and addresses
driving, parking, and route selection rules, with special reference to the
movement of radioactive materials. The federal Research and Special Products
Administration (RSPA) has also produced guides describing procedures for
inspecting shipments of hazardous materials, radioactive materials, and spent
nuclear fuel, as well as cargo tanks. Some states have built upon these
federal regulations by developing in more detail such elements as safe routes
and stopping places, and handling of specific materials like explosives and
radioactive substances.
Further federal transport requirements were formalized in the Hazardous
Materials Transportation Uniform Safety Act (HMTUSA) of 1990. This act, which
describes the urgency of developing a national program to promote public
health and welfare, began to untangle the web of conflicting state and local
requirements essentially by pre-empting them, and calls once more for
far-reaching training of first responders.
An alliance for uniform hazardous material transportation proce-dures, made
up of 28 state and local government officials, has been charged by HMTUSA to
develop guidelines that state and local jurisdictions can use for registering
and issuing permits to hazardous materials carriers. The alliance was formed
to present recommendations to the DOT for inclusion in future federal
regulations. State registration and permit programs may be pre-empted unless
they conform to these regulations. To test its recommendations, the alliance
developed a pilot state registration program which incorporated a “base state”
process for the registration of hazardous materials carriers. Cooperative
Hazardous Materials Enforcement Development (COHMED)
COHMED is a joint federal-state-local-private sector effort to promote
uniform enforcement of hazardous materials transporta-tion regulations. The
organization is administered by state enforce-ment officials, and parallels
the CVSA in its intent to bring uniformity to the specialized area of
hazardous materials regulation and enforcement.
An outgrowth has been the Hazardous Materials Information Exchange (HMIX),
a two-way communication service through which state and local organizations
can obtain information on training opportunities, conferences, and literature.
HMIX partici-pants can also communicate with each other via computer hookups.
Other training sources include the Hazardous Materials Advisory Council
(HMAC), which sponsors a variety of specialized courses in conjunction with
the RSPA; the Transportation Safety Institute (TSI), a federal training center
located in Oklahoma City; and various hazardous materials program policy
documents produced by state agencies.
Hazardous Materials Incident Emergency Management
The Superfund Amendments and Re-authorization Acts (SARA) of 1986 required
the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to prepare
regulations, now identified as Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations, to
protect employees involved in handling hazardous waste. The regulations also
define the training requirements for personnel, including police officers, who
respond to hazardous materials incidents. CFR 29 now describes five levels of
training for emergency responders. Three are particular pertinent to police:
For the awareness level, training must be sufficient to ensure competency
in understanding hazardous materials and the inherent risks associated with a
spill or incident; recognizing the presence of hazardous materials and
identifying their type, if possible; understanding the employer's emergency
response plan and the need for site control; and making notification to the
communications center in recognizing the need for additional resources. First
responder operations level training, usually a minimum of eight hours, must
include the first responder awareness elements plus the knowledge to choose
proper protective equipment for on-scene personnel; the ability to perform
basic spill containment and confinement procedures consistent with equipment
and personnel available at the scenes; an understanding of basic
decontamination procedures and how to initiate them; and an understanding of
operating procedures at the scene.
On-scene incident commander training, usually an additional 24 hours, must
be sufficient to ensure competency in properly conducting the agency's
incident command system, initiating agency emergency responses, and
coordinating an emergency response with other agencies that may become
involved. In addition, the trainee must know the risks faced by people working
on-scene at a hazardous materials spill, including personnel wearing chemical
protective clothing; be aware of both the state and federal regional response
plans or teams; and realize the importance of decontamination procedures and
know how to conduct them. The importance of constant police readiness
emphasizes the need for thorough training, reinforced by frequent in-service
updates for both management and line personnel.
Every police vehicle used for traffic patrol should carry in it the latest
copy of the federal DOT Emergency Response Guide. This concise book contains a
rapid reference by which officers can determine, from the numbers and other
information on placards and shipping papers, the classification of hazardous
materials being transported and the general cautions and instructions for
containment of spills and evacuation of the public. For further information on
incident management and control, see Part Eleven, “Roadway Management Through
Engineering and Enforcement.”
Driver Licensing
Licenses are generally issued by the motor vehicle administrators of the
various states and provinces. As well as serving as a national identifier of
persons, the driver's license system is used for the rapid identification of
persons who are driving motor vehicles; the operation of a classified license
system which provides separate written and skill tests for various types of
vehicles such as motorcycles, passenger vehicles, and commercial vehicles; a
point system for targeting unsafe drivers for license suspension or revocation
to remove hazardous drivers from the roads; and identifying and tracking
traffic violators through the court system and preventing persons from
defaulting on traffic citations.
The License as a Positive Identifier
When first issued, driver's licenses were intended to verify that the
holder complied with the regulations associated with vehicle operation.
Photographs were later added to aid in positive identification and to reduce
fictitious usage. Strategies to prevent counterfeiting include the use of
thumbprints and holograms. Many licenses even contain magnetic strips and bar
codes to provide for the electronic recording of driver license information if
a citation is issued in the field. A driver's license typically contains a
variety of information, including the driver's date of birth, his social
security number as a primary or secondary identifier, his blood-type, an
indication if the driver is an organ donor, and certain physical
characteristics such as height, weight, hair and eye color.
Over a period of time, the driver's license has assumed the role of a
positive identifier. This acceptance is based upon the belief that an
effective screening process is employed to verify that the license data is
valid. Today, the license has become the means to use legal instruments, to
obtain social benefits, and to gain access to restricted areas and services.
The state agencies issuing driver's licenses are finding that positive
identification of applicants is nearly impossible because of the absence of a
national identification system. The U.S. birth certificate system is
ineffective for identification purposes. Coupled with the problems of
identification presented by legal and illegal aliens, the use of a driver's
license as a national identifier is not reliable. In the past several years,
the use of a digital image photo license has increased. Over 15 states and
provinces are using this technological breakthrough, which provides more
effective securi-ty and identification. In addition, photographic information
can be transmitted via computer to officers in the field.
The AAMVA recently began a project to standardize identification means when
issuing driver's licenses. The problem of alien identification remains an
unaddressed issue at the national level. Another major problem is the use of
fraudulent driver's licenses by minors to purchase alcoholic beverages. A
number of states have addressed this problem through the use of special
licenses, or the addition of identifying features to the licenses of persons
under the age of 2,1 so that they may be readily identified by law enforcement
and other persons.
National Driver's License Compact
The National Driver's License Compact (NDLC) program has several
administrative components, including an application to law enforcement. Prior
to the NDLC, a person in one state who was convicted of a traffic violation in
a neighboring state would not have that violation reported or charged against
his record in his home state. Also, nonresident drivers who were issued
citations were often physically arrested and required to post bond or surety
for court appearances for even non-jailable motor vehicle offenses. Under the
NDLC program, which is administered by the American Association of Motor
Vehicle Administrators, the majority of states report violations by
nonresidents to the driver's home state. The charges are then added to the
offender's driving record as though the violations occurred in the home state.
For example, a driver charged with DUI in an NDLC state will have his
license suspended in his home state as well. Also, nonresident drivers can
promise to appear in court, or pay a waiver and be released without bond. If
he fails to satisfy the court appearance, a mechanism permits the issuing
state to revoke the driver's privileges until he complies with the laws of the
other state. A total of 43 states now participate in the NDLC.
Administrative License Revocation (ALR)
State government has traditionally retained the responsibility of issuing
and regulating driver's licenses. Upon conviction, the courts have been
committed to limit or suspend driver's licenses or operating privileges. A
current trend is to remove the license sanction from the courts, to eliminate
unnecessary delays associated with court backlogs, and to reduce the impact of
plea bargaining. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration advocates
the on-the-spot revocation by police officers who arrest drivers for driving
under the influence of alcohol or drugs.
In states with this legislation, police officers are empowered to
confiscate the driver's license of a person arrested for impaired driving when
that person either refuses a chemical test of blood, breath or urine or tests
above the prescribed limit. The license is usually forwarded to the licensing
agency, and the holder is issued a temporary permit to drive pending a
hearing. The benefit of ALR is that action is less complicated and immediately
removes a known hazardous driver from the roads.
Most states have some version of ALR in operation; it is a condition for
some states to receive additional federal highway safety funds.
Advancement in technology now gives the ability to produce a digital photo
driver license. These documents offer advantages over the old photo
technology. Central electronic image storage makes access to the pictures and
information much easier. Many of the fraudulent practices that plagued photo
technology are eliminated by digital imaging. Multiple duplicate driver's
licenses, held by the same or different people, become practically impossible
to obtain when the person applying for a duplicate license has himself
compared to the digital image of the original applicant. Comparison under the
old photo technology was either cumbersome or impossible.
Electronic auditing of driver license production also helps eliminate abuse
by operators to create fraudulent licenses which are used in check and credit
card fraud, drug trafficking, and, especially, illegal immigration. The
implications for law enforcement go far beyond these obvious benefits. With a
central image database of every driver in a state, the public safety community
has a ready-made storehouse of photos to be used in criminal investigations.
Due to the electronic nature of these images, they can be obtained in seconds
via a computer retrieval unit in the department or even faxed or thermal
printed directly to the patrol car. These same images can also be brought into
a photo array for suspect identification. The uses for these images are
limited only by the wants and needs of the public safety community.
Not to be forgotten is the importance of the actual driver license itself.
With the aid of computer technology, the license can now be made more secure
and tamper-proof than ever before. Magnetic stripe encoding, a technology
currently employed in banking, can be used in tandem with this electronic
record to provide even greater help to police traffic enforcement.
Additionally, recent technological advances in two-dimensional bar coding
enhances security and assists in providing additional data to the public
safety community, specifically to the patrol officer. Citations can be issued
much more quickly and efficiently. Use of this technology also eliminates
multiple entry points for the information.
A typical traffic stop could go something like this: The driver's license
with an encoded magnetic stripe and bar code is read by an in-car unit. This
unit then transmits the information to the department's system which runs a
standard check of traffic and criminal records on the individual. This
information is returned to the car, either by the dispatcher or through an
in-car computer. This same computer could also display the photo of the driver
from the drivers license database. Information on the type of violation is
then entered into the unit. This generates the printed citation to be given to
the driver and at the same time updates the departmental computer and
transfers the violation information electronically to the courts and the DMV.
As can be seen, the benefits of this technology have far reaching
implications.
Fifteen jurisdictions have already converted to this technology, and many
others are doing so presently. Work is progressing on digital standards
(common data elements and compatible records) so that a national and, perhaps,
an international network of digitized images can be established. This progress
emphasizes the importance of public safety and particularly the law
enforcement community's efforts to maintain a proactive relationship with
motor vehicle departments. These technological advancements must be
continually monitored and promoted so that law enforcement can take full
advantage of them and be able to use a secure document.
Generally, a committee is established in each jurisdiction to evaluate the
needs of agencies affected by a plan to convert to a digital image photo
license. This committee may also have the responsibility of evaluating vendor
proposals to accomplish this conversion. Representation on these evaluation
committees should be sought by the law enforcement community so that their
needs and wants will be considered.
The public safety community and particularly law enforcement should be
continually alert to legislation that limits and/or precludes the transmission
of the digital image driver's license and pertinent information to a police
officer.
Detecting Suspended and Revoked Driver's Licenses
The revocation or suspension of a driver's license is potentially very
effective because it separates persons with physical or mental disabilities,
or those with poor driving records or attitudes from the other users of our
highways. In practice, however, this strategy is not as effective because many
persons continue to drive after their driving privileges have been suspended
or revoked and are not detected by law enforcement. This problem leads to a
breakdown in respect for the law, clutters our highways with dangerous
drivers, and frustrates the criminal justice and driver licensing processes.
Although detecting and apprehending suspended or revoked drivers is difficult,
few police activities yield higher dividends in improving traffic safety and
promoting respect for the law. Several associations, including the AAMVA,
advocate strict enforcement of laws relating to the operation of vehicles
while licenses are suspended or revoked. Repeated national studies ind-icate
that license suspensions are the most effective sanction used in traffic law
enforcement.
The Need for A Policy
Police agencies need policies to ensure that appropriate enforce-ment
action is taken when a suspended or revoked driver's license is found. The
policy should not permit an officer to lodge a charge of driving without a
license as a substitute for driving after suspension. Policies should advocate
that driving after suspension cases are pursued to conviction and not dropped
as part of a plea bargain, especially when accompanied by DUI charges. When a
motorist displays a suspended or revoked license, the individual should be
charged with that separate offense as well as driving after suspension. The
license should be confiscated and returned to the state licensing agency.
Police agencies should form task forces to contact anyone who fails to turn in
their license if it is under suspension or revocation. Officers should
confiscate the license and return it to the licensing authority. The
individual should be charged with failing to surrender a suspended or revoked
license. Violator-directed patrols are effective when police departments are
notified by licensing agencies of the suspension or revocation of a person who
is an habitual motor vehicle offender.
The National Driver Register (NDR)
The National Driver Register (NDR) is a central repository of information
on individuals whose driver’s licenses have been revoked, suspended,
cancelled, or denied, or who have been convicted of certain serious
traffic-related violations, such as driving while impaired by alcohol or other
drugs. When an individual applies for a license, state driver licensing
officials query the NDR to determine if the individual’s driving privilege has
been withdrawn in any other state. Because the NDR is a nationwide index to
driver records from all states, a state needs to submit only a single inquiry
to obtain this information. The information obtained from the NDR assists the
state driver licensing official in determining whether or not to issue a
license. The Federal Aviation Administration and the Federal Railroad
Administration also use the NDR to process their inquiries for the detection
of driving violations, especially alcohol-related, among their applicants for
certification. In addition, the U.S. Coast Guard recently was authorized to
receive NDR information regarding their applicants for certification. Fifty
states have established electronic access to the NDR file—a major step for
states that issue licenses over the counter rather than require a waiting
period.
During 1993, the NDR processed over 25 million file checks for all users of
the NDR, which resulted in over one million probable identifications, or
matches. As required by Public Law 97-364, the NDR is converting to a Problem
Driver Pointer System (PDPS) to improve the timeliness and reliability of NDR
information. Under the PDPS, the NDR will no longer contain substantive data.
Instead, it will contain only identifying information to enable it to check
whether or not adverse action has been taken against an individual—not
specific information about why an individual’s name appears on the NDR file;
such information will be maintained by the state that executed the adverse
action. When a match occurs with a record on the NDR file, the NDR will
electronically point to the state where the adverse action is maintained,
retrieve that information, and relay it to the state of inquiry. In this way,
the state of inquiry is assured of receiving the latest information available
regarding the driver’s record.
PDPS conversion involves not only making system changes at the NDR but also
providing technical and training assistance to states in their conversion
efforts, including a Help Desk staffed by a small group of systems analysts.
Ohio, North Dakota, Washington, and Virginia—the four states that participated
in the PDPS Pilot Test Program in 1987 to 1988—continue to operate under the
PDPS concept. Florida will be the first new state to implement PDPS, scheduled
for July, with an additional 11 to 15 states scheduled for implementation by
the end of 1993.
Motorcycle Licensing Requirements
Motorcycle collisions contribute significantly to the large number of
deaths and injuries occurring on our nation's highways. They account for
nearly seven percent of all traffic deaths in this country but represent only
two percent of the nation's registered vehicles. More than 80 percent of all
motorcycle crashes result in injury or death, and DWI on a motorcycle is an
especially risky venture.
In a recent year, more than 2,400 motorcyclists were killed in traffic
crashes. The death rate per 100 million vehicle miles traveled for a
motorcyclist is over 20 times that of an automobile occupant.
The Problem of Unlicensed Motorcyclists
A substantial number of the riders killed in motorcycle crashes are
unlicensed or not properly licensed to operate a motorcycle. In 1993, of the
total 2,435 motorcycle operators involved in fatal motorcycle crashes, 991
(40.7 percent) were not licensed to drive a motorcycle. Of those 991
operators, 158 (6.5 percent) had no license whatsoever, and 833 (34.2 percent)
did not have a valid motorcycle license or endorsement. The number of
improperly licensed motorcycle drivers involved in fatal motorcycle crashes
has remained at approximately 40 percent for the most recent five years.
The following list of motorcycle validation codes is provided to assist
officers who stop motorcyclists to determine if the license is valid for the
operation of a motorcycle.
