STAND

STAND. COM. REP. 330

Honolulu, Hawaii

, 2003

RE: H.B. No. 807

H.D. 1

Honorable Calvin K.Y. Say

Speaker, House of Representatives

Twenty-Second State Legislature

Regular Session of 2003

State of Hawaii

Sir:

Your Committee on Transportation, to which was referred H.B. No. 807 entitled:

"A BILL FOR AN ACT RELATING TO CHAPTER 291E,"

begs leave to report as follows:

The purpose of this bill is to improve upon and clarify statutory language relating to the operation of a vehicle under the influence of an intoxicant. Specifically, this bill:

(1) Creates a new offense of habitually operating a vehicle under the influence of an intoxicant;

(2) Deletes statutory language requiring that the impaired driving suspect be informed of the possible criminal and civil sanctions for driving under the influence and the refusal to submit to and take a intoxicant test;

(3) Permits the refusal of a suspect to take a chemical test to be used as evidence in a criminal trial for impaired driving;

(4) Permits the use of juvenile adjudications of impaired driving to be used as prior convictions for purposes of impaired driving offenses; and

(5) Includes bicycles as vehicles covered by the impaired driving statutes.

The Department of the Attorney General, Department of Transportation, Department of the Prosecuting Attorney of the City and County of Honolulu (Prosecutor), Honolulu Police Department, and Mothers Against Drunk Driving testified in support of this measure. The Judiciary commented on this measure.

The "hard core" or habitually impaired driver presents a higher risk and the most serious danger on our highways. Recent evidence has shown that it is this type of driver who is more likely to refuse a chemical blood alcohol content (BAC) test. By refusing to take a BAC test, many of these habitual drivers stopped on suspicion of driving under the influence (DUI) avoid having three convictions for DUI and thus avoid being charged with a class C felony. Oftentimes, this is due to the fact that by the time a law enforcement officer informs the suspect of the possible criminal and civil sanctions for driving under the influence and the suspect submits to a BAC test, the BAC is below the legal limit of .08. This severely impacts law enforcement personnel from removing these individuals from our roadways, which may lead to increased fatalities.

However, your Committee notes that the Prosecutor stated that the alcohol content test of urine was inadvertently deleted from current statutory language and that the Judiciary stated that it would need time to amend existing forms to comply with the new statutory language of this bill. Accordingly, your Committee has amended this measure by:

(1) Reinserting language that includes a urine alcohol level test for the purpose of determining alcohol concentration of urine;

(2) Changing the effective date to January 1, 2004; and

(3) Making technical, nonsubstantive amendments for purposes of clarity, conformity, and style.

As affirmed by the record of votes of the members of your Committee on Transportation that is attached to this report, your Committee is in accord with the intent and purpose of H.B. No. 807, as amended herein, and recommends that it pass Second Reading in the form attached hereto as H.B. No. 807, H.D. 1, and be referred to the Committee on Judiciary.

Respectfully submitted on behalf of the members of the Committee on Transportation,

		____________________________ JOSEPH M. SOUKI, Chair