SF 1314

as introduced - 80th Legislature (1997 - 1998) Posted on 12/15/2009 12:00am

  1.1                          A bill for an act
  1.2             relating to crimes; making it a crime for suspected 
  1.3             drug-impaired driver to refuse to submit to drug 
  1.4             recognition evaluation; expanding implied consent law 
  1.5             to cover drug recognition evaluation conducted by a 
  1.6             drug recognition expert; requiring peace officer 
  1.7             training in sobriety field testing and on drugs that 
  1.8             impair driving; requiring that drug recognition 
  1.9             experts be trained and made available around the state 
  1.10            on a phased-in schedule; appropriating money; amending 
  1.11            Minnesota Statutes 1996, sections 169.01, by adding 
  1.12            subdivisions; 169.121, subdivisions 1a and 2; and 
  1.13            169.123, subdivisions 2, 4, 5a, and 6; proposing 
  1.14            coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapters 
  1.15            299D; and 626. 
  1.16  BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA: 
  1.17     Section 1.  Minnesota Statutes 1996, section 169.01, is 
  1.18  amended by adding a subdivision to read: 
  1.19     Subd. 84.  [DRUG RECOGNITION EVALUATION.] "Drug recognition 
  1.20  evaluation" means the systematic, standardized, investigative 
  1.21  procedure defined by the National Highway Traffic Safety 
  1.22  Administration that is used to determine whether a driver is 
  1.23  impaired, whether the impairment relates to drugs or a medical 
  1.24  condition and, if drug-related, the categories of drugs likely 
  1.25  to have caused the impairment. 
  1.26     Sec. 2.  Minnesota Statutes 1996, section 169.01, is 
  1.27  amended by adding a subdivision to read: 
  1.28     Subd. 85.  [DRUG RECOGNITION EXPERT.] "Drug recognition 
  1.29  expert" means a peace officer who is certified by the 
  1.30  International Association of Chiefs of Police to conduct drug 
  2.1   recognition evaluations. 
  2.2      Sec. 3.  Minnesota Statutes 1996, section 169.121, 
  2.3   subdivision 1a, is amended to read: 
  2.4      Subd. 1a.  [REFUSAL TO SUBMIT TO TESTING; CRIME.] It is a 
  2.5   crime for any person to: 
  2.6      (1) refuse to submit to a chemical test of the person's 
  2.7   blood, breath, or urine under section 169.123; or 
  2.8      (2) refuse to submit to a drug recognition evaluation under 
  2.9   section 169.123 at the request of a drug recognition expert. 
  2.10     Sec. 4.  Minnesota Statutes 1996, section 169.121, 
  2.11  subdivision 2, is amended to read: 
  2.12     Subd. 2.  [EVIDENCE.] (a) Upon the trial of any prosecution 
  2.13  arising out of acts alleged to have been committed by any person 
  2.14  arrested for driving, operating, or being in physical control of 
  2.15  a motor vehicle in violation of subdivision 1, the court may: 
  2.16     (1) admit evidence of the presence or amount of alcohol, 
  2.17  controlled substances, or hazardous substances in the person's 
  2.18  blood, breath, or urine as shown by an analysis of those items; 
  2.19  and 
  2.20     (2) admit evidence concerning a drug recognition evaluation 
  2.21  conducted by a drug recognition expert. 
  2.22     (b) For the purposes of this subdivision, evidence that 
  2.23  there was at the time an alcohol concentration of 0.04 or more 
  2.24  is relevant evidence in indicating whether or not the person was 
  2.25  under the influence of alcohol. 
  2.26     (c) Evidence of the refusal to take a test or a drug 
  2.27  recognition evaluation is admissible into evidence in a 
  2.28  prosecution under this section or an ordinance in conformity 
  2.29  with it.  
  2.30     (d) If proven by a preponderance of the evidence, it shall 
  2.31  be an affirmative defense to a violation of subdivision 1, 
  2.32  clause (e), that the defendant consumed a sufficient quantity of 
  2.33  alcohol after the time of actual driving, operating, or physical 
  2.34  control of a motor vehicle and before the administration of the 
  2.35  evidentiary test to cause the defendant's alcohol concentration 
  2.36  to exceed 0.10.  Evidence that the defendant consumed alcohol 
  3.1   after the time of actual driving, operating, or being in 
  3.2   physical control of a motor vehicle may not be admitted in 
  3.3   defense to any alleged violation of this section unless notice 
  3.4   is given to the prosecution prior to the omnibus or pretrial 
  3.5   hearing in the matter. 
  3.6      (e) If proven by a preponderance of the evidence, it shall 
  3.7   be an affirmative defense to a violation of subdivision 1, 
  3.8   clause (g), that the defendant used the controlled substance 
  3.9   according to the terms of a prescription issued for the 
  3.10  defendant in accordance with sections 152.11 and 152.12.  
  3.11     (f) The preceding provisions do not limit the introduction 
  3.12  of any other competent evidence bearing upon the question of 
  3.13  whether the person violated this section, including tests 
  3.14  obtained more than two hours after the alleged violation and 
  3.15  results obtained from partial tests on an infrared 
  3.16  breath-testing instrument.  A result from a partial test is the 
  3.17  measurement obtained by analyzing one adequate breath sample, as 
  3.18  defined in section 169.123, subdivision 2b, paragraph (b). 