STATE LICENSE CODE
Horizontal gaze nystagmus is an involuntary jerking
of the eyeball which occurs naturally as the eyes gaze to the side. Under
normal circumstances, nystagmus occurs when the eyes are rotated at high
peripheral angles. However, when a person is impaired by alcohol, nystagmus is
exaggerated and may occur at lesser angles. An alcohol-impaired person will
also often have difficulty smoothly tracking a moving object. In the HGN test,
the officer observes the eyes of a suspect as the suspect follows a slowly
moving object such as a pen or small flashlight, horizontally with his eyes.
The examiner looks for three indicators of impairment in each eye: if the eye
cannot follow a moving object smoothly, if jerking is distinct when the eye is
at maximum deviation, and if the angle of onset of jerking is within 45
degrees of center. If, between the two eyes, four or more clues appear, the
suspect likely has a BAC of 0.10 or greater. NHTSA research indicates that
this test allows proper classification of approximately 77 percent of
suspects. HGN may also indicate consumption of seizure medications,
phencyclidine, a variety of inhalants, barbiturates, and other depressants.
The walk-and-turn test and one-leg
stand test are “divided attention” tests that are easily performed by most
sober people. They require a suspect to listen to and follow instructions
while performing simple physical movements. Impaired persons have difficulty
with tasks requiring their attention to be divided between simple mental and
physical exercises.
Speed
Enforcement
One of the least expensive and readily utilized
methods of speed enforcement is using the patrol vehicle speed-ometer to do
clocks; however, this method can only be used in the moving mode. It can be
used in any type of weather and terrain and during any light conditions. The
speedometer must be calibrated regularly and must be used responsibly. This
method is somewhat subjective because it is done by pacing. It is recommended
that pacing be done for at least two-tenths to one-half mile, at a speed at
which the violator's vehicle is gaining just slightly on the officer. When a
speeding car is detected and the clock is completed, the vehicle should be
pulled over. A violator should not be followed for miles in an attempt to
determine his maximum speed. Since one of the purposes of speed enforcement is
to make the roads safer, this is not accomplished by allowing a speeding
vehicle to continue in a hazardous manner for long distances. Traffic
conditions, weather, and terrain may make a good clock difficult. Some
jurisdictions have statutes that prohibit driving at a speed greater than
reasonable, or careless driving, which may apply. If an officer is a good
observer and can document that the vehicle passed all other vehicles,
screeched tires while turning, jumped while going over bumps in the roadway,
and exhibited other indications of speed, convictions can be obtained.
Radar is the most widely used and accepted speed
detection device. The costs vary. A reliable unit may be purchased for under
$2,000. These types of units have many advantages: they can be used in a
stationary or moving mode, are available in a hand-held variety, and give both
audio and visual indications of speed. Since the units are highly accurate and
reliable, they are widely accepted in court. The units can be stored in a
carrying case and moved from vehicle to vehicle. If a department has several,
they should devise an internal marking scheme to keep all the units accounted
for and maintain the certifications with the proper unit. One disadvantage of
radar units is that, unless the operators have been properly trained, the
wrong motorist can be cited for speeding. Radar has a wide beam combined with
a range of three-fourths of a mile or more. Because the devices are not
target-specific, but rely on the operator for accuracy, they are more
difficult to use in congested traffic areas. Training can help officers use
radar in congested traffic areas but it will be more difficult than using it
in less congested areas.
LIDAR or laser units have some distinct advantages over
radar but have their own disadvantages. LIDAR units are expen-sive when
compared to radar—approximately $4,000 to $5,000 each. The units are
target-specific: The vehicle aimed at is the vehicle detected. Unlike radar
devices, these units are immune to electrical interference, such as that from
car fans. LIDAR units work well in city environments and on heavily traveled
roadways. The disadvantages of LIDAR units are that they must be used in a
stationary and hand-held mode. Their range is approximately 1,200 feet. This
technology is not accepted in all courts. Once the technology receives
judicial notice it should receive general acceptance in the courts. Rain and
fog reduce a laser's range as well. When debating the purchase of radar or
LIDAR devices, the issue is not that one is better than the other; each
complements the other and are suited for its own purpose.
The use of average speed computers is
also worthy of consideration. It emits no beams and can be used in all weather
and traffic conditions. It is target-specific and can be used in a moving or
stationary mode. Some consider this a better measurement of speed, since it
measures average speed over the target area, rather than maximum speed, as do
other devices.
Photo Radar uses the same technology as other radar
units but can be used at both manned and unmanned loca-tions. It is effective
if set up properly and can also be used to photograph traffic light violators.
The potential for detection is enormous since the violators are not stopped,
but a permanent record is made of each for processing later. Photo radar is
controversial because of the photographs and privacy issues. Vehicles must
have front license plates so that both vehicle and driver can be photographed.
A rear plate method can be used if driver identification is not required. This
method may need legislation to make speeding charges the civil responsibility
of the owner of the vehicle. Although photo radar is technically sound, it may
not be accepted by the community because a police officer is not operating the
unit for each target vehicle. This method also does not allow any personal
contact by the police officer who otherwise could exercise discretion by
considering special circumstances, such as family emergencies or medical
problems, that may cause an individual to speed. While some might view this as
a disadvantage, photo radar advocates would argue that officer discretion is
not uniformly or fairly administered. Photo radar eliminates any arguments
about the speed of the vehicle from the discussion between an officer and the
violator at the scene of an arrest and moves this discussion to an
administrative or court hearing. Some feel that since the photo radar does not
discriminate that this method is the most fair type of speed enforcement that
exists. This method does eliminate the possibility of finding other violations
of law such as carrying of contraband, or stolen property. Other offenses such
as driving with a suspended license or without registration, or even driving
under the influence are not discovered using this type of technology.
Collision Investigation
Commercial Vehicle and
Hazardous Materials Regulation
The Driver Licensing
System
State | Code |
---|---|
Alabama | M |
Alaska | M1,M2 |
Arizona | M |
Arkansas | MD,M |
California | M1,M2 |
Colorado | M |
Connecticut | 104,106,204,206,AM,BM,CM |
Delaware | M |
District of Columbia | M |
Florida | MTCY |
Georgia | MR,MU,MX |
Hawaii | Class 2 |
Iowa | M,8 |
Idaho | No Requirement |
Illinois | L,M |
Indiana | MC |
Kansas | D,M |
Kentucky | M |
Louisiana | 4 |
Maine | I,J |
Maryland | M |
Massachusetts | M |
Michigan | CY |
Minnesota | M |
Mississippi | E |
Missouri | M |
Montana | M |
Nebraska | M |
Nevada | M,MX,MZ,MU |
New Hampshire | MC |
New Jersey | M,E |
New Mexico | Y,W |
New York | M,MJ |
North Carolina | M |
North Dakota | M |
Ohio | M,R |
Oklahoma | M |
Oregon | M,Q,M1,M2 |
Pennsylvania | M |
Rhode Island | H |
South Carolina | M,4 |
South Dakota | 2,3 |
Tennessee | M,MP |
Texas | M |
Utah | M,O,U |
Vermont | M |
Virginia | M |
Washington | M1,M2,M3 |
West Virginia | F |
Wisconsin | M,CY |
Wyoming | M |
Occupant Protection and Enforcement
A little more than a decade ago, highway safety priorities counted safety belt and child safety seat use as just one of many goals— an important one, but not a priority. The drunk driver commanded somewhat more attention but not to the degree this menace deserved. Today that has all changed and we address both subjects with equal vigor—removing drunk drivers from behind the wheel and putting all vehicle occupants into approved safety restraints. Alcohol-related fatalities dropped 26 percent between 1983 and 1993, declining nearly 10 percent in 1991 alone. Alcohol-related deaths still number almost 18,000 a year, slightly below half of all highway crash deaths. We are doing better, but not well enough!
The Role of Occupant Protection
Safety belt use saves over 9,000 lives and prevents 200,000 moderate-to-critical injuries each year. NHTSA estimates that, if all passenger vehicle occupants wore safety belts, nearly 10,000 additional lives could be saved per year. Studies show that the use of safety restraints cuts the number of deaths and injuries in traffic crashes by one-half. The following statistics, provided by NHTSA, dramatically show the impact that safety belts can have in traffic crashes:
From 1982 through 1994, an estimated 65,000 lives were saved by safety belts and more than 1.5 million moderate-to- critical injuries were prevented. Over the same eight years, safety belts prevented an estimated 770,000 moderate to critical injuries, 571,000 in jurisdictions that have mandatory belt use laws.
Among front-seat passenger vehicle occupants over four years of age, safety belts saved 4,682 lives in 1991, 3,828 of them in jurisdictions that have belt use laws. Of 55,000 passenger car occupants involved in fatal crashes in a recent year, over half (52 percent) of the unrestrained occupants were fatally injured, while only 29 percent of the restrained occupants were fatally injured. Three-quarters of the uninjured occupants of passenger cars involved in fatal crashes were using restraints.
Safety Belt Use Laws
The July 1984 ruling by the U.S. Department of Transportation on automatic occupant protection began a wave of legislative action resulting in the enactment of safety belt use laws in many states. The goal of these laws was to promote belt use and thereby reduce death and injuries in crashes. As of this writing, 48 states and the District of Columbia have belt use laws, some as a primary violation and some as only a secondary violation (enforcement action can only be taken if the driver is stopped for another violation). Reported safety belt use ranges from 24 to 83 percent, varying widely from state to state, reflecting factors such as differing public attitudes, enforcement practices, legal provisions, and public information and education efforts. NHTSA estimates that the implementation of state belt use laws has reduced traffic fatalities by seven percent a year.
Types of Occupant Protection Systems
Safety belts were first installed on passenger vehicles in 1956, and shoulder restraints were added in later years. Using a combined seat belt and shoulder restraint keeps the driver from hitting the dashboard, windshield, or rear-view mirror— “submarining under the dashboard.” The addition of automatic passenger restraints by some manufacturers resulted in miniature electric motors which deploy the shoulder strap when the driver sits in the car and the ignition is turned on. However, many drivers take no further action after the shoulder strap is deployed and do not fasten their seat belts. This defeats the engineering that went into the restraint system, because the shoulder restraint alone is not protective without the lap belt fastened.
In fact, the National Transportation Safety Board has highlighted instances of where motorists using the motorized shoulder belt without the lap belt have been decapitated in crashes.
Driver and passenger-side air bags are now mandatory in most new passenger vehicles. These devices contain sensors that detect rapid deceleration characteristic of a collision, and through an explosive device, deploy an air bag which blows up, similar to a balloon, and prevents the driver from impacting the interior of the vehicle.
The presence of an air bag does not relieve the driver or passengers from the responsibility of utilizing lap and shoulder belts. An air bag provides little protection in a side collision. Lap belts and shoulder harnesses provide the added protection of keeping the driver behind the wheel and in control of the vehicle to allow for last-minute emergency maneuvers, and preventing the driver and passengers from hurtling around the interior of the vehicle and colliding with one another.
Child Safety Seats
Law enforcement and education can make the difference between life and death for our children. All 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Canadian provinces have child restraint use laws. When used correctly, child restraints are 71 percent effective in preventing deaths and 67 percent effective in reducing injuries. In a recent year, 100 percent use of child safety seats nationwide could have prevented 455 fatalities and approximately 49,000 serious injuries to children under the age of five. The actual usage rate in that year was estimated at 80 percent, and approximately 247 lives of children under the age of four were saved as a result of child restraint use.
Even though child safety seats are proven lifesavers, many drivers still do not use them, purchase unapproved seats, or use them incorrectly. Incorrect use is a major contributor to the deaths and injuries each year.
Many cases of incorrect use are as simple as turning the seat toward the proper facing position for that age child—rear-facing positions for infants and forward-facing position for older children. The best position for rear-facing child safety seats is the middle position of the rear seat of the vehicle. Simply not following the manufacturer's instructions for properly installing the seat also nullifies its benefit. The best place for any child in a safety seat is in the rear seat of the car, properly secured with a seat belt system as recommended by the manufacturer of the safety seat.
Policies and Training Programs
The National Highway Safety Traffic Administration has a model OPUE (Occupant Protection Usage and Enforcement) Program that is available to law enforcement agencies to train members of their department to act as instructors. The training program uses a model curriculum which includes teaching participants to write safety restraint enforcement policies. State POST Academies provide this training, and all law enforcement agencies are urged to have at least one member trained in OPUE.
Motorcycle Safety Helmets
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issued Federal
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 218, Motorcycle Helmets, on August 20,
1973. The standard went into effect on March 1, 1974, and was most recently
amended on October 3, 1988.
All motorcycle helmets sold in the United States are required by law to
meet or exceed the minimum performance requirements established by FMVSS 218.
These requirements include minimum impact and penetration capabilities, chin
strap retention qualities, and a 210-degree field of view, along with a number
of labeling requirements. To certify that their helmets meet all the
requirements of FMVSS 218, a manufacturer places the letters “DOT” on the back
of each helmet. This lettering is often referred to as a “DOT label” or “DOT
sticker.” If a manufacturer sells a helmet certified as meeting the FMVSS
standard and NHTSA discovers the helmet does not, NHTSA conducts an
investigation that can result in the manufacturer's having to recall the
helmets in question. Recently, the manufacture and sale of costume or novelty
helmets has dramatically increased. These helmets, if not sold as motorcycle
helmets, are not required to meet FMVSS 218. If the manufacturer does not
place a DOT sticker on the back of the helmet, they are not certifying that
the product meets FMVSS 218, and they do not claim that it offers any
protection at all to the wearer. A problem arises with a novelty helmet when
its manufacturer or distributor encloses or offers a DOT label separately for
the consumer to place on the back of the helmet. Reputable manufacturers place
the DOT sticker on their helmets before shipping them to distributors.
Most state helmet use laws require motorcyclists to wear helmets that meet
FMVSS 218. NHTSA has developed a training videotape and an informational
brochure to assist law enforcement personnel in identifying helmets that do
not meet this national standard. For copies of the video and brochure, call
NHTSA at (202) 366-1739.
FMVSS 218 Requirements
A DOT label must be affixed to the center, lower back of each approved
helmet.
FMVSS 218 also requires the manufacturer to sew into the helmet liner a
label or labels that can be easily read without removing padding or any
permanent part. This label must include following information:
Indicators Of An Illegal Helmet
The following is a list of items, in lay terms, that are indicators of
illegal helmets.
This information was provided by NHTSA's Safety Countermeasures Division
and compiled by the Licensing Depart-ment of the Motorcycle Safety Foundation.
Motor Vehicle Registration
The system of motor vehicle registrations carried out in the various states
and provinces serves multiple purposes, foremost of which are
Two-Plate Reflectorized Registration
The proliferation of different plate types bearing the same charac-ters
creates problems in detecting stolen and wanted vehicles, and states should
avoid issuing duplicate identification, if possible.
Mandating that all vehicles display registration plates on both the front
and rear of the vehicle enhances law enforcement's efforts to identify a
vehicle rapidly, whether it be from a frontal position or from the rear of a
vehicle. Police officers are commonly trained to jot down the license plate
numbers of oncoming vehicles they see while responding to an accident or crime
scene, in an effort to identify possible fleeing perpetrators or eyewitnesses
to the incident. Bicyclists, pedestrians and drivers frequently observe the
plate numbers of suspicious vehicles and report them to the police. This
assistance has been instrumental in solving many serious crimes over the
years. A study conducted by the IACP and published in 1979 revealed the
benefit of two-plate registration. In addition to the rapid identification of
a vehicle by police authorities, two-plate reflec-torized registration also
enhances officer safety. Through today's synthetic materials used to cover
registration plates, a minimum amount of light can illuminate the plate as an
alert to the police officer for personal safety and for identification
purposes.
If for no reason other than officer safety, two-plate reflectorized
registration should be incorporated as a primary design for registration
plates in every state. Additionally, a reflectorized plate prevents collisions
with vehicles parked along streets in poorly lighted areas.
Enforcing the Two-Plate Requirement
From an enforcement perspective, vehicles required by law to display two
registration plates are easier to identify, and the dual plate registration is
effective in thwarting vehicle thefts.
In those jurisdictions where two plates are required, the absence of one
plate provides an officer with articulable suspicion to execute a traffic stop
for vehicle registration inquiry, leading to the detection of drunk drivers,
persons operating under revocation or suspension, and persons transporting
contraband.
