National Standards
of the Drug Evaluation and
Classification Program
STANDARDS FOR AGENCY PARTICIPATION
Since 1986, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has endeavored to expand the Drug Evaluation and Classification Program to jurisdictions outside the Los Angeles metropolitan area. In an effort to contain costs, ensure the most efficient use of resource and maintain a high probability of program success, NHTSA developed site selection criteria to be used in assessing potential suitability of pilot sites. Factors such as demographics, favorable legislation, agency operations and system support for the program were consi-dered in evaluating potential pilot sites for the implementation of the Drug Evaluation and Classification Program.
It is recognized that law enforcement agencies, in considering the implementation of new traffic enforcement programs, must be aware of both short- and long-term costs that are involved. The Drug Evaluation and Classification Program requires that agencies commit considerable resources long term to the detection and apprehension of the drug-impaired driver in order for the program to achieve maximum results.
5.1 A DEC Program site should be a state, a political subdivision of a state, or a group of subdivisions.
Commentary: Experience has shown that a DEC Program will take firm root only if the resources to support the program are concentrated in a relatively small geographical area, such as a major city or county. Given that these new sites will begin operations with a small cadre of DREs, a community-focused DEC Program will allow the DREs to respond quickly to the location(s) where drug-impaired drivers might be taken for processing. By concentrating its forces, the program can ensure that a qualified DRE is available at any time or place needed. The concentrated focus of a community-based program allows the DREs ample opportunity to conduct evaluations and maintain skills at peak proficiency.
5.2 A proposed program site should be able to produce enough drug-impaired driving arrests to (1) justify the expense of training the DREs, and (2) provide enough evaluation opportunities for DREs to maintain proficiency.
Commentary: As a general rule, each DRE at a site should conduct at least one drug evaluation per week to keep skills at peak levels. In other words, a proposed site should be able to apprehend at least fifty drug-impaired drivers per year for each DRE. Studies indicate that 15 to 40 percent of the persons arrested for impaired driving are actually under the influence of drugs, either alone or in combination with alcohol. Thus, a site should produce between 350 and 500 DUI arrests annually per DRE to provide ample drug evaluation opportunities.
5.3 Prior to implementation of a DEC Program, a site must be located in a state with an implied consent law that:
Commentary: It is pointless to evaluate drivers for drug-induced impairment unless those found to be so impaired can be prosecuted successfully. The requirements for multiple chemical tests are essential because both a breath test and blood or urine test are integral components of the drug recognition process. In addition to implied consent legislation, the effectiveness of DEC programs is greatly enhanced by legislation that:
5.4 At least eighty percent (80%) of a participating agency's traffic law enforcement officers must be fully trained and proficient in the use of the NHTSA/IACP approved standardized field sobriety tests, including the horizontal gaze nystagmus test.
Commentary: It is recommended that the agency's SFST training program is consistent with the NHTSA/IACP model curriculum. In particular, the training must be at least sixteen hours long and include at least two practice sessions with volunteer drinkers.
5.5 Participating agencies must maintain accurate and timely records of :
Commentary: In order to evaluate critically the effectiveness of the Drug Evaluation and Classification Program, it is necessary that, at a minimum, the above records be maintained. In addition to evaluation purposes, the records may prove beneficial in establishing program validity for court purposes.
5.6 Participating agencies must have the capability to establish centralized booking or processing of all DUI arrestees.
Commentary: The ideal situation is one in which all persons arrested for DUI are taken to a single location for processing. One or two DREs could then be stationed at that location to ensure prompt access to all suspects apprehended for drug-impaired driving. However, it is feasible for a jurisdiction to have a few centralized processing facilities as long as there are enough DREs to staff them adequately and enough DUI arrests to ensure that the DREs conduct frequent evaluations.
5.7 Each DUI arrest processing location must have adequate facilities for conducting drug recognition evaluations. These facilities shall include:
Commentary: Because of the unique requirements of the DEC Program, it is sometimes more economical for several agencies within a site to share DUI processing facilities. Other desirable characteristics for a DUI processing facility include:
5.8 Participating agencies must have access to laboratories that are capable of identifying the presence of the most commonly abused drugs when these drugs are present in sufficient concentrations to produce impairment.
Commentary: Ideally, the laboratories will also be able to identify the concentration of these drugs. In any case, the accuracy of the chemical analysis should be consistent with state-of-the-art drug testing. In other words, screening tests are not sufficient; a jurisdiction should be able to produce a confirmatory analysis. Although either blood or urine samples are acceptable, it is best if the jurisdiction has the ability to test both.
5.9 All agencies interested in participating in a Drug Evaluation and Classification Program must have the following endorsements:
LAPD DRE Unit Home Page
Sitemap
This page was updated 2-20-98
Copyright © 1998 LAPD
