One of the biggest changes in Washington DUI law in the last 5-10 years is the sweeping nature of the ignition interlock device as both a so-called deterrent to and a penalty for a DUI. As of January 2009, interlock devices are a requirement upon any DUI conviction. The Department of Licensing requires them in a broader range of situations. Many courts have been requiring them as a pretrial condition of release.  RCW 46.20.710 discusses the legislative intent behind the law.  RCW 46.20.720 spells out the interlock requirements both before and after January of 2009.

For those who need to drive for a living or who would be irreparably harmed by a license suspension, the new ignition interlock laws will likely be viewd very positively. They allow for an individual to continue driving during almost any period of Washington license suspension. The Washington DOL would require that a driver show proof of an ignition interlock device and SR-22 insurance. Once that has been done and the DOL approves the ignition interlock license (IIL) application, a person can drive anywhere at any time so long as the car he is driving is equipped with the interlock device.

Not everyone will be happy with all of the changes however.  For those who are convicted of DUI in Washington, installation of the IID is now mandatory. Under previous Washington DUI laws, it was permissive, meaning one could get the IID in order to keep driving but could choose not to drive. Now, even in instances where one wished not to drive or doesn't even own a car, installation of an IID is mandatory. To make matters worse, in cases where a person doesn't own a car, they will have to be fitted with what is known as a SCRAM bracelet to detect alcohol consumption.

For more information, review the statutes below or contact one of our Washington DUI lawyers if you'd prefer. We would be glad to discuss this rather peculiar and confusing area of Washington DUI law with you.

RCW 46.20.710 - Legislative finding.

The legislature finds and declares:

     (1) There is a need to reduce the incidence of drivers on the highways and roads of this state who, because of their use, consumption, or possession of alcohol, pose a danger to the health and safety of other drivers;

     (2) One method of dealing with the problem of drinking drivers is to discourage the use of motor vehicles by persons who possess or have consumed alcoholic beverages;

     (3) The installation of an ignition interlock breath alcohol device or other biological or technical device will provide a means of deterring the use of motor vehicles by persons who have consumed alcoholic beverages;

     (4) Ignition interlock and other biological and technical devices are designed to supplement other methods of punishment that prevent drivers from using a motor vehicle after using, possessing, or consuming alcohol;

     (5) It is economically and technically feasible to have an ignition interlock or other biological or technical device installed in a motor vehicle in such a manner that the vehicle will not start if the operator has recently consumed alcohol.

[1994 c 275 § 21; 1987 c 247 § 1.]

Notes:

Short title -- Effective date -- 1994 c 275: See notes following RCW 46.04.015.

RCW 46.20.720 - Drivers convicted of alcohol offenses.

    (1) The court may order that after a period of suspension, revocation, or denial of driving privileges, and for up to as long as the court has jurisdiction, any person convicted of any offense involving the use, consumption, or possession of alcohol while operating a motor vehicle may drive only a motor vehicle equipped with a functioning ignition interlock. The court shall establish a specific calibration setting at which the interlock will prevent the vehicle from being started. The court shall also establish the period of time for which interlock use will be required.

     (2) Under RCW 46.61.5055, 10.05.020, or *section 18 of this act, the court shall order any person convicted of an alcohol-related violation of RCW 46.61.502 or 46.61.504 or an equivalent local ordinance or participating in a deferred prosecution program under RCW 10.05.020 or *section 18 of this act for an alcohol-related violation of RCW 46.61.502 or 46.61.504 or an equivalent local ordinance to apply for an ignition interlock driver's license from the department under RCW 46.20.385 and to have a functioning ignition interlock device installed on all motor vehicles operated by the person.

     (3) The department shall require that, after any applicable period of suspension, revocation, or denial of driving privileges, a person may drive only a motor vehicle equipped with a functioning ignition interlock device if the person is convicted of an alcohol-related violation of RCW 46.61.502 or 46.61.504 or an equivalent local ordinance.

     The department may waive the requirement for the use of such a device if it concludes that such devices are not reasonably available in the local area. The device is not necessary on vehicles owned by a person's employer and driven as a requirement of employment during working hours. The person must provide the department with a declaration pursuant to RCW 9A.72.085 from his or her employer stating that the person's employment requires the person to operate a vehicle owned by the employer during working hours.

     The ignition interlock device shall be calibrated to prevent the motor vehicle from being started when the breath sample provided has an alcohol concentration of 0.025 or more. The period of time of the restriction will be as follows:

     (a) For a person who has not previously been restricted under this section, a period of one year;

     (b) For a person who has previously been restricted under (a) of this subsection, a period of five years;

     (c) For a person who has previously been restricted under (b) of this subsection, a period of ten years.

[2008 c 282 § 12; 2004 c 95 § 11; 2003 c 366 § 1; 2001 c 247 § 1; 1999 c 331 § 3; 1998 c 210 § 2; 1997 c 229 § 8; 1994 c 275 § 22; 1987 c 247 § 2.]

Notes:

   *Reviser's note: Section 18 of this act was vetoed by the governor.

     Effective date -- 2008 c 282: See note following RCW 46.20.308.

     Effective date -- 1999 c 331: See note following RCW 9.94A.525.

     Short title -- 1998 c 210: "This act may be known and cited as the Mary Johnsen Act." [1998 c 210 § 1.]

     Finding -- Intent -- 1998 c 210: "The legislature finds that driving is a privilege and that the state may restrict that privilege in the interests of public safety. One such reasonable restriction is requiring certain individuals, if they choose to drive, to drive only vehicles equipped with ignition interlock devices. The legislature further finds that the costs of these devices are minimal and are affordable. It is the intent of the legislature that these devices be paid for by the drivers using them and that neither the state nor entities of local government provide any public funding for this purpose." [1998 c 210 § 7.]

     Effective date -- 1998 c 210: "This act takes effect January 1, 1999." [1998 c 210 § 9.]

     Effective date -- 1997 c 229: See note following RCW 10.05.090.

     Short title -- Effective date -- 1994 c 275: See notes following RCW 46.04.015.