In today's society, the general public supports laws and regulations that
benefit them, even if they may involve an increased or new user fee. It should
be the responsibility of law enforcement and other public agencies to
demonstrate and convey to the public and legislative bodies the benefits from
a two-plate system. Vehicle owners can see potential benefits in the event
their vehicles are stolen. Citizens can appreciate how the two-plate system
enhances police officers' abilities to detect criminals and simultaneously
heightens personal safety.
Police executives and associations should be proactive in advocating
two-plate systems in jurisdictions that do not have them and in fighting back
attempts to go to a one-plate concept. However, justifying the need for a
two-plate system is difficult unless law enforcement officers aggressively
enforce the two-plate requirement by stopping vehicles with only one plate and
issuing either a warning or citation to these drivers. Each police department
should have a specific policy supporting enforcement against drivers with
missing, mutilated, or illegible number plates.
Automated Data Collection At Roadside
Increased refinements in the field of electronics have opened up new vistas
of exploration within the law enforcement profession. Sophisticated
electronics and computer equipment are making their way into more facets of
our daily routines, from the check-out counter at the neighborhood grocery
store to the vehicles driven on our highways.
Electronic equipment such as bar code scanners, transponders, and computers
can be utilized in law enforcement and highway safety disciplines to evaluate
traffic flow patterns, determine traffic demographics, record vehicle
registrations, issue parking tickets, and automatically collect highway tolls.
The progressive use of equipment and techniques that uniquely identify
vehicles without requiring any action by the driver are evolving. An automatic
vehicle identification (AVI) device can be attached to a vehicle, whether it
be a bar code or a more sophisticated transponder, containing specific
information about that vehicle. Through the use of a reader capable of
interpreting the AVI, law enforcement personnel can instantaneously retrieve
the information on the vehicle for their use.
Equipment of this type and capability can enhance vehicle registration
requirements and enforcement without placing an officer in a situation of
increased jeopardy.
Within the law enforcement community, title enforcement responsibilities
usually do not generate discussion; however, with-out specialized training and
concentration in vehicle titling and registration, the public can suffer
astronomical fraud and economic loss.
Title enforcement requires investigating police personnel to have a
comprehensive knowledge of state and local laws, regulations and ordinances,
and the idiosyncrasies associated with various types of titles, reissued
titles, duplicate titles, salvage titles, and manufacturer's statements of
origin. As with most sophisticated law enforcement areas and functions,
specialty skills have evolved that are essential to effectiveness.
Hidden VIN
Beginning in 1981, all motor vehicles manufactured in the United States or
imported for sale for over-the-road use were required to have a 17-character
vehicle identification number (VIN). In 1987, the Federal Motor Vehicle Theft
Law Enforcement Act of 1984 became law. Through the enactment of this law,
vehicles with a high-theft potential were required to use component part
labeling or secondary sources of identification, so-called “hidden VIN's.”
Specially trained officers use these hidden VIN's to verify the authenticity
of a vehicle or a component part.
By law, this secondary source of identification must be indelibly printed
on a label. This label must be permanently affixed to the component part on an
interior surface or location, so that it cannot be damaged in a collision or
during part installation, adjustment, or removal. It must be located in such a
fashion as to prevent its destruction or defacement during normal dealer
preparation, including any after-market installation procedures. The label
must contain the manufacturer's logo, or some other unique identifier, plus
the VIN. Any attempt to alter the label must either leave traces of the
original number or visibly alter the label's appearance. In cases of non-label
identifiers, inscriptions to the part must be so that any removal or
alteration visibly changes the appearance of the vehicle part. Locating the
secondary sources of identification is the responsibility of the manufacturer.
In order to assist law enforcement, manufacturers must notify, in writing, the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration of their numbers and locations
within 308 days of the date the vehicle line is offered for sale. Having the
special expertise to investigate cases where secondary sources of vehicle
identification are utilized is invaluable to a police agency. The National
Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB), a private organization funded by the automobile
manufacturers and insurers, has special agents in every state who are
available to law enforcement to provide training and other technical
assistance in identifying hidden VIN's.
Periodic Motor Vehicle Inspection
Furthering highway safety and providing a safe travel environment for our
citizens can be accomplished in a wide variety of fashions. Such is the case
when a jurisdiction implements by law a periodic motor vehicle inspection
(PMVI) program. Approximately 22 U.S. jurisdictions, several U.S. territories,
and the majority of the Canadian provinces have some type of PMVI program.
Some jurisdictions require annual or semi-annual safety inspections at either
a state-maintained or a private motor vehicle inspection stations licensed by
state authorities. Annual inspections may be required of passenger cars and
more frequent inspections of commercial vehicles and school buses. State-level
law enforcement agencies are charged with additional inspections of school
buses by specially trained troopers or inspectors.
In other jurisdictions, the periodic safety inspections by an authorized
inspection station are not required, but officers are allowed to stop vehicles
to conduct roadside safety inspections.
Increased concern by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over air
pollution caused by automobile emissions has led many jurisdictions to require
periodic inspection of motor vehicle emission systems. This procedure can be
effectively combined with periodic safety inspections in a single system. Law
enforcement executives and associations are encouraged to lobby for enacting
PMVI in those states and provinces where it does not currently exist. Although
variation exists within the types of PMVI programs, all ensure the periodic
inspection of basic safety components such as steering, tires, suspension,
brakes, lighting systems, and glass.
Effectiveness of PMVI Programs
Studies conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Admin-istration
(NHTSA) have identified vehicle defects as the sole cause of one out of every
43.4 fatal accidents studied. In addition, it has been determined that vehicle
defects play a partial role in a much larger percentage of all collisions. The
failure of essential mechanical vehicle components—such as ball joints, idler
arms, rack and pinion steering units, shock absorbers or struts, tires, and
brakes—can cause loss of control of a motor vehicle while it is in motion.
Each jurisdiction is responsible for using any available means to guarantee
that vehicle safety components are examined and periodically reexamined to
reduce the level of jeopardy that exists while a motor vehicle is being
driven.
Public Support for PMVI
While PMVI programs are not always recognized for the benefits they
deliver, widespread public support does exist for such programs. Public
perception is that the benefits derived from the inspection far outweigh the
inconvenience or cost of having to take a vehicle to a service facility for an
inspection. With the proliferation of self-service gasoline stations, no
longer is the friendly local attendant looking over a vehicle when it comes in
for fuel and advising the driver of the needed replacement of worn components
or low tire pressure. Without a PMVI program, what would be a simple, low-cost
replacement of brake pads often leads to the expensive replacement of rotors
simply because the problem was not caught in time. Thus, PMVI programs can
actually reduce the cost of motor vehicle maintenance, as well as enhance
safety factors.
Law Enforcement Benefits and Concerns
Requiring an inspection sticker on a vehicle also gives the police
additional articulable suspicion to stop a vehicle, and frequently leads to
the detection of drunken drivers, revoked or suspended operators, persons
transporting contraband, or stolen vehicles. The primary concern of state
authorities responsible for a PMVI program is to ensure that a quality safety
inspection is provided at a reasonable price; inspection facilities are
reasonably accessible and convenient; and safety inspection is not utilized as
a convenient excuse by unethical mechanics to sell unnecessary vehicle
repairs. Periodic use of undercover officers and vehicles to run through the
inspection process serve as an effective quality control measure for these
programs.
With the conscientious efforts of state agencies, street-level enforcement
officers, and public advocacy groups, a PMVI program can be effectively
administered and enforced and contribute enormously to highway safety.
Rebuilt or reassembled vehicles are often utilized by motor vehicle thieves
to conceal the identity of a stolen vehicle. Using the salvage parts of
several stolen vehicles to rebuild the vehicle, the thief then represents the
stolen vehicle as one rebuilt and is able to secure the proper documentation
to legitimize the sale of the vehicle.
A second concern regarding rebuilt vehicles is the vehicle's level of
safety provided to its occupants and its road worthiness. Law enforcement
officials must take specific measures to ensure that stolen vehicles are not
legitimately sold in the public market and that unsafe vehicles are not
allowed to operate on the highways.
To prevent the sale of stolen vehicles, law enforcement personnel should
examine all salvaged or rebuilt vehicles prior to issuing a title. Specially
trained VIN examiners, generally at the state level, should closely scrutinize
each such vehicle for signs of repair and the replacement of parts. The
examination should include a review of the documentation to ensure all
replacement parts are accounted for and that component part labels or
inscriptions are intact and free of tampering. Any discrepancy should be
thoroughly examined, including an examination of major component part labels
and identifiers.
Rebuilt vehicles can offer an affordable alternative to individuals who
otherwise could not purchase a vehicle, but unscrupulous or incompetent
rebuilders may shortcut or overlook critical safety components. For this
reason, all rebuilt vehicles should be inspected for safety compliance. A
check of all vehicle safety equipment should be performed to assure compliance
with applicable statutory requirements.
Through a systematic examination at the time of registration and title, the
potential for fraud is significantly reduced while, simultaneously, unsafe
vehicles are detected.
Specially Constructed Vehicles
Specially constructed vehicles, “street rods,” and other assembled vehicles
pose many of the same problems as rebuilt vehicles. A specially constructed
vehicle generally is not visually recognizable as being produced by a
particular manufacturer, while the assembled vehicle is distinguishable
because its composition is by a well-known manufacturer of commercially
produced vehicles.
When the owner of a specially constructed or assembled vehicle requests a
title or registration, law enforcement and vehicle titling authorities should
ensure that the vehicle is examined for safety compliance. Such vehicles
should be required to meet and be in compliance with all state equipment laws
prior to final inspection and the issuance of a title.
A particular problem involves vehicles fitted with oversize tires or
“jacked up” by other means so that they are extremely high on the road and
their centers of gravity have been drastically altered. Such alterations can
impair the handling dynamics of the vehicle and lead to component failure and
dangerous traffic crashes.
When such vehicles slip through the registration and titling process,
street-level law enforcement officers are obligated to enforce state laws and
local ordinances regarding such standards as bumper height requirements. Law
enforcement agencies should have written policies encouraging their officers
to enforce these requirements.
Enforcement and Engineering Liaison
The basics of an effective traffic safety program involve the “three
E's”—enforcement, engineering, and education—working in conjunction for safer
roads and drivers. Some accidents are caused by vehicle defects. Adopting
mandated federal motor vehicle safety standards, such as seat belts, air bags,
collapsible steering columns, padded dashboards, child safety seats, and
rollover and side impact protection, have reduced the number of injuries in
traffic accidents. Periodic motor vehicle inspection programs in many
jurisdictions assure us that vehicles maintain their road worthiness during
their useful lives. Aggressive traffic enforcement programs by state police
and highway patrol agencies, county sheriffs' departments and local police
departments deter unsafe drivers by suspending or revoking driver licenses for
hazardous moving violations. In addition, enforcement efforts to detect
vehicle equipment violations remove unsafe vehicles from the road. Public
information campaigns conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration, state governor's highway safety representatives, state and
local law enforcement agencies and licensing authorities, and public groups
such as MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Driving), and SADD (Students Against
Driving Drunk), along with high school and commercial driver education
programs, violator schools, and driver improvement programs, acquaint drivers
with rules of the road and instill proper driving attitudes.
The Final E
The final E involves engineering. Design, construction, and maintenance of
highways and traffic control devices can be instrumental in reducing
collisions. Seldom do enforcement and engineering work in concert to promote
highway safety, despite the fact that police officers on patrol are perhaps
the best eyes and ears that traffic engineers could have. By reporting
obscured or nonfunctioning traffic control devices and dangerous highway
conditions and providing feedback from citizen complaints and the study of
traffic congestion problems, officers can offer important input for traffic
engineers. Engineers can work with officers by making highway improvements
such as changing speed zones, erecting new types of traffic control devices,
and placing roadside objects, such as utility and sign poles and guard rails,
so that out-of-control vehicles are slowed or stopped without causing injury
to occupants.
The Precedent Is Set
Years ago, the Bureau of Public Roads, the forerunner of the present
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) held the first national joint
enforcement/engineering conference. State traffic engineers and top law
enforcement officials met for the first time, many after working in the same
state for years. At this conference, common goals and interests were promoted
in the area of traffic safety and an efficient transportation system. It was
recognized that, in planning new highways, cross-overs are needed on
controlled access highways to provide access for law enforcement vehicles; as
well, space is required for pulling commercial vehicles over for weight checks
and safety inspections. It was also recognized that both the efforts of
engineering and law enforcement are necessary: short-term traffic problems can
often be solved efficiently by law enforcement actions, while long-term
problems are often best removed by engineering solutions. Out of this first
national conference grew suggestions for regional, multi-disciplinary
enforcement and engineering conferences throughout the nation, whereby state
law enforcement and DOT engineers from multi-state regions could discuss
problems and exchange ideas. Individuals attending from each state could
expand this concept when they returned to their home states. Finally, there
developed a concept that state Department of Transportation officials and
state, county and local law enforcement agencies could meet with their
counterparts in both statewide conferences and regional meeting within states.
Jurisdictions could schedule regular meetings between these disci-plines,
even allowing engineers to ride with police officers and see at first-hand the
situations that an officer was talking about. Construction conferences could
be held during the planning stages of highway improvement jobs so that law
enforcement would have strong input. The need for funding of patrols could be
taken into consideration in budgeting for highway improvements. Work zone
safety could be discussed and improved.
Resources Available
The Texas Engineering Extension Service (TEEX) of Texas A&M University
in College Station, Texas, is an excellent resource on this concept, since
TEEX is the driving force behind a successful engineering/enforcement liaison
in the lone star state. Arizona, capitalizing on the Texas experiment, also
holds regional and local meetings between DOT engineers and Department of
Public Safety commanders and engages in the joint planning of safety projects,
including engineering and enforcement concepts, with consideration of all the
other disciplines that play a significant role. DOT's top managers attend DPS
commanders' meetings and develop mutually agreed-upon policy statements,
recognize differences of opinion and deal with them effectively, and emphasize
risk management which has reduced lawsuits arising out of allegations of
collisions caused by unsafe highway conditions.
In any state where these joint engineering and enforcement conferences are
not currently in use, police executives and associations and highway
transportation planners and engineers should be proactive in bringing about
such efforts.
Freeway Incident Management: Strategies for Relieving
Congestion
The urban areas of the United States have experienced tremendous population
growth over the past ten years. With this growth has come rapidly worsening
traffic, as both passenger vehicles and freight carriers stretch the capacity
of our road systems. While adequate mass transit facilities are generally
available inside city limits, development patterns have placed both the people
and the jobs just outside the city areas, creating new transportation
patterns. The lack of mass transit to meet the needs of the growing suburban
commuter force has left people stuck in their vehicles, typically one person
to a car. The increase in numbers of one- or two-occupant vehicles has
overburdened our highway system to the point that peak periods of highway use
(“rush hours”) frequently extend to two or three hours. Traffic slows to 30-35
mph on roadways designed to move vehicles at 55 miles per hour or more. The
result is more pollu-tion, more frustrated commuters, and a higher cost of
commuting due to increased fuel consumption.
Traveling in or around urban areas during a peak-use period is irritating
at best, but it can be downright miserable when an incident further impedes
the traffic flow. In a typical freeway lane capable of carrying 2,000 vehicles
each hour, an incident that blocks one lane out of three will reduce that
highway's capacity by nearly 50 percent. Thus, when blockage occurs, the cause
needs to be eliminated quickly so that ordinary delays do not become
extraordinarily long. Freeway Incident Management (FIM) can help reduce the
delay caused by non-recurring incidents.
Problems Caused by Lane Closure
Traffic engineers estimate that, for every minute a traffic lane is
blocked, it takes four minutes to restore the flow after the incident has been
cleared. When an incident occurs during peak-use traffic periods, even a small
reduction in the time taken to clear the incident can greatly relieve
congestion.
In an average urban area such as Washington, D.C., and its suburbs, as many
as 400 blockages lasting one hour or more will occur annually. Many more
incidents will last less than one hour.
The FHWA has translated the average 20-minute lane blockage into a monetary
figure to show how freeway incidents directly affect the national economy. If
one lane of a three-lane freeway is blocked for 20 minutes—assuming the
freeway is running at capacity—the delay caused to motorists will exceed 1,200
vehicle hours. At the FHWA-assigned value of $4.00 per hour for each vehicle
hour of delay, the cost of the incident due to the delay alone is
approximately $5,000.
