Tucked in the bipartisan infrastructure bill is a provision that could mandate “drunk and impaired driving prevention technology” on all new passenger vehicles as soon as 2026.
Doing so, lawmakers and advocates say, could save more than 9,000 lives per year. But critics warn that the technology is costly to consumers and far from perfect, and they argue that with drunken driving fatality statistics hitting record lows, the legalization of drugs such as marijuana presents a greater risk to roadways.
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act is on track to pass the Senate this week and then will head to the Democrat-controlled House.
It would direct the regulators in the Department of Transportation to issue a rule governing the installation of impaired driving technology detection within three years. Manufacturers then have another two years, but not more than three, to be in compliance.
FREE COMMUNITY COLLEGE, PRESCHOOL, AND AMNESTY FOR MILLIONS: SENATE REVEALS $3.5T BUDGET PLAN
On an accelerated timeline, that means impaired-driving technology could be standard on new cars as soon as 2026. But government rule-making is often slow and delayed, and the bill also provides instructions for the Transportation Department to issue a report to Congress if the rule is not finalized after 10 years.
Exactly what the technology would look like, though, is up in the air, and the technology is still being developed.
The bill describes a system that can “passively monitor the performance of a driver of a motor vehicle to accurately identify whether that driver may be impaired” or “passively and accurately detect whether the blood alcohol concentration of a driver of a motor vehicle” is above the legal limit and prevent or limit the operation of the vehicle based on that.
The Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety, a research program collaboration between the federal government and a coalition of leading automakers, is developing two technologies to detect alcohol in a driver automatically.
One is a device installed on the steering column or driver’s side door that measures alcohol content from naturally exhaled breath. That is different than hand-held ignition interlock devices that can prevent a driver from starting a car, which some states require drivers to install after DUI offenses (the infrastructure bill also creates a grant for states that adopt mandatory alcohol-ignition interlock laws).
The first product from that detection technology will be made available for open-source licensing commercially later this year, but the consumer version is still under development and is expected by 2024.
Another is a touch-based technology with sensors in the car’s ignition button or gear shift to detect blood alcohol content in the blood.
A concept car developed by Nissan in 2007 could also provide a blueprint for the kind of technology that might be mandated, Car and Driver reported. It had sensors that could detect alcohol in the driver’s perspiration as well as in the air, could monitor the driver’s face for signs of impairment, and could monitor lane-swerving and other signs of drunken driving.
Other car companies have also experimented with driver-intoxication monitoring. Toyota worked on a similar system to Nissan’s also in about 2007, and in 2019, Volvo announced in-car cameras to monitor signs of intoxicated or distracted drivers.
Anti-drunken-driving organizations hailed the inclusion of the technology mandate in the infrastructure bill.
“It would mark the beginning of the end of drunk driving,” said Mothers Against Drunk Driving President Alex Otte.
Notably, there is some support from the alcoholic beverage industry. The Distilled Spirits Council trade association is a supporter of the rule and has partnered with MADD to advocate for the measure.
But new mandates must have adequate technology, regulators warned. In the 1970s, a mandatory seat belt interlock system that prevented cars from starting unless the driver was buckled up was prone to malfunction and resulted in backlash.
The American Beverage Institute, which lobbies for the consumption of alcohol at restaurants, called the mandate “an overstep by Congress that will have major unintended consequences” and the technology “dangerously unreliable.”
“Considering the harsh conditions that vehicle components must endure, including constant road vibrations and dramatic temperature shifts, it’s not difficult to imagine unmaintained delicate measurement instruments providing faulty BAC readings that are either too high or too low,” the American Beverage Institute said in a statement. “Even more simplistic breathalyzers currently used by law enforcement must be regularly calibrated to be adequate evidence during a DWI prosecution.”
Even a highly accurate system could result in regular false readings, either leading intoxicated drivers to believe that it is safe to drive or stranding “responsible consumers” of alcohol who are not drunk, the institute said.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reported that in 2019, the most recent year for which data are available, alcohol-impaired driving fatalities (those involving a driver with a blood alcohol concentration of 0.08 or higher) accounted for 10,142 deaths. That is about 28% of total motor vehicle deaths that year, marking the lowest percentage of alcohol-impaired fatalities since the agency first started reporting alcohol data in 1982.
“Remaining substance abusers coupled with the rise of drugged driving associated with legalized marijuana has complicated the threats Americans face on the road,” the American Beverage Institute said.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
The mandatory installation of alcohol impairment detection devices in vehicles in the infrastructure bill is the result of previously introduced legislation.
Michigan Democratic Rep. Debbie Dingell brought forward a bill to make the technology standard on vehicles in 2019 after a vacationing Michigan family was killed by a drunken driver driving the wrong way on the highway with a blood alcohol content more than three times the legal limit. In April, Democratic Sen. Ben Ray Lujan of New Mexico and Republican Sen. Rick Scott of Florida introduced a version of the bill in the Senate.
