Citation

Frank JF, Raub R, Lucke RE, Wark RI. Proc. Int. Counc. Alcohol Drugs Traffic Safety Conf. 2002; 2002: 105-109.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2002, The author(s) and the Council, Publisher International Council on Alcohol, Drugs and Traffic Safety)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The Illinois ignition interlock law first went into effect in 1994 when the installation of ignition interlock devices was added to the package of sanctions for Driving Under the Influence (DUI) of Alcohol (625ILCS5/11-501(6)(i)). Previously, repeat offenders could petition the Secretary of State (SOS) for a restricted driving permit (RDP) after serving some period of license loss, and such permits generally were issued without other requirements. With the enacting of the ignition interlock legislation, those individuals would also need to install an interlock as an additional requirement for receiving the RDP. It was and still is an administrative program requiring the installation of an interlock as a condition of the RDP. Offenders had and have the option of not reinstating their licenses and not installing an interlock. Accordingly, the interlock users were and continue to be a group of people who are motivated to get their license back legitimately, and are, perhaps, more likely to succeed on the interlock than those who choose not to reinstate their license and install a device. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) agreed to provide some funding for an evaluation of the program in collaboration with the Illinois Secretary of State. This paper reports on the results of that evaluation.(A)