The goal of FIM, in addition to saving lives and property, is to minimize
the effects of such incidents on traffic congestion and reduce the possibility
of secondary incidents. This can be accomplished by the following:
What Is An Incident?
An incident that causes significant delay on a freeway can be as simple as
a disabled vehicle in a traffic lane or on a shoulder. It can be a lost piece
of lumber from a truck that causes motorists to change lanes suddenly. Such
minor incidents, if detected promptly, can be cleared rapidly with little
residual affect on peak-use traffic.
Major freeway incidents on the other hand, generally include:
Such incidents result in delay, inconvenience, wasted fuel, frustration,
and higher costs to motorists. Stopped traffic can create secondary motor
vehicle crashes. Local streets can become gridlocked by motorists trying to
avoid the incident scene.
What Can Be Done?
No single agency can effectively respond to and clear a major traffic
incident. Traditionally, the agencies charged for the motor vehicle crash
clearance are police, fire, and rescue services, and either public or private
wrecker companies. If structural damage is done as a result of the incident,
the local and state Department of Transportation (DOT) is called to respond,
generally after the other agencies have cleared the scene.
With FIM, many other agencies can be involved. Acting together, these
agencies can reduce the total time to resolve and remove incidents by more
than 50 percent. Agencies and services that should be an integral part of
planning for and responding to freeway incidents include; the state police and
law enforcement agencies having jurisdiction over surrounding areas, the state
DOT, local transportation agencies, large and small rig wrecker companies,
emergency medical services, fire departments, local media representatives,
local traffic reporters, the Department of Public Works, traffic engineers,
and public and private safety service patrols.
In the past, tasks were accomplished sequentially at a crash site: The
police would secure the area around the incident, rescue personnel would work
at rendering aid and removing victims, the police would investigate the crash
and finally, wreckers would be called to tow the disabled vehicles. After the
incident was cleared, DOT officials would be notified of downed signs or
missing guard rails.
At each stage of the incident, responding emergency vehicles would arrive
and park wherever the operator could find an open space. The result was a
mixture of emergency vehicles often blocking each other for long periods of
time, even when some vehicles were no longer needed.
Creating An FIM Plan
The first step is to examine the locality's needs. Whether an area is
highly urbanized, with recurring traffic congestion, or rural, with traffic
problems occurring only during major incidents, will determine the focus and
extent of planning for freeway incidents.
The second step is to identify those public and private resources available
to the locality that have a vested interest in transportation planning and
safety. Once these various agencies and services are identified, a request is
made for each to supply a command-level person to attend an initial
conference. The focus of the first meeting is on consensus building and
deter-mining that traffic incidents are a problem and that, by acting in
concert, time-saving policies can be implemented within each agency.
During the next phase, a working group is established to identify tasks,
resources, and existing capabilities of each entity focusing particularly on
jurisdiction, agency perspective and responsibilities, interagency field
communication, administrative coordination among agencies, legal
ramifications, site management, political sensitivity, consensus building and
goal setting. In these early stages, the group determines how best to use
existing resources to improve detection, verification, response, clearance,
and recovery of freeway incidents. To assist states and localities in
accomplishing these tasks, the FHWA makes available a four-hour upper
management overview and a two-day workshop for practitioners, detailing
step-by-step methods to create and implement FIM plans and response teams. You
can access these services by contacting your FHWA state coordinator.
System Components
Freeway Incident Management can be broken down into seven components:
pre-planning, detection and verification, response time, site management,
clearance time, motorists' information, and recovery time.
1. Planning
Management of an incident and the surrounding traffic problems is a team
effort, and each agency has a specific role to play. Planning minimizes
on-scene conflict and confusion, as well as redundant requests for
additional services. 2. Detection and Verification
3. Response Time
Training of all personnel of the agencies involved in incident management
creates a greater awareness of each individual's role in incident clearance.
When properly trained, workers know what their tasks will be and can begin
executing activities in accordance with the FIM plan for the specific
incident.A direct correlation exists between effective interagency
communications and reduced response time. Transportation offi-cials must be
able to communicate with police or fire/rescue personnel on the scene to
determine the correct response. Radio or cellular telephones can be used to
relay response information to avoid delay, or make detailed requests for
specific equipment and personnel from other agencies. Communications is
particularly important when planned alternate routes must be modified due to
construction or incident events (such as chemical fumes passing from
incident site to alternate route).
Each local FIM planning team should consider pre-staged equip-ment
storage areas, administrative traffic management teams, public education
programs, central information, processing and control sites, and better
identification of exact locations on freeways (more frequent mile-post
markers, for example). Like other facets of FIM, these must be evaluated as
to cost, practicality, frequency of use, and overall benefit. Each planning
team must select the options that work best in its locality, implement the
procedures, and refine their use. 3. Site Management
5. Clearance Time
6. Motorist Information
There are many means by which motorists can be advised of the nature of
the problem, alternate routes, and any specific instructions. Some examples
include commercial radio stations, fixed and portable variable message
boards, detour route signs, highway advisory radio systems, and
vehicle-mounted public address units. 7. Recovery Time
Public and media criticisms of the incident should also be exa-mined.
News articles, editorials and letters to the editor or to politicians will
identify the perceived strengths or weakness of the response. The team must
review all these sources, honestly evaluate the group effort, and modify the
plan as necessary. With the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act
of 1991, resources from FHWA and NHTSA are available for states and
localities to create incident management plans and teams. or more
information on a step-by-step approach to incident management systems,
ontact David Hellman, Federal Highway Administration, Room 6311, Nassiff
uilding, 400 Seventh St., SW, Washington DC 20590, regarding the FHWA
orkshop, “Relieving Congestion Through Incident Management,” emon-stration
Project 86. Incident Command System
An issue for law enforcement is knowing how to manage frequent, complex
emergency incidents effectively while avoiding the problems associated with
past responses. The National Interagency Incident Management System (NIIMS)
and its on-scene management component, the Incident Command System (ICS),
offer the greatest potential for law enforcement application.
Genesis of the System
The ICS and its successor, the NIIMS, evolved from FIRESCOPE, a project in
Southern California organized for potential emergencies in the early 1970s. A
series of wild-land fires in 1970 in a seven-county area made it apparent that
federal, state and local jurisdictions had no management mechanism or
resources to allow effective response to wildfire emergencies, which recognize
no jurisdictional boundaries. Funded by the United States Congress, FIRESCOPE
was chartered to assist Southern California fire service agencies in
multi-agency coordination of emergencies involving multiple jurisdictions and
exceeding a single jurisdiction's capabilities. The project developed two
interrelated and independent systems, the ICS and the Multi-Agency
Coordination System (MACS).
ICS operates on both conceptual and operational levels. At the conceptual
level, it represents agreement on common organization and terminology for
multi-agency personnel to manage resources and activities efficiently at
incidents involving two or more emer-gency response agencies. ICS encompasses
not only fire emergencies but all natural and technological emergencies, from
earthquakes to hazardous materials transportation incidents and civil
disturbances. ICS works with, and parallel to, the MACS in defining and
focusing information collection, processing and distributing resulting data,
and identifying related human and material resource needs. Its effectiveness
depends on voluntarily accepting its terminology and concepts into the daily
operation of each agency, from handling of routine, single-agency incidents to
complex, multi-agency operations.
Multi-Agency Coordination System
MACS is a coordinating process involving top agency managers. It integrates
the collection, processing, and dissemination of information necessary in
multi-agency operations, and provides for rapid allocation of required
resources during major incidents.
National Interagency Incident Management System
The NIIMS, which became operational in 1982, evolved from and built upon
the systems developed from the FIRESCOPE project. Publications providing
explanations and details of the system are available from the National Fire
Academy in Emmetsburg, Maryland.
Operational Characteristics
The ICS was developed and designed to meet a number of criteria critical to
effective incident management, including the capability to provide for single
jurisdiction/single agency involvements; single jurisdiction/multiple agency
involvements; and multi-jurisdiction/ multiple agency involvement. The
organizational structure is adaptable to any emergency or incident, is
applicable and acceptable to emergency responders throughout the country, and
readily adaptable to new technology. It provides the ability to expand an
operation logically from a single-unit response on up, with common elements
and organization, terminology, and procedures. It can be implemented with the
least possible disruption to existing systems. ICS consists of eight
components utilized interactively. These components include common
terminology, modular organization, integrated communications, unified command
structure, consoli-dated action plans, manageable span of control,
predesignated incident facilities, and comprehensive resources management. ICS
consists of five major functional areas: command, operations, planning,
logistics, and finance/administration. Through these major functions and
subordinate functions in each category, the incident commander has all the
management tools necessary to handle any size or type of emergency.
Law Enforcement Application
ICS is readily adaptable to law enforcement and other emergency response
disciplines. Since its adaptation by the San Bernardino, California Sheriffs
Department in the early 1980s, law enforcement agencies began recognizing its
value in managing police emergencies. It was successfully used to manage the
July 1989 DC-10 airliner crash in Sioux City, Iowa, and the October 1989 Loma
Prieta earthquake in California.
In the Sioux City incident, which resulted in over 100 deaths and numerous
injuries, rescue operation supervisors claimed that one of the most important
factors contributing to the successful management of this emergency was the
use of an ICS.
During the Loma Prieta earthquake, which affected a significant area from
Oakland to Santa Cruz some 75 miles to the south, emergency crews began to
respond from hundreds of miles away, many without any type of formal request.
The ICS system was integral to managing this massive disaster response, as a
planned procedure in some jurisdictions and conceptually in others. It
provided a more organized and systematic structure for the management of the
large volume of resources that assembled for the incident. Many jurisdictions
operated under the ICS unified command structure, while law enforcement, the
fire service, and other emergency response disciplines shared management
responsibility for emergency operations.
Adaptation and Training
The key to the success of law enforcement ICS is the ability to modify and
adapt the system to regional and law enforcement needs while keeping it
completely compatible with the fire service. For effective and efficient
operations to occur, the management mechanism of major emergency response
disciplines (fire, law enforcement, EMS, and transportation departments) must
have readily interchangeable and recognizable components and terminology.
Unlike the fire service, which is likely to have a company officer and several
firefighters responding to an incident on a given piece of apparatus, law
enforcement response generally consists of a single officer/single patrol
unit. This reduced manpower situation requires the initial police responder to
perform both command and tactical functions (in a simple motor vehicle
accident, this would be overall management and investigation), unlike the fire
service response, whereby the company officer assumes command and subordinate
personnel perform the tactical functions. To adapt the ICS system
successfully, police personnel must be trained and ICS must be integrated into
daily operations.
The effectiveness of ICS training increases when an integrated approach
involves regional law enforcement agencies and representatives of other
emergency disciplines. This enhances closer working relationships and on-scene
coordination and cooperation. Training conducted by the Massachusetts State
Police includes not only state police supervisors but also representatives
from other law enforcement agencies, the Massachusetts Department of
Transportation and Turnpike Authority, representatives of towing associations,
Port Authority supervisors, and representatives of other emergency response
providers. Interagency relations have been improved, and the concept of
teamwork, vital to the management of complex incidents, has been established
and reinforced.
Traffic Management and ICS
Typical traffic incidents consist of disabled vehicles, accidents, or load
spillages. They are a major cause of traffic congestion. The FHWA estimates
that the nation loses 1.3 billion vehicle-hours of delay due to incident
congestion each year, at a loss of nearly 10 billion dollars. This figure does
not take into consideration the economic cost of wasted fuel and environmental
damage by vehicles idling in incident-related queues. Congestion can be
minimized by clearing incidents as quickly as possible and diverting traffic
before vehicles are caught in the incident queue. The time saved by an ICS
program depends on how well the four stages of an incident—detection and
verification, response, clearance, and recovery—are managed. The ICS is the
most effective and efficient on-scene management process available to law
enforcement agencies today. It is particularly applicable to the response,
clearance and recovery stages of traffic incident management. Its concepts of
initial scene control and management, integrated operations, and teamwork
approach result in reduced clearance times for traffic incidents of all types.
This reduction mitigates the effects of traffic congestion at the incident
site. Major traffic accidents and hazardous material spills require the
participation and expertise of numerous emergency response disciplines. ICS
provides a mechanism for these disciplines to work together in an integrated
and coordinated manner, toward a shared goal of rapid incident clearance.
ICS As An All-Risk System
In addition to its effectiveness at highway transportation incidents, the
ICS has evolved into an all-risk management process for all types of
emergencies and all law enforcement activities. Response to the natural and
technological disasters, civil disturbances, security and crowd control
details, and the entire gamut of law enforcement activities can be managed
through the ICS implementation and use. The ICS is a widely accepted tool
among law enforcement agencies because it is logical and easy to implement yet
still compatible with the ICS utilized by fire and other primary emergency
response disciplines. It has been accepted and endorsed by the IACP Highway
Safety Advisory Committee as the preferred method of handling major highway
emergencies.
Abandoned Vehicles and Shoulder Collisions
Each year, thousands of vehicles break down and are left abandoned on
highway shoulders. Law enforcement officers have long considered these
abandoned vehicles as traffic hazards, regardless of how far off the road or
how short a time they are allowed to remain. If the Washington State Patrol
had its way, any abandoned vehicle would be defined as a traffic hazard.
Although this position may sound extreme to the motorist who runs out of gas
on the way to work, it is not without good cause. Over a ten-year period,
Washington State experienced more than 3,000 collisions involving abandoned
vehicles—resulting in 40 deaths, 1,774 injuries and nearly 36 million dollars
in economic loss. Police efforts to remove these vehicles have been hampered
by the issue of property rights, weak impound legislation, and a general
resistance on the part of the courts and the public to recognize abandoned
vehicles as traffic hazards.
Overview
The Washington State Department of Transportation has stated, “Millions of
dollars are spent each year to make highways safer and the roadside features
more forgiving to errant drivers. Why, then, do we tolerate parked or
abandoned vehicles to remain along our highways for extended periods of time?
We have designed standards that require a 'clear zone' on limited access
highways. Nothing can be placed in this zone without providing protection to
the motorist in the form of a guardrail, barrier, crash cushions, or
break-away supports. Yet, we allow heavy vehicles to stand a few feet or even
inches from the traveled lanes.” The prompt removal of abandoned vehicles is
necessary in the interest of traffic safety; however, because removal involves
a tow bill for the vehicle's owner, the issue has always been controversial.
A motorist who runs out of gas and is going to return in a few hours
becomes upset to learn that the police removed the vehicle and he must now pay
a tow company to recover the vehicle. Yet the same motorist who balks at
paying the tow bill is first in line to file a claim against the state for
“failure to protect” when he discovers his vehicle has been vandalized,
stolen, or damaged.
In Washington, state law allows a 24-hour grace period for vehicles stopped
along the roadway before they are deemed to be a traffic hazard. Although
several state laws forbid such stopping and standing, this rule clouds the
issue.
The Washington State Supreme Court supported abandoned vehicle impoundment
when it ruled that police impounds were appropriate as a part of a police
“community caretaking function, if the removal of the vehicle was necessary in
that it was abandoned, impeded traffic, or posed a threat to public safety and
convenience.” Even with this judicial support, however, resistance has
persisted in the lower courts. When an officer makes a decision to impound,
the agency risks paying the tow bill. In one year alone, the Washington State
Patrol paid more than $21,000 for 160 tow bills at the direction of the
courts.
The Washington State Patrol has explored the relationship between
aggressive impound policies and shoulder collision rates. In 1985, the impound
policy was more lenient in response to public pressure and judicial rulings.
In 1986, a more aggressive policy encouraged impoundment if the trooper judged
a vehicle to be a traffic hazard. Shoulder collision rates in three counties
in the Puget Sound metropolitan area decreased 18.3 percent by the end of the
year.
Problem Areas Identified
To document the problem of abandoned vehicles, the Washington State Patrol
conducted a study focusing on four areas of concern:
Analysis quickly identified three problem areas in analyzing interstate
shoulder collision data over a nine-year period:
The study recommended a two-hour impound policy for all abandoned vehicles
on limited access highways where the speed limit was 55 mph or less, and four
hours for all other limited access highways. It also suggested urban areas
should post restric-tive signs advising that abandoned vehicles were subject
to impound.
Following the study, the state Department of Transportation looked at the
shoulder collision problem again and found that, over a 7-year period, 3,165
shoulder collisions had occurred on interstate, limited access, or other state
highways; 57 percent of them occurred in urban areas, 43 percent in rural
areas. Additionally, 55 percent occurred at night. These collisions caused 40
deaths and 1,774 injuries. These findings reinforced the need to remove
abandoned vehicles in all areas, urban and rural, day and night.
Determining Impound Policies
When considering any state's liability in determining impound policies, a
“catch-22” situation clearly arises. If vehicles are promptly impounded, the
accident potential is reduced, but the state's likelihood of paying a
contested tow bill increases. If vehicles are not promptly removed and are
vandalized or struck, the state's liability is even greater when the
relatively small cost of a tow bill is compared with potentially large costs
of wrongful death or serious injury lawsuits. One wrongful death award can
cost the state much more than paying hundreds of $100 toll bills.
Police departments who patrol high-speed highways should choose the most
aggressive impound policy that is legal, in order to protect the public
interest and reduce liability. An aggressive public information campaign can
help raise awareness of the abandoned vehicle problem. Additionally, law
enforcement agen-cies should lobby their legislatures to request changes to
eliminate length grace periods contained in motor vehicle codes. Agencies that
fail to develop and enforce impound policies may face court-imposed costs, and
shoulder collision rates likely will rise, thereby increasing the agency’s
potential liability. It is hoped that sufficient evidence is now available to
convince court officials, the public, and police administrators that vehicles
abandoned anywhere upon highway right-of-ways are hazardous to the public
safety.
Law enforcement agencies throughout the country are plagued with rest area
crimes. These crimes irritate and annoy the public, make them fearful, and
frequently harm tourism.
The first step in attacking the problem is to determine the crime problem,
its location, and extent and to identify or profile the people causing these
crimes.
Developing a Plan
To develop a plan to eliminate rest area crime, law enforcement must
coordinate efforts with other agencies, such as the DOT or the Department of
Parks and Resources, that manage the rest areas. It is important to elicit the
opinions and support of the officers on patrol and the personnel of these
other agencies. We should consider multiple concepts to eliminate crime,
including the installation of signs, rest area maintenance, officer and
citizen awareness campaigns, and enforcement. Goals and objectives should be
set for any plan and should correspond with the police department's mission
and goals. Crimes occurring in rest areas include prostitution, homosexual
activity, vandalism, thefts of abandoned vehicles, open-air drug markets,
panhandling, vagrancy, car jacking, and car-clouting.
Establishing Operational Procedures
When a plan has been devised, the department needs to establish the
operational procedures to carry it out. One of the first steps is to set up a
covert surveillance in order to determine the extent of the problem and the
specific behavior to be targeted. Typically, a covert surveillance will reveal
such problems as an extraordinary number of men cruising in cars or on foot
and seeking sex with other men. Often these men will be openly drinking or
using narcotics in public, exposing themselves, vandalizing the toilet areas
with graffiti, and cutting holes in toilet walls. Illicit sex acts, homeless
persons using rest areas for a place to live, and criminals lying in wait to
commit a crime of opportunity will soon be observed, along with their intended
victims, the motoring public—tourists, travelers, and truck drivers who use
the rest areas for their intended purposes.
Once information is obtained from covert surveillance, it is best to
solicit volunteer officers to perform an undercover enforcement operation.
Planning should go into such areas as the type of clothing undercover officers
will wear; the number and location of backup officers and when they will be
deployed; various communications signals and emergency signals; the role of
the supervisor; tactics to be used in contacting subjects, arrest procedures
including bookings, transportation, and issuing citations; providing
undercover officers with false identification, tactics and strategies;
notification of patrol commanders and working units that an undercover
operation is in progress; subtle identification means undercover officers can
use to identify themselves to on-duty officers; and any necessary equipment
for the operation.
Training Requirements
The most important step prior to implementing a rest area enforcement
operation is training all the persons involved. This training should focus on
the laws to be enforced (elements of the crime), descriptions/profiles of
targeted individuals, areas, and crimes, communications procedures, equipment
use, and guidelines for arrest, supervision, and operational procedures.
Implementing the Operation
Immediately prior to beginning the operation, all involved officers should
be gathered for a thorough briefing and be identified to one another. Any
equipment, such as a surveillance van and video, should be checked to ensure
it is in proper working condition. The laws of arrest and entrapment and
preferred methods of making an arrest while out of uniform should be reviewed.
Typically, arrests will be made for such offenses as patronizing a prostitute,
public indecency, possession of a controlled substance, minors in possession
of alcohol, possession of drug paraphernalia, open containers of alcohol in a
motor vehicle, DUI, and other traffic offenses.
Critique Procedures
Following each shift and at the conclusion of the operation, a critique
should be held for not only the officers and their supervisors but also other
agencies involved, such as the DOT and the Fish and Wildlife Service.
Participants should brainstorm on how the operation worked and how it can be
improved. All participants should have an opportunity to express their ideas.
Collection and Analysis of Data
Reporting procedures should be established at the beginning of the
operation and carefully followed. Data should be input and analyzed to
determine the effectiveness of the operation and to defend against possible
later public criticism.
Monitoring Rest Areas for Further Problems
Once covert operations have ceased, officers on routine patrol, as well as
DOT employees and others, should be impressed with the necessity for continued
monitoring of the rest areas and notifying supervisors if illegal activities
reappear. A brief, intensive period of enforcement will have a “halo” effect
for a few weeks or months, but unless the operation is repeated from time to
time, the problems will reappear.
What Departments Have Learned
Some departments, such as the Washington State Patrol, have had great
success in implementing rest area enforcement operations. A great deal can be
learned from the experience of these agencies. Some of the things that the
Washington State Patrol identified include the following:
Organizing the Detail In a busy rest area, it is advisable to have
as many as six officers on an assignment, set up in teams, with each team
assigned with a decoy and surveillance person. The surveillance person is
responsible for keeping all of the members aware of the decoy's whereabouts
and activities at all times. A marked unit, if available, would be assigned to
the program to provide transportation to jail for those arrested. If an extra
marked unit is not available, then nearby officers should be notified of the
operation, and a marked unit called to assist in booking suspects. Because of
the wide use of police radio scanners, officers must be extremely circumspect
in radio transmissions affecting the operation.
With a six-person team, one officer is given the assignment of being a
decoy and allowing men to approach him and discuss sex, while three additional
officers, a detective, and a supervisor provide surveillance and look for
other crimes.
The decoy, during his conversation with suspects, tells them that he
charges for his services—that he only “plays for pay.” When an offer of a
specific sex act with an agreement for a fee is reached, the suspect is
arrested for prostitution. The decoy may or may not allow the suspect to touch
him, and, if he does so, only the arm, shoulder, or leg area should be
touched. Officers playing the role of decoy should not allow themselves to be
touched in the area of the groin or buttocks. Decoys should tell suspects who
try to touch them that they do not allow themselves to be touched prior to
payment. If touched in the groin area, they should immediately tell the
suspect to stop. If the suspect continues, he should be arrested for assault
or a similar offense that prohibits unprivileged physical contact.
Unit members not playing the role of decoy should be told to arrest anyone
who touches them in the groin area or anywhere they do not want to be touched,
especially while using the toilet facilities or areas where it is known that
sexual practices occur.
Supervisors should review each arrest and determine whether or not the
officer has probable cause to book the suspect or issue a citation and release
the individual on a written promise to appear.
Information on arrests should be logged into a computerized program, and as
a suspect goes through the court system, the arresting officer should be
notified of the case disposition, which is then added to the computer file.
Each officer assigned to surveil a decoy should be equipped with a portable
radio that communicates with the other officers and the command post. Each
decoy should have a pre-arranged signal to alert the surveillance officer and
others when an arrest is to be made. The surveillance officer is responsible
for keeping super-visors and others aware of the decoy's whereabouts at all
times.
Media Coverage
Departments should not overlook the advantages to be gained by effective
media coverage of efforts to clean up rest areas. At the same time, a
department contemplating such a program must be aware it is absolutely
essential to conduct it in such a manner that does not penalize persons for
lifestyle choices but, rather, focuses on illegal sexual behavior that is
harmful to the community.
Preventing Wrong-Way Accidents on Freeways
In some localities, many serious accidents result from wrong-way driving on
freeways, and the prevention of these violations becomes an important public
safety issue.
According to a report issued by the California Department of
Transportation's Division of Traffic Operations, half of the wrong-way driving
on freeways results from deliberate, illegal U-turns. Measures taken to
improve ramp operation would not affect this half of the wrong-way problem.
For the other half, none of the physical barriers tested to date appear
appropriate. Methods other than physical barriers have, however, proved
helpful in decreasing incidents of wrong-way driving.
Effective Treatments
Effective treatments include repainting or adding wrong-way pavement
arrows; reorienting, moving, or adding wrong-way sign packages; modifying the
trail-blazing freeway entrance packages; placing edge lines in pavement
markings; upgrading signs of high-intensity reflective sheeting; and modifying
lighting.
Occasionally, more extensive measures can be used to solve the problem at
unique locations, including airport-type pavement lights, modifying the design
of ramp terminals, and adding ramps to incomplete interchanges. Important to
note is that three-quarters of the fatal wrong-way accidents are caused by
drivers involved with alcohol or drugs. This fact presents a difficult
challenge in terms of developing appropriate engineering solutions. Additional
wrong-way pavement arrows may be beneficial. The use of larger “Do not enter”
signs may be considered if an off-ramp continues to have a problem.
Larger, highly reflective signs may be helpful for confused or elderly
drivers. Using red pavement lights activated by wrong-way drivers may be
considered at locations where traditional treatment is not effective. The
condition of wrong-way signing packages at off-ramps and directional signs is
important. Always consider the option of using a second set of wrong-way and
“Do not enter” signs and wrong-way arrows farther along an off-ramp. The
option of using additional signs and markings on selected ramps may give
drivers a second chance to realize that they are headed the wrong way before
they enter the freeway.
Results of Studies
Because wrong-way accidents are tragic, they have been under intensive
study by the California Department of Transportation for over 30 years.
Wrong-way fatal crashes account for about three percent of the fatal crashes
on California freeways, and about 5 percent of the fatalities.
Remedial Measures Taken
Wrong-way signs and 24-foot white wrong-way pavement arrows have been
developed and installed on many of California's freeways. White-on-green
freeway entrance signs at either side of on-ramp entrances have also been
posted to aid motorists in finding the correct way onto the freeway. Further
studies on wrong-way sign colors indicate that white-on-red is seen the
earliest of any color; thus, the “Do not enter” and the “Wrong way” signs
should both be red and white. In fact, these signs and pavement arrows were
adopted as a national standard in 1967 in the Manual of Uniform Traffic
Control Devices.
“Do not enter” signs should be located low enough for good visibility to
the headlights of vehicles entering the wrong way. Camera surveillance reveals
that the most effective corrections for wrong-way movements include the
installation of freeway entrance signs at on-ramps, and “Do not enter” and
“Wrong way” signs at off-ramps; posting supplementary trail-blazing signs and
extra lighting at on-ramps; reducing the off-ramp throat opening, and
eliminating the free right turn from the off-ramp.
More than half the fatal and injury crashes occur at locations where sight
distance is less than 1,200 feet on mainline freeway lines. A few types of
ramps and interchanges, such as the cul-de-sac, buttonhook, trumpet, and
two-leaf clover have a greater number of wrong-way accidents than other types.
Also, left-hand off-ramps can appear to be on-ramps to the wrong-way driver
and should be avoided during design and construction.
California has installed red-backed reflective pavement markers on the lane
lines on freeways, and the Department of Motor Vehicles has educated the
public to the concept that the driver who sees red reflectors is going the
wrong way. Because these reflectors have proven to be of limited value with
drunk drivers, they are now installed only in the vicinity of off-ramps as a
secondary treatment.
Parking lot spike barriers have been tested to determine if they could be
used at off-ramps to stop vehicles from entering the wrong way; however, they
were found unsuitable. The spikes, even when modified in shape, would not
cause tires to deflate quickly enough to prevent a vehicle from entering the
freeway. Under high-volume traffic the spikes broke, leaving stubs that would
damage the tires of right-way vehicles. It was believed that some right-way
drivers, upon seeing the spiked barriers, would hit their brakes and create a
hazardous situation.
California designed movable gates to bar traffic from high occupancy
vehicle lanes. The gates are designed to stop even the heaviest vehicle;
however, they take approximately 20 seconds to lower or raise—far too slow for
a wrong-way vehicle entering a ramp. With the present state of the art, gates
are not appropriate for retaining a wrong-way vehicle.
Georgia has tested a pump-up device that presents a physical curb-like
barrier to the wrong-way driver, but it was found unsuitable for reasons
similar to those of the spike barriers.
California tried adding horns and flashing red lights over the wrong-way
signs, but these were found to be ineffective and drew complaints from
neighbors. One device that did show promise was red, airport-type pavement
lights, embedded in the pavement across an off-ramp, activated by wrong-way
vehicles. These were shown by camera monitoring to reduce further wrong-way
entries. About half of the wrong-way drivers at these ramps braked before
reaching the wrong-way sign. Nearly half continued past the signs but braked
before the pavement lights. Some, however, continued past the pavement lights
and went out of view of the camera.
A check of the driving records of typical wrong-way drivers indicate that
they have received more traffic violations and felony convictions and have
been involved in considerably more accidents of all types than the average
motorist. The majority of wrong-way drivers were male. Another complicating
characteristic is that many make intentional U-turns on freeways—they do not
enter via an off-ramp. Nearly half of the wrong-way crashes are caused by
U-turns, and half from wrong-way entries via off-ramps. 12-1-39 Field reviews
must be conducted by transportation officials to make sure that signs and
markings at these locations are in good repair, and that there are no
conditions which could mislead drivers.
High-intensity reflective sheeting for signs can be adopted for wrong-way
and freeway entrance sign replacements and upgrades. Using larger signs also
provides more visibility, especially for elderly drivers. Thermal plastic
pavement wrong-way arrows can be installed. They have high reflectivity and
great durability.
Synthetic materials have been developed for anti-theft signs in urban areas
with high instances of vandalism, motivated by the aluminum resale value. An
anti-graffiti coating has also been developed. Innovations in reflective
coatings continue to be made. The electronic system for pavement lights should
be carefully selected for its reliability under varying moisture conditions.
Wrong-way accidents show distinct patterns by time of day, a trend that may
have implications for directed patrol enforcement. These crashes peak at
around 2 to 3 a.m., although this is more noticeable in the urban areas. The
bars are required by law to close at about this time. The higher traffic
volume during the day in urban areas probably depress the wrong-way crashes
during these hours. Urban areas have a much greater number of wrong-way
crashes than rural areas.
Enforcement Efforts
State police, highway patrol officers and local police can make a valuable
contribution in combating wrong-way driving.
Most vehicle codes contain provisions such as sobriety, turning movements,
and sign theft, which can be enforced to good advantage by the police. Crash
reports reveal that the typical wrong-way crash is caused by a driver who is
either driving under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or had been drinking
or consuming drugs. Various police programs can help remove these drivers from
the road.
One important program is the Sobriety Checkpoint program. Its aim is to
detect and remove drinking drivers from the road and to reduce alcohol-caused
collisions. In any state in which state law and appellate court decisions
allow the use of sobriety checkpoints, they should be seriously considered as
a means of preventing wrong-way accidents on freeways.
Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Safety
Police should not overlook intervening variables in traffic safety that can
be affected directly or indirectly by the private sector. For instance,
railroads maintain private roadbeds that intersect more than 160,000 public
highways in the United States. More than 5,000 collisions occur at these
intersections each year, resulting in almost 600 fatalities and 1,800
injuries. A motor vehicle/train collision is many times more likely to produce
fatalities than a roadway collision.
Highway-rail grade crossing traffic enforcement should be given every
consideration in the aggressive pursuit of traffic safety. Collisions that
occur at these intersections usually are a result of motorist inattention or
impatience, which is especially apparent after observing motorist behavior at
these crossings.
Law Enforcement Liaison with Private Sector Traffic Safety Programs The
Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), using data provided by United States
railroads, maintain a detailed analysis that may prove beneficial to police
when conducting safety studies within their communities. By using this data in
conjunction with programs offered by the private sector, agencies can
implement effective enforcement strategies. Such programs are supported by
federal and state funds, such as the OOT (Officer on the Train) and GCCI
(Grade Crossing Collision Investigation) programs for police.
OOT is a highway-railroad grade crossing safety awareness program
coordinated through a national railroad safety program, Operation Lifesaver,
which places police officers aboard trains to radio traffic violations to
other officers strategically located at or near grade crossings. The selection
of these sites are based on previous collisions and traffic violations.
The GCCI course is a highway-railroad grade crossing safety awareness
program coordinated through the Operation Lifesaver program. Tailored to
specific law enforcement agency needs, the course usually lasts one to three
days and is provided at no cost to the agency.
Section 402 manpower funding may be available from the U.S. Department of
Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) for
these programs.
Operation Lifesaver is a nationwide, nonprofit public information and
education program dedicated to reducing crashes, injuries, and fatalities at
highway-rail grade crossings. You can obtain more information by contacting
Operation Lifesaver, Incorporated 1420 King Street, Suite 401 Alexandria, VA
22314 800-537-6224
Pedestrian Safety
After vehicle occupants, pedestrians represent the second largest category
of motor vehicle deaths. In a recent year, motor vehicle crashes claimed the
lives of 5,797 pedestrians in the United States. Approximately l00,000 more
were injured. Over a 12-year period, between 14 and 17 percent of all traffic
deaths annually have involved pedestrians.
The loss of human life and suffering caused by these crashes is a serious
national health problem. Each year, the economic cost of salary loss and
medical expenses also amounts to billions of dollars.
The federal government has designated pedestrian safety as one of the
national priority highway safety program areas. Pedestrian safety is a
nationwide concern, and effective countermeasures exist to address the
problem. In order to combat the problem, each law enforcement agency must take
the initiative.
Reasons Behind Lax Enforcement
Although pedestrian safety has been identified at the federal level as a
serious problem, it may not be perceived as such at the state and local level.
Many communities are unaware of pedestrian safety issues or are forced to
overlook them because of budget constraints.
Law enforcement activity on pedestrian safety has been limited because of
several reasons. One of the biggest reasons is a significant lack of technical
information available to the law enforcement community. Some departments give
pedestrian law enforcement a low priority because of other demands, such as
violent crime, drug intervention, increased calls for service, or lack of
manpower. In these circumstances, concerned police agencies are faced with the
challenge of creating a demand for enforcement of pedestrian laws within their
agencies or communities.
A police agency becomes more involved with pedestrian safety issues for a
variety of reasons, one of the most common of which is a local tragedy. The
publicity surrounding such an event often sends the community to the police
for leadership in solving what may be a pedestrian safety problem. Another
reason for police involvement is the identification of pedestrian issues
through the analysis of accident reports. Whatever the reason, it then becomes
time for someone within the agency to develop expertise in pedestrian safety
issues.
Changing Attitudes and Behavior
As with other traffic safety programs, a pedestrian safety law enforcement
program requires using the “3-E” (enforcement, education, and engineering)
approach. Changing pedestrian and motorist behaviors and attitudes about
pedestrian safety is an ongoing process that requires an ongoing commitment.
The commitment will not take a great deal of time nor drain resources, but it
will demonstrate to the community that your police agency takes pedestrian
safety seriously. Other community organizations may be encouraged to follow
your lead, and together you can utilize community policing concepts to improve
pedestrian safety.
The Pedestrian Crash Picture
Children, the most inexperienced users of the road system, have nearly 43
percent of the pedestrian accidents although they comprise only 30 percent of
the population. Their resiliency to injury is probably the reason for the
disproportionate percentage of fatalities experienced by this age group. Of
the child pedestrian mishaps, 2.6 percent result in death.
Target Percent of Group Population Total Fatalities Crashes
The fact that working adults have years of experience using the road system
may explain why this group, comprising 60 percent of the population, has only
50 percent of the pedestrian crashes. The resiliency of youth fades in this
group, however, and it experiences a fatality rate equal to its population
numbers. Of the mishaps happening to working adults, 6.8 percent result in
death.
Older adults have fewer mishaps than would be expected for the size of this
age group due to, perhaps, their many years of experience and a lowered use of
the road system. But a frailty factor likely operates here, and a large
percentage of these mishaps—16.1 percent— result in fatalities.
When pedestrians are involved in motor vehicle crashes, the results are
usually disastrous. Close to 6,000 pedestrians are killed each year in traffic
crashes, often the result of alcohol use by the pedestrian, the motorist, or
both, plus excessive speed by the motorist. These causes account for almost 15
percent of all annual fatalities.
Males account for about 70 percent of the pedestrian fatalities, making
them over-represented. The male pedestrian fatality rate is 3.24 per l00,000
population—more than twice the rate for females.
Nearly the same number of pedestrians are killed on weekday days as on
weekday nights; however, weekend nights see almost twice as many pedestrian
fatalities as do weekend days.
Approximately 60 percent of pedestrian fatalities occur at night. Half of
the victims under 16 years of age are killed in crashes that occur between
3:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m.
Seventy percent of the pedestrian fatalities occur in urban areas, and 82
percent of fatally injured pedestrians are at non-intersection locations.
People 65 years and older have the highest pedestrian fatality rates and are
more likely to sustain serious injury or death if struck by a motor vehicle.
They account for 18 percent of all pedestrian fatalities.
Twenty-eight percent of annual pedestrian fatalities involve children under
the age of five. Pedestrian mishaps are the single largest cause of death of
children ages 5-9 years. More than 25 percent of the traffic fatalities under
age 16 are pedestrians.
Alcohol involvement, either for the driver or pedestrian, is reported in
more than half of the motor vehicle crashes that result in pedestrian
fatalities. Nearly one-third of the pedestrians involved are intoxicated, with
BAC levels of 0.10 or greater. While the percentage of alcohol-related traffic
accidents involving drivers and passengers in motor vehicles has been steadily
declining, the percentage of alcohol-involved pedestrian accidents has
remained relatively constant.
Pedestrian Safety Programs
Commitment by the law enforcement agency's chief executive is essential to
the success of a pedestrian law enforcement program. Involving the community
in the planning and implementation of such a program is equally important. The
goals of a pedestrian safety law enforcement program are to have citizens be
aware of and comply with the pedestrian laws and to have police officers
enforce these laws.
It is only logical to have both the police and the community working
together on a program aimed at citizen behavior. Prob-ably no single
organization has a great deal of time to devote to pedestrian safety; however,
by pooling resources you can have a significant impact.
The method agencies use to train officers placed on traffic assign-ments
enhances the effectiveness of a pedestrian program. Recruit schools and
traffic commanders need to explain and emphasize the reasons why pedestrian
law enforcement is important. They need to sell their officers on enforcement
by using educational efforts.
Suggested training tools for educating police officers about pedestrian law
enforcement include using the same safety messages communicated to the general
public by television, radio, or brochures; placing articles about pedestrian
safety and enforcement concepts in police memos and bulletins; and developing
enforcement videotapes to be shown at roll call.
When issuing a citation to a pedestrian or motorist for a pedestrian
violation, officers should be encouraged to run a check on the violator's
license. The officer may find that the violator is a wanted criminal or is
driving on a suspended license. Officers will then see that they are not only
reducing the pedestrian problem but also responding to other crimes. For
traffic officers to enforce pedestrian laws and be dedicated to the program,
police supervisors must communicate their support and provide positive
reinforcement, and top management must trust its commitment.
Obstacles to Enforcement
Throughout the country, police agencies run into obstacles when trying to
enforce pedestrian laws. These obstacles include a lack of interest or
understanding, the severity of other law enforcement programs, insufficient
training or funding, weak laws governing impaired pedestrians, and inadequate
support from the judicial system, where many judges do not support efforts to
ticket pedestrian safety violators.
By decriminalizing public intoxication, lawmakers intended that public
drunks would be treated rather than punished. However, when that law changed
and the resources directed toward public health facilities for alcohol
treatment never materialized, police officers were left with no permissible
law enforcement response and no places to take public drunks. In some
jurisdictions, the increased emphasis on anti-DWI programs has led to more
intoxicated persons on foot and an increase in the number of alcohol-involved
pedestrian crashes. We can often remove some of the obstacles to pedestrian
safety enforcement by learning from the successes of other jurisdictions.
Invite police officers or commanders from other agencies to explain how
pedestrian laws are enforced, and how tickets are issued in their
jurisdictions. Inform judges and prosecutors about your program and the
statistics concerning pedestrian crashes. Involve members of the judicial
system in planning your pedestrian law enforcement program.
Planning to enforce pedestrian laws where they have not been enforced
before will only lead to resistance unless the public is educated beforehand.
The pedestrian safety program is effective only when it successfully
integrates enforcement, education, and engineering. Once a community has been
educated about pedes-trian safety and understands the importance of following
the laws, it is more likely to support a law enforcement program. Educational
programs can mobilize community support for pedestrian law enforcement, which
is crucial to its success. Ten years ago, people did not expect to be arrested
for DWI and if arrested, expected minimal punishment. Today, DWI is considered
a serious offense and carries serious penalties and a social stigma. The
difference often is attributed to organized public support and demand for
enforcement from groups like Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD).
Educating the public will change attitudes, improve skills, and increase
knowledge about pedestrian safety issues.
Pedestrian Education Issues
Some pedestrians dart out into the street without stopping or looking for
traffic, and others cross at intersections without checking for turning
traffic.
Pedestrians sometimes do not understand what flashing “Don't walk” signals
mean. They mean, “Continue your trip but do not start if you have not yet
begun.” Pedestrians often begin crossing the street as the “Don't walk” signal
is flashing, instead of waiting for the next signal cycle. Some pedestrians
also disregard crossing signals altogether and cross the street when they
think it is clear.
Pedestrians frequently do not realize the importance of being able to see
motorists as well as being seen by them. Some walk along the roadway in the
direction of traffic and cannot see traffic coming up behind them. Others walk
in the street or along the roadway at night without any reflective clothing.
Pedestrians are unaware of the dangers involved by stepping out of a vehicle
once it has been disabled. When pedestrians step out of a car, they often walk
too closely to the road. When they cross they may misjudge the speed of
oncoming vehicles, especially on high-speed roadways.
Children do not perceive moving vehicles in the same way adults do. They
frequently lack the ability to judge the speed of oncoming vehicles.
Pedestrians crossing high-speed roadways or rural roads are often unable to
judge the speed of oncoming vehicles. Some pedestrians walk through parking
lots or pass driveways without looking for moving vehicles. Crashes usually
involve a behavioral error on the part of the pedestrian, the motorist, or
both. Motorists' behavioral errors can be seen in exceeding the speed limit;
failing to slow down when driving through residential areas in which children
are playing; and failing to reduce their speeds on city streets, in shopping
areas, or in the vicinity of crosswalks where pedestrians are abundant. Many
motorists turn without looking for pedestrians crossing their paths,
particularly in right-turn-on-red situations. They ignore the law requiring
them to yield or stop for pedestrians in crosswalks. Motorists may back up
without checking for pedestrians behind the vehicle, a particular hazard for
delivery trucks calling on house-holds. Also, motorists may pass stopped
vehicles, such as school buses, and thus endanger pedestrians.
Properly planned and sustained enforcement programs and public education
make people adopt intelligent practices for both walking and driving. You can
assist by developing a public information campaign, with a media
packet—containing information about pedestrian laws, high-risk behaviors,
accident statistics, and particularly dangerous intersections or areas of your
community—to be distributed to newspapers, radio, television, and community
bulletins.
Publicity Efforts—A Necessity
Holding a media conference when pedestrian issues are more likely to gain
attention, such as when schools open or close, can be a particularly effective
time to kick off a pedestrian safety program. Newspaper articles can be used
to ask the public to identify the most hazardous areas in the community for
pedestrians. Active or retired officers can provide public information at
scheduled programs in local schools and clubs.
Dispatching a brochure about pedestrian safety with all traffic citations
and written warnings is another effective method of educating the public. You
may also wish to consider including a survey about pedestrian safety as a
means of obtaining information about how much individuals know about this
topic. You can ask public transit agencies to include pedestrian safety
advertisements on the exteriors and interiors of their buses. Motor vehicle
authorities should be encouraged to include a section on pedestrian laws,
rights, and obligations on driver's tests, in driver education programs, and
in violator schools. In your educational efforts, personalize the issue by
showing how a loved one could be a pedestrian at risk. Victims' stories told
from a point of view as survivors are effective in such campaigns. Because
most drivers also walk, appeal to them from both perspectives. How do they
behave toward pedestrians when they are driving, and how do they expect a
driver to behave toward them when they are walking?
Utilities, banks, and other institutions and organizations can be
encouraged to include pedestrian safety information in monthly billings and
mailings. The state Motor Vehicle Division can be asked to include such
information with automobile registration and driver license renewal notices.
Senior citizen groups and youth groups such as the Boys Scouts can be used to
assist with mailing tasks.
Encouraging and supporting a pedestrian advocacy operation is also useful.
When preparing educational material, stress safety and not punishment. Inform
citizens about situations that can be dangerous for pedestrians, rather than
telling them about the jaywalking tickets they can receive. A good idea is to
integrate pedestrian safety with corporate health and traffic safety programs,
such as occupant protection, impaired driving, smoking cessation, and weight
control. Your message can reach many more people than it would if you were
doing it alone, and your limited funding and resources are thus maximized for
a greater impact.
Your pedestrian safety program will be much more effective if you gain the
support of government officials, community leaders, and organizations by
forming a pedestrian safety committee of individuals who have an interest in
traffic safety issues. Potential members can include representatives from
government, the Safety Council, the school system, media, automobile clubs,
youth, civic, and senior citizen organizations; traffic engineers; and
hospital or trauma center personnel. Networking with community groups is an
excellent method for obtaining citizen input as you develop and implement
pedestrian safety programs.
Cooperation with Engineers
Traffic engineering countermeasures can improve pedestrian safety by
modifying the physical environment. Solutions can range from painting
crosswalks to constructing pedestrian overpasses.
Engineering and enforcement interventions to improve safety can include
modification of stoplight signals to increase pedestrian crossing time, new
roadway markings to emphasize crosswalks, pedestrian signals on median
islands, oversized speed limit signs, and increased police enforcement of the
speed limit.
City planning departments should be made aware of pedestrian issues and
consider them when approving site plans. Typical urban problems, such as
traffic volume, limited resources, and crime, pose problems for pedestrians
that may not be addressed as a community grows.
Engineering factors regarding pedestrian safety should be integrated into
the community plans, including overhead cross-walks, sidewalks, marked
crosswalks, street lighting, shortened city blocks, and curb ramps for the
disabled.
Strategies for High-Risk Populations
Specific pedestrian populations have been identified as being high-risk.
They are either over represented in pedestrian crashes, or they put themselves
in vulnerable positions as pedestrians. These high-risk individuals include
older adults, alcohol-impaired pedestrians, and children. Increase enforcement
in areas where there are high concentrations of older adults. When pedestrians
see officers ticketing violators, they will be more law-abiding themselves.
Crossing guards can be assigned to high-concentration areas during peak
times or at designated times publicized to older adults. Placing crossing
guards in concentrated areas greatly reduces the opportunities for motorists
to violate pedestrian laws. Sometimes, volunteer crossing guards can be
obtained through organizations such as the AARP (American Association of
Retired Persons) or retired police officers' groups.
Determine where older pedestrians walk to shop, eat, or exercise,
particularly in areas with high concentrations of older adults, such as
retirement communities. The Department of Social Services or senior citizen
centers can help police departments identify such locations, as well as the
times when older adults are most likely to be in high-traffic areas.
Suggestions can be made to older adults about the safest times to be
pedestrians.
Many older pedestrians are killed while crossing legally in cross-walks. A
high rate of older pedestrian are involved in right-turn-on- red and left turn
crashes. Radio and television public service announcements, which reach a wide
audience, can stress messages aimed at older adults to make them more aware of
their limitations and adjust their driving and walking behaviors accordingly.
Video or slide presentations can be made to older adult organizations,
including church groups and social clubs, who are frequently eager to have
programs of interest presented to their members.
Mature motorists programs are available from the AARP and the American
Automobile Association. These training programs cover the issue of dealing
with back or neck problems that may interfere with an older driver's ability
to check for pedestrians before backing out of a driveway or parking space and
other issues, such as slowed response time, sensory deficiencies, mental
deficiencies, and other behavioral defects.
Inform traffic planners of the engineering needs for older adults. Offer
suggestions for countermeasures that will aid older adults: bigger signs;
timed push-button crossing lights to allow a longer pedestrian crossing time;
refuge islands to provide a safe haven for those unable to cross the street
during one pedestrian crossing signal cycle; high-visibility crosswalks with
overhead lighting, flashing lights, or reflectors to allow motorists and
pedestrians to see them better; delayed green lights on all-ways stop for
motorists so that pedestrians can cross in any direction or get a head start
on crossing before vehicles make their turn; and the construction of fences
and barricades to direct pedestrian flow to intersections and discourage
mid-block crossings.
Alcohol-Impaired Pedestrians
Law enforcement options for handling intoxicated pedestrians are limited
now that public intoxication has been decriminalized. Education is the best
way to encourage pedestrians to look for alternate forms of transportation
when drinking. Your agency can also participate in legislative action to
criminalize walking while intoxicated.
The message to be communicated to the public is that intoxicated
pedestrians present a hazard to law-abiding motorists as well as to
themselves. You can develop a public service campaign addressing the
relationship between alcohol and pedestrian crashes, and expand public
education about DWI to include the risks of walking while intoxicated. Enlist
the participation of anti-DWI groups in a campaign to highlight the dangers to
pedestrians caused by drunk drivers, and of drunk pedestrians to themselves.
Campaigns can be developed to alert restaurant and bar industries to the
problems related to drinking and walking, especially if you involve the
Alcohol Beverage Control Board in your jurisdiction.
Child Pedestrians
Educational countermeasures are most effective with this age group.
Enforcement agencies can play a significant role from an educational
perspective by developing safety materials for parents; delivering training
materials to pre-school programs and day-care centers to train child providers
to teach children about traffic safety skills; developing programs for school
crossing guards to instruct children to identify and report maintenance
problems such as broken pedestrian lights or signs that need replacing; and
developing school-based educational programs on pedestrian traffic safety. One
simple initiative is the installation of a mechanical arm that swings out ten
feet in front of a school bus so that children must walk around it to cross
the street and will be more visible to the bus driver.
Other High-Risk Populations
Other populations at risk are pedestrians on high-speed roadways and
tourists. Convincing the highway engineering departments to construct
overpasses and barricades, so that pedestrians are prevented from crossing
high-speed roadways, can help reduce collisions in these locations.
Distributing information about the dangers of crossing high-speed roadways can
also be effective when they address vehicle distance and speed as well as
alcohol impairment problems.
Motorists need to be aware of the risks they take when they get out of
disabled cars on high-speed roadways. Pedestrians have been killed while
standing in the road wondering what to do, while working on their cars, or
while attempting to flag down assistance. It is extremely important to
distribute information on the dangers and safety precautions motorists should
take when their vehicles becomes disabled. Transportation departments should
be encouraged to install telephones along expressways so that pedestrians can
call for vehicle assistance, and to post signs instructing motorists what to
do if their cars break down.
Police can work with hotel and motel associations to develop public
information and education materials for tourists, including information on the
dangers of walking after drinking. Hotels and motels can be encouraged to
distribute pedestrian safety materials to guests as they arrive and to develop
maps with safe pedestrian routes. Pedestrian educational materials can be
placed at rest stops along interstates and can be included on, or attached to,
state tourist maps.
Construction Zone Safety
An enforcement program is the best approach to deal with the safety of
construction workers on high-speed roadways. The Michigan State Police
developed a program called Construction Zone Accident Reduction (CZAR). It
involved a pre-enforcement study period, an enforcement period, and a
post-enforcement study. Prior to any enforcement efforts, the study indicated
that cars averaged 56 mph in a posted 45 mph construc-tion zone. Undertaking
vigorous enforcement efforts, state police issued speeding tickets during the
times when construction workers were present. A post-enforcement study
indicated motorists had reduced their speed by an average of 8 mph. In the
state of Pennsylvania, a double fine is imposed for speeding in construction
zones. Signs describing the fine for each incremental speed violation and the
amount if doubled are posted to inform motorists of their financial liability.
Federal Funds
Federal funds available to highway and traffic safety initiatives in states
and local areas are known as Section 402 funds. These formula grant program
funds are intended to aid the states in conducting approved highway safety
programs, under the direction of the governor's highway safety representative.
City and county government agencies are eligible for 402 grants to fund
activities in priority program areas such as occupant protection, police
traffic services, alcohol and other drug countermeasures, emergency medical
service, traffic records, motorcycle safety, and pedestrian/bicycle safety.
For information on these programs, contact your state governor's
representative for highway safety.
Federal funds are also available to conduct research, develop new
technology, and demonstrate new strategies and technology in the field of
highway traffic safety. Referred to as Section 403 funds, they are awarded
through grants, contracts, and cooperative agree-ments with state governments,
universities, and consultants.
Several other sources of federal funding are available for highway safety
strategies. These are incentive grants, awarded to states meeting certain
legislative and program requirements.
Section 153 funds are awarded to states that have safety belt and
motorcycle helmet use laws and that reach certain usage levels specified by
law. Section 408 and 410 funds are awarded to states that have passed
legislation such as administrative license revocation, mandatory jail for
repeat alcohol offenders, and lower legal BAC content levels, and that have
programs that control access to alcohol by use, conduct sobriety checkpoints,
and have self-sustaining alcohol programs. For more information on any of
these programs, contact your governor's representative for high-way safety.
Available pedestrian safety materials include the AAA Traffic Safety
Services Catalog, published by the American Automobile Association, Traffic
Safety Department, 1000 AAA Drive, Heathrow, Florida, 32746; and the
Pedestrian Accident Reduction Guide, distributed by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration, NTS-23, 400 7th Street, S.W., Washington, D.C.,
20590. The Walk Alert Program Guide is published by the National Safety
Council, 444 North Michigan Avenue, Chicago, Illinois, 60611-3911. The
National Safety Council also produces a “Watchful Willy Preschool Pedestrian
Program” aimed at preschool children to modify behavior and increase safety
awareness. The AAA also produces a booklet entitled, Older Adult Pedestrian
Safety, that gives local communities guidelines for the development of
programs that meet older adult pedestrian safety problems. The National Safety
Council has a similar brochure entitled Walk Alert: Pedestrian Safety for
Older Adults. The National Association for the Education of Young Children,
1834 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C., 20009 has a program, entitled
“Walking in Traffic Safely (WITS).” This traffic education curriculum package
for young children, aged pre-school to six years old, is designed to teach
them about streets and cars. Any of these programs are yours for the asking.
Public Information and Education Programs
From the smallest police departments where the chief must handle formal
public relations efforts to larger municipal police and sheriffs' departments,
state police and highway patrols that have formal public relations units
within their organizations— police everywhere need to tell their story. And
nowhere is this need more relevant or important than in the field of traffic
and highway safety.
In too many instances, the department's spokesperson may have little, if
any, training or experience, either in communicating with the media or in
organizing and managing an effective public relations campaign. Often the
person in charge of public relations may be at a loss to know what is expected
of him, or where to obtain assistance.
For many years, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
has urged law enforcement agencies to establish comprehensive traffic safety
programs. One way to accomplish this with a public information and education
(PI&E) program that creates a “perception of risk” among the public, so
they will support proactive traffic enforcement. Public information programs
are needed not only to educate but also to keep the topic of traffic safety
before the media and, thus, the public.
Public Information
The public perception of the police is directly affected by the image you
portray. You can gain public understanding, support, and confidence with a
positive impression created through effective, ongoing contacts with the
people you serve. A positive climate for these relations between your officers
and the public can be fostered by successful media relations. In larger
departments, a person or a unit may be responsible for implementing a public
information program. However, even in a department where such a unit is not
possible, a good public information program can be created. What is needed is
a strong commitment by the head of the agency to lead by example.
The task of public information consists of two important areas— external
and internal information.
External public information informs the public of departmental activities,
develops good relations with the local media, performs traffic safety
education and community services, develops an effective liaison with the
legislative and judicial branches of government, and enhances overall
department image. Internal public information disseminates information on
internal activities and employee achievements to department employees.
Media Relations
Media relations is the most important tool at your disposal in your quest
for a good public affairs program. The majority of the public has no direct
contact with you. Their perceptions are greatly influenced by what they see,
hear, and read on television, radio, and in the newspapers. Positive publicity
generates positive opinion, and negative publicity can destroy what took years
to accomplish.
Too often, we fear close contact with the media, either because of an
incident in which we received unfair treatment, or as a result of a “horror
story” from a fellow officer. Sometimes, we react to such painful experiences
by withdrawing into a shell and refusing to cooperate or even talk with the
press. When we do this, we risk digging a hole for ourselves so deep that it
will take an unbelievable amount of work and determination to regain public
trust. Our programs suffer as a result of being unable to inform the public
adequately of what we are doing. Upon closer examination, we may find that the
negative repercussions could have been avoided if we handled the media
differently. Proactive media efforts can often identify a potential problem
and manage its probable outcome. Make media relations a high priority in your
department because, without them, effective public relations programs are
impossible.
Community Programs
Community programs are formal services that serve a demonstrated need
within a particular community or area. They are sponsored totally or partly by
the law enforcement agency and aimed at mitigating a particular problem, or
advising a segment of the population about a specific program. These
activities can include both crime prevention programs and traffic safety
projects. Examples are neighborhood watch, operation identification, DARE,
rape and assault prevention, child molestation prevention, bicycle safety
programs, Halloween safety, departmental appearances, tours, speaking
presentations, and ride-along programs.
Public Perception of Risk
The goal of traffic safety programs is to convince the public that
violating traffic laws leads to crashes, serious injury, or death. Too many
people take the use of vehicles for granted and think, “It can't happen to
me!” Effective PI&E programs address this perception of risk, to help the
public understand that the risk of dying or being seriously injured in a
traffic crash is real. They must be shown statistics that will convince them
of this. A comparison of traffic statistics to crime statistics will show
that, although people are more fearful of being the victim of a crime than
being involved in a crash, traffic crashes are violent events that are more
likely to happen, even in a high-crime area.
This same theory can be applied to enforcement strategies. Regardless of
how many violators your officers stop, the only people that will be aware of
this activity are those who are stopped or ticketed. To give the general
population the idea that, “I might get caught, too,” and thus secure
additional voluntary compliance with the traffic laws, you must introduce
timely public information with your enforcement efforts. For the same reason,
highly visible enforcement programs such as sobriety checkpoints, wolfpack
patrols, speed saturation, and occupant restraint and equipment checkpoints,
have a great deterrent effect as the public observes a number of police units
in the area.
Working With the Media
Public information officers must recognize and understand the needs and
requirements of the media and help the media understand the methods, policies,
and constraints governing law enforcement. Then the best possible image of the
department can be conveyed to the public, and the media can perform its
primary mission to educate and inform.
Newsworthy events occur almost hourly, many directly or indirectly
involving law enforcement. We may secretly believe the media has no business
investigating these police matters and should stay clear until they are told
differently by us; yet the media believes its responsibility is to inform the
public about every detail of a story it considers newsworthy. If an event
provokes media interest, the fact is that the story will go out, with or
without our help. Law enforcement needs the media as an ally, but the media
does not need us to do a story—their existence doesn't depend on us.
The print media (newspapers and magazines) are more interested in the
smaller details of a story than television and radio reporters, who must tell
the story in a few seconds. However, newspapers, too, revolve around
deadlines. Being familiar with the deadlines of the various newspapers will
help you time releases to accommodate schedules, ease the workload of
reporters, and help your relationship with them. Despite the reporter's
insistence, you may be able to take time to prepare your response to certain
news events.
Radio media operate 24 hours a day, just as we do, and constantly require
information from us. With stories introduced and updated around the clock,
deadlines seldom exist. Broadcasts, which are short and concise, do not
require a lot of detail. The desired format is a quick, factual release of the
main parts of the story. Be prepared to condense a release of information into
a nine to fifteen second time period to accommodate radio's format. Half the
battle of getting your story aired is minimizing editing by the station to fit
it into their time frame. A snappy, factual, and appropriately timed release
that requires little or no editing helps guarantee that your release will be
broadcast as is, with the facts you want included. It also eases the workload
of the station staff and helps your relationship with them. Radio has the
largest audience during the morning and evening commuter rush hours, and
requests for updates and comments will increase during those times.
Radio stations frequently request a taped phone interview for broadcast.
Before you comment, ask if you are being taped. Avoid personal
opinions—remember, you are representing the department. Feel free to ask a
reporter, before the taping starts, what questions they will be asking. If you
make a mistake, realize it and correct it, either by making the correction or
retaping the interview. The radio format is especially valuable for getting
out traffic and emergency information, such as detours, evacuations, and
temporary parking restrictions. Officers can also serve as guests on talk
shows and provide information about departmental activities.
The television media can be summed up by the old adage, “A picture is worth
a thousand words.” TV, like radio, must fit the story into a short, concise
package suitable for viewing. However, unlike radio, TV has fixed deadlines,
because time is required for editing and preparing raw video footage of an
incident or interviews to meet scheduled air times. If you are being
interviewed on camera, discuss the interview outline with the reporter until
you feel comfortable about it. If you know in advance, do some research on the
topic. It is possible to stop the cameras if you make a mistake and tape that
portion of the interview over. As TV news crews have become more mobile, live
television interviews at the scene of an event are commonplace. Your officers
in the field must be trained to respond to these live requests. Television,
because it combines news with the impact of visual images, can enhance your
PI&E efforts. Use TV whenever it can help your efforts.
National News Media
Radio and TV network reporters and national wire services will descend on
you whenever you have news of more than local interest—a riot, a public
demonstration, or even a severe storm. You must be prepared for this to
happen.
Good coordination is the key to dealing with the national media. Designate
one spokesperson or public information officer to do all the interviews if
possible. This avoids releasing conflicting information or making it look as
though you are hiding something. In disaster situations, designate a media
staging area where they can work and you can interface with them. Don't
overlook your local media simply because the national people are on the scene.
When the national attention goes away, you must face the local media 365 days
a year.
Public Service Announcements
Radio and TV stations broadcast public service announcements (PSAs). In
addition, many newspapers will print free public service ads as a community
service.
If you wish to use PSAs, remember that they are a form of advertising.
Develop them as an advertising agency would develop an advertisement or
commercial. They should have a theme, present a concise and easily understood
message, and be factual and entertaining. Sometimes, the use of a celebrity or
radio or TV professional as the voice over, or “talking head,” will help to
get your message across. If you produce your own PSAs, be sure they are of
broadcast or print quality, or you can be assured that they will not be used.
Frequently, a local advertising agency will assist you, free of charge, as
their own contribution to the public well-being.
Managing The Media
Learn, either by attending journalism or police-media courses or from a
friendly media representative, how to write a good news release—one which
contains the “who, what, why, when, where, and how” in the first paragraph and
adds details of diminishing importance in subsequent paragraphs, so it can be
easily edited to fit the space available.
Get to know the names, addresses, phone and pager numbers of the movers and
shakers in your local media. Be accessible to them. If you send news releases
out, do not address them generically to the news desk, but send them to
someone you know. Top department officials should also develop friendly
relationships with managing editors, publishers, and those who set editorial
policy. Have a formal policy on handling the media, and consider issuing press
cards to bona-fide media representatives, to allow them the closest possible
access to a scene without disrupting operations or destroying evidence.
Regular meetings every few months between the department management and media
representa-tives provide both parties an opportunity to break bread together
and iron out any differences.
How to Obtain Further Information
NHTSA has a booklet entitled, Law Enforcement Public Information, as well
as examples of video and audio-taped PSAs, that is free for the asking. You
can obtain copies by contacting
Police Traffic Services Division (NTS-41) National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration 400 7th St., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590
Uniformity and Reciprocity of Federal Programs
Currently, more than 170 million licensed drivers are driving about 188
million vehicles over two trillion miles a year on our streets and highways.
Our efforts in highway safety have reduced the death rate to less than two
deaths per hundred million vehicle miles traveled. In the 1930s, the mileage
death rate was approximately 15.
The terrible loss of life on our streets and highways called for action,
and a group of visionaries in the 1920s and 1930s saw the need for highway
safety programs. Among these was the need for uniformity of traffic laws, and
reciprocal agreements between and among the states to improve the safety,
mobility, and efficiency of our roadway system.
The History of Reciprocity
The conceptual framework of reciprocity and uniformity was formalized in
1924, when Secretary of Commerce and later U.S. President Herbert Hoover
convened a group of people to develop a national, rather than federal, set of
proposed laws. The purpose was to achieve uniformity from state to state and
to enhance both intrastate and interstate motor vehicle travel. Reasonable
uniform-ity of state motor vehicle laws would then establish a framework for
interstate reciprocity and the free flow of goods and people.
The Uniform Vehicle Code
Today, there is the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws and
Ordinances (NCUTLO) which has maintained the Uniform Vehicle Code (UVC) since
1926, when the first edition was published. The first edition was what we now
know as the part of the UVC called the “Rules of the Road.” Over the years,
other chapters were added to the UVC. Everything was combined in a single
edition of the UVC shortly after World War II. The NCUTLO is still active
today in producing what is generally accepted as a national guideline for
uniform state traffic laws and local ordinances. The code has been revised
approximately every four years since 1926.
Interstate Compacts and Institutions
Over the past six or seven decades many individuals, organiza-tions, and
institutions have dedicated intellect, time, and funding to providing a safer,
more efficient highway transportation system.
Presidents Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, and Johnson established national
committees which became known as the President’s Committees for Traffic
Highway Safety. Advisory groups were formed to establish action programs
ranging from accident records, laws and ordinances, driver licensing, police
traffic services, engineering, and public support and information, to research
and development. These programs, and the many dedicated people who worked on
them, soon recognized the need for coordination, balance, and comprehensive
concepts, which in later years became known as the “systems approach.”
The U.S. Constitution provides that, before the various states can enter
into a compact, they must have the consent of the Congress. Representative
Beamer saw the need for consent ahead of time to encourage state compacts in
the traffic safety field. In 1958, the so-called “Beamer Resolution” passed
Congress, and gave permission for states to pursue such compacts. This
legislation resulted in the National Driver License Compact, the Non-Resident
Violator Compact, and the Motor Vehicle Safety Equipment Compact. A number of
institutions were established such as the Automotive Safety Foundation, the
Traffic Institute at Northwestern University, the American Association of
Motor Vehicle Administrators, the Traffic Division of the International
Association of Chiefs of Police (later to become the Highway Safety Advisory
Committee to the Institute for Traffic Engineering, the National Safety
Council, the American Association of State Highway Transporta-tion Officials
(formerly known as AASHO, now AASHTO), the Bureau of Public Roads of the
Department of Commerce (now the Federal Highway Administration of the U.S.
Department of Transportation), the Traffic Court Program of the American Bar
Association, the Safety Education Commission of the National Education
Association, and the American Automobile Association Motor Clubs.
The Federal Aid Highway Act
In 1956, the Federal Aid Highway Act was passed by Congress and signed by
President Eisenhower. This created the system of interstate and national
defense highways, and the Federal Highway Trust Fund. It also called for a
study of the federal role in highway safety. A document entitled “The Federal
Role in Highway Safety” was published several years later and became one of
the studies that influenced the landmark legislation in 1966 (Senate
Resolution 3005, to provide for a national safety program for the
establishment of safety standards for motor vehicles and interstate commerce,
and Senate Resolution 3052) to provide for a coordinated national highway
safety program known as the Highway Safety Act of 1966. This act called for
the establishment of national standards. Eventually there were 18 program
standards which, in the view of some, have been diluted in recent years.
The National Highway Safety Bureau (later changed to the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration) and the Federal Highway Administration were
established. Note the distinction of one being “national” and the other
“federal.”
The 1966 legislation was an expansion of the concepts of the 1956 Federal
Aid Highway Act. The Highway Safety Act called for statewide planning, focus
of responsibilities through the governor of each state, local planning and
participation, and funding mechanisms.
Relationship to Highway Safety Program Standards
Highway Safety Program Standard No. 6 calls for the elimination of all
major variations in traffic codes, laws and ordinances among the political
subdivisions of a state, in order to increase the compatibility of these
ordinances with a unified overall state policy on traffic safety codes and
laws, and to further the adoption of appropriate aspects of the Rules of the
Road section of the UVC among the states.
The standards section calls for each state to develop and implement a
program to achieve uniformity in traffic codes and laws throughout the state.
The program was to provide a plan to achieve uniform rules of the road in all
of its jurisdictions, and a plan to make the state's unified rules of the road
consistent with similar unified plans of other states. Additionally, it calls
for continuing comparisons of all state and local laws, statutes, and
ordinances with comparable versions of the Rules of the Road section of the
UVC.
For many years, several states did, in fact, make comparative studies with
the UVC, but very few, if any, go through this process today. For over 60
years, the National Committee on Uniform Traffic Laws and Ordinances has
encouraged states to use the UVC to achieve and maintain reasonable and
realistic uniform traffic laws and ordinances. For without such uniformity,
how can reciprocity between and among the states be recognized and practiced?
The Future of Reciprocity and Uniformity
Advances in technology as applied to the highway environment and to the
motor vehicle include, but are not limited to safety restraints, anti-lock
brakes, passenger containment protection, and steel belted tires. As we review
these advances, together with program advances addressing uniform laws,
alcohol/drug abuse, driver licensing, police traffic supervision, and some
behavioral changes, we better understand our achievements in the area of
highway safety. We must not, however, forget that the foundation of all these
advances are the federal, state, and local laws, which enable and authorize
the creation, enactment and implementation of all of these factors in a
comprehensive, uniform, systematic way. As a result, the states can and do
enact reciprocal agreements between and among themselves so that each
citizen/motorist can drive intrastate and interstate with the confidence of
being in compliance with the law.
The following is a summary of the various federal agencies that are active
in highway safety and traffic enforcement, along with their roles and
responsibilities.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) was established
by the Highway Safety Act of 1970, as the successor to the National Highway
Safety Bureau, to carry out safety programs under the National Traffic and
Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966 and the Highway Safety Act of 1966. It also
administers consumer programs established by the Motor Vehicle Information and
Cost Savings Act, enacted in 1972.
NHTSA is responsible for reducing deaths, injuries, and economic losses
resulting from motor vehicle crashes. This is accomplished by setting and
enforcing safety performance standards for motor vehicles and items of motor
vehicle equipment, and by funding grants to state and local governments for
conducting effective local highway safety programs.
NHTSA also investigates safety defects in motor vehicles, sets and enforces
fuel economy standards, helps states and local communities reduce the threat
of drunk drivers, promotes the use of safety belts, child safety seats and air
bags, investigates odometer fraud, establishes and enforces vehicle anti-theft
regulations, and provides consumer information on motor vehicle safety topics.
402 Funds
The State and Community Highway Safety Grant Program was enacted by the
Highway Safety Act of 1966 as Section 402 of Title 23, United States Code.
Grant funds are provided to the states, the Indian nations, and U.S.
territories each year according to a statutory formula based on population and
road mileage. The grants support state planning to identify and quantify
highway safety problems, provide start-up or “seed” money for new programs,
and give new direction to existing safety programs. These funds are intended
to catalyze innovative programs at the state and local level and leverage
commitments of state, local, and private resources. The Section 402 grant
process has been successful in directing resources to national and state
priority safety programs.
403 Funds
The Research and Demonstration Grants Program was enacted by the Highway
Safety Act of 1966. Grant funds are provided to conduct research and
demonstration projects on developing the most efficient and effective means of
bringing about safety improvements.
Incentive Funds
Section 408: The Alcohol Traffic Safety Program Act (Public Law 97-364),
enacted in 1982, created Section 408 of the Highway Safety Act. It authorized
$125 million in incentive grant funds to encourage state and local agencies to
deal more aggressively with the impaired driving problem. These grants assist
and provide recognition to states that establish laws and programs to deter
drunk and drugged driving, such as certain and swift arrest, license
suspension, and rehabilitation of drunk driving offenders. Section 408 is
administered by NHTSA. Grants are awarded to the states through their
designated Highway Safety Offices.
Section 410: This is a section in Title 23 of the United States Code that
establishes a federal alcohol incentive grant program designed to encourage
states to enact strong, effective anti-drunk driving legislation and improve
the enforcement of these laws. Section 410 also promotes the development and
implementation of innovative programs to combat impaired driving. The program
is administered by the NHTSA. Grants are awarded to the states through their
designated Highway Safety Offices.
Section 153: Section 153 is a federal incentive grant program enacted by
the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) as
Section 153 of Title 23, United States Code. It promotes the passage of state
safety belt and motorcycle helmet use laws and compliance with those laws.
Section 153 grants are administered by NHTSA. The grants are awarded to the
states through their designated Highway Safety Offices.
The Federal Highway Administration
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) was established as a component of
the Department of Transportation in 1967 as a result of the Department of
Transportation Act (49 U.S.C. app. 1651 note). The agency administers the
highway transportation programs of the DOT in accordance with the provisions
of section 6(a) of the act and other pertinent legislation. The FHWA carries
out a broad range of highway transportation activities including the
coordination of the highway mode with other modes of transportation and
ensuring that the nation's highway transportation system is safe, economical,
and efficient with respect to the highway's impact on the environment and
social and economic conditions.
Federal-Aid Highway Program
The FHWA administers the federal-aid highway program of financial
assistance to the states for highway construction and improvements. This
program provides for construction and preser-vation of the approximately
42,500-mile national system of interstate and defense highways and the
improvement of approximately 800,000 miles of other federal-aid primary,
secondary, and urban roads and streets. The agency also administers the
Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program to assist in the
inspection, analysis, and rehabilitation or replacement of bridges both on and
off the federal-aid highway systems.
The FHWA is responsible for carrying out several highway safety programs.
These safety programs provide funding for projects which remove, relocate, or
shield roadside obstacles; identify and correct hazardous locations; eliminate
or reduce hazards at railroad crossings; and improve signing, pavement
markings, and signalization.
The agency promulgates and administers highway-related safety guidelines
providing for the identification and surveillance of accident locations;
highway design, construction, and maintenance; traffic engineering services;
and highway-related aspects of pedestrian safety.
Office of Motor Carrier Safety (OMCS)
Under the authority of the motor carrier safety provisions of Title 49 of
the U.S. Code, the FHWA, through the Office of Motor Carrier Safety, exercises
federal regulatory jurisdiction over the safety performance of all commercial
motor carriers (trucks and buses) engaged in interstate and foreign commerce.
The agency's motor carrier safety investigators conduct safety reviews at the
carriers' facilities and at roadside to determine the safety perfor-mance of
the carriers' operations. Compliance reviews are conducted to follow up on
problem areas identified during the safety reviews and at times result in
prosecution or other sanctions against violators of the federal motor carrier
safety regulations or the hazardous materials transportation regulations.
Grant Funds
The Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) provides grant funding
from the federal government to the states to enforce uniform federal and state
safety and hazardous materials regulations and rules applicable to commercial
motor vehicles and their drivers. To qualify for participation, a state must
adopt and enforce the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) or
similar state rules compatible with the FMCSRs and the Hazardous Materials
Transportation Regulations.
Commercial Driver's License (CDL) Program
All drivers of vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 26,001 pounds
or more (what the vehicle and cargo would weigh fully loaded) and those of any
size transporting hazardous materials that are required to be placarded must
possess a CDL. For buses, the law applies to drivers of vehicles designed to
carry 16 or more people.
Research and Special Programs Administration
The Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA) manages a number of
diverse and intermodal programs that include hazardous materials
transportation safety, pipeline safety, transportation safety training,
emergency transportation involving national defense and resources, aviation
data collection and gathering statistics, and research and development.
Programs
The Office of Hazardous Materials Transportation is responsible for
hazardous materials transportation safety regulation and enforcement. It
develops and issues safety standards addressing every aspect of hazardous
materials transportation for all types of transportation except marine bulk
packaging. Each of the DOT modal administrations inspects and enforces the
hazardous materials regulations applicable to their mode.
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center
The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC), a bureau of the U.S.
Department of the Treasury, is an interagency training facility for the
personnel from approximately 70 federal law enforcement organizations.
Facilities are available for extensive physical training and driver training
complexes, indoor and outdoor firearms ranges, and numerous practical exercise
areas. Approximately 20 federal law enforcement agencies maintain on-site
training staffs. FLETC's interagency training mission for the federal
participating organizations is threefold: to provide basic training; to
provide advanced and specialized programs geared to a common need; and to
support organizations conducting their own advanced and specialized training.
Programs
The National Center for State and Local Enforcement Training was
established at the FLETC in 1982. The National Center is mandated to provide
training for personnel from state and local law enforcement agencies. The
center's primary goal is to provide state and local law enforcement agencies
with training or technical assistance in subject matter areas generally
unavailable elsewhere. National Center policies focus not only on creating
needed training, but also on encouraging networking and operational
interaction after training. Such interaction among federal state, and local
agencies is viewed as critical.
FHWA Regional Offices
Legal Issues U.S. Constitution and Traffic Law: Decisions of the U.S.
Supreme Court The following is a synopsis of the appellate court decisions
pertaining to traffic law enforcement.
DWI
Chemical Test:
A driver was injured in collision. The investigating officer made an arrest
at the hospital and persuaded a doctor to draw blood sample over the protest
and without consent of the driver. At the time, California had no im-plied
consent or other law that would muddy the waters. The Court held that the
officer had probable cause and arrest was legal under California law. Thus,
the search and seizure of blood sample was constitutional incident to the
arrest. The court held that there was no violation of the privilege against
self-incrimination as that constitutional right did not apply to physical
evidence. The privilege covers testimonial-type evidence.
There was no violation of due process of law since the blood sample was
taken by qualified personnel under proper medical procedures in a hospital
environment. The driver's right to counsel was not violated even though his
counsel had advised the driver that he did not have to submit to a chemical
test. Schmerber v. California, 384 U.S. 757 (1966).
Admissibility of Refusal of Chemical Test:
Where a driver refused a chemical test, this refusal could be admitted into
evidence at the trial, and it does not violate his constitutional rights.
South Dakota v. Neville, 459 U.S. 553 (1983). Saving Breath Sample for
Defendant The U.S. Constitution does not require the prosecution to preserve a
breath sample so that a defendant can have it analyzed at a later time.
California v. Trombetta, 467 U.S. 479 (1984).
Hit and Run
Requiring a driver involved in an accident to stop and return to the scene
and identify himself does not violate his constitutional rights. California v.
Byers, 402 U.S. 424 (1971).
Parking
The government may create parking districts and prohibit nonresidents from
parking on public streets in such areas. It does not violate equal protection
of the law, since classifying parkers into residents and nonresidents was a
reasonable classification. County Board v. Richards, 434 U.S. 5 (1977).
Stopping Drivers
An officer cannot pull a single driver from the stream of traffic without
at least an articulable suspicion of wrong doing. Delaware v. Prouse, 440 U.S.
648 (1979).
Roadblocks/DWI
As long as law enforcement officers conduct a nondiscretionary roadblock,
it does not violate the Fourth Amendment. How many impaired drivers are
arrested is not relevant. Michigan v. Sitz, 496 U.S. 444, 110 S. Ct. 2481
(1990).
Driver's License
The Court held that a driver's license is an “important interest” and
cannot be taken away or denied without affording the person due process of
law. The Court avoided calling it a “right” or a “privilege.” Bell v. Burson,
402 U.S. 535 (1971).
However, later decisions have made some exceptions to the Bell case. In
Dixon v. Love, 431 U.S. 105 (1977) it was held that no opportunity for a
hearing was required under a point system. In Mackey v. Montrym, 443 U.S. 1
(1979), under an implied consent law the license could be revoked first and
the hearing could come later. In Illinois v. Batchelder, 463 U.S. 1112 (1983),
an officer's affidavit for refusal under the implied consent law does not have
to recite the reasonable grounds the officer had that the driver was DWI.
Miranda
Where a DWI driver is transported to the police station and held, he is in
custody for purposes of Miranda. Questioning in custody requires Miranda
warnings in misdemeanor cases. Berkemer v. McCarty, 468 U.S. 420 (1984).
Registration, Title and
Inspection Enforcement
Roadway Management Through
Engineering and Enforcement
Pedestrian
Safety
Children (0-19)
28.9%
42.5%
19.9%
Working Adults (20-64)
58.7%
48.7%
56.6%
Older Adults (65+)
11.95%
8.8%
22.3%
Public Information and
Education Programs
Uniformity, Reciprocity, and
Federal Programs