  3.19     Sec. 5.  Minnesota Statutes 1996, section 169.123, 
  3.20  subdivision 2, is amended to read: 
  3.21     Subd. 2.  [IMPLIED CONSENT; CONDITIONS; ELECTION OF TEST.] 
  3.22  (a) Any person who drives, operates, or is in physical control 
  3.23  of a motor vehicle within this state or upon the ice of any 
  3.24  boundary water of this state consents, subject to the provisions 
  3.25  of this section and sections 169.121 and 169.1211, to a drug 
  3.26  recognition evaluation conducted by a drug recognition expert 
  3.27  and to a chemical test of that person's blood, breath, or urine 
  3.28  for the purpose of determining the presence of alcohol, 
  3.29  controlled substances, or hazardous substances.  The test shall 
  3.30  be administered at the direction of a peace officer.  The drug 
  3.31  recognition evaluation shall be conducted by a drug recognition 
  3.32  expert.  The test or drug recognition evaluation may be required 
  3.33  of a person when an officer has probable cause to believe the 
  3.34  person was driving, operating, or in physical control of a motor 
  3.35  vehicle in violation of section 169.121 and one of the following 
  3.36  conditions exist: 
  4.1      (1) the person has been lawfully placed under arrest for 
  4.2   violation of section 169.121, or an ordinance in conformity with 
  4.3   it; 
  4.4      (2) the person has been involved in a motor vehicle 
  4.5   accident or collision resulting in property damage, personal 
  4.6   injury, or death; 
  4.7      (3) the person has refused to take the screening test 
  4.8   provided for by section 169.121, subdivision 6; or 
  4.9      (4) the screening test was administered and indicated an 
  4.10  alcohol concentration of 0.10 or more. 
  4.11     The test may also be required of a person when an officer 
  4.12  has probable cause to believe the person was driving, operating, 
  4.13  or in physical control of a commercial motor vehicle with the 
  4.14  presence of any alcohol. 
  4.15     (b) At the time a test or a drug recognition evaluation is 
  4.16  requested, the person shall be informed: 
  4.17     (1) that Minnesota law requires the person to take a 
  4.18  test or a drug recognition evaluation:  (i) to determine if the 
  4.19  person is under the influence of alcohol, controlled substances, 
  4.20  or hazardous substances; (ii) to determine the presence of a 
  4.21  controlled substance listed in schedule I or II, other than 
  4.22  marijuana or tetrahydrocannabinols; and (iii) if the motor 
  4.23  vehicle was a commercial motor vehicle, to determine the 
  4.24  presence of alcohol; 
  4.25     (2) that refusal to take a test or a drug recognition 
  4.26  evaluation is a crime; 
  4.27     (3) if the peace officer has probable cause to believe the 
  4.28  person has violated the criminal vehicular homicide and injury 
  4.29  laws, that a test or a drug recognition evaluation will be taken 
  4.30  with or without the person's consent; and 
  4.31     (4) that the person has the right to consult with an 
  4.32  attorney, but that this right is limited to the extent that it 
  4.33  cannot unreasonably delay administration of the test or drug 
  4.34  recognition evaluation. 
  4.35     (c) The peace officer who requires a test pursuant to this 
  4.36  subdivision may direct whether the test shall be of blood, 
  5.1   breath, or urine.  Action may be taken against a person who 
  5.2   refuses to take a blood test only if an alternative test was 
  5.3   offered and action may be taken against a person who refuses to 
  5.4   take a urine test only if an alternative test was offered. 
  5.5      Sec. 6.  Minnesota Statutes 1996, section 169.123, 
  5.6   subdivision 4, is amended to read: 
  5.7      Subd. 4.  [REFUSAL; REVOCATION OF LICENSE.] (a) If a person 
  5.8   refuses to permit a test or a drug recognition evaluation, none 
  5.9   shall be given, but the peace officer shall report the refusal 
  5.10  to the commissioner of public safety and the authority having 
  5.11  responsibility for prosecution of misdemeanor offenses for the 
  5.12  jurisdiction in which the acts occurred.  However, if a peace 
  5.13  officer has probable cause to believe that the person has 
  5.14  violated section 609.21, a test or a drug recognition evaluation 
  5.15  may be required and obtained despite the person's refusal.  A 
  5.16  refusal to submit to an alcohol concentration test or a drug 
  5.17  recognition evaluation does not constitute a violation of 
  5.18  section 609.50, unless the refusal was accompanied by force or 
  5.19  violence or the threat of force or violence.  
  5.20     (b) If a person submits to a test and the test results 
  5.21  indicate an alcohol concentration of 0.10 or more or the 
  5.22  presence of a controlled substance listed in schedule I or II, 
  5.23  other than marijuana or tetrahydrocannabinols, or if a person 
  5.24  was driving, operating, or in physical control of a commercial 
  5.25  motor vehicle and the test results indicate an alcohol 
  5.26  concentration of 0.04 or more, the results of the test shall be 
  5.27  reported to the commissioner of public safety and to the 
  5.28  authority having responsibility for prosecution of misdemeanor 
  5.29  offenses for the jurisdiction in which the acts occurred. 
  5.30     (c) Upon certification by the peace officer that there 
  5.31  existed probable cause to believe the person had been driving, 
  5.32  operating, or in physical control of a motor vehicle in 
  5.33  violation of section 169.121 and that the person refused to 
  5.34  submit to a test or to a drug recognition evaluation conducted 
  5.35  by a drug recognition expert, the commissioner of public safety 
  5.36  shall revoke the person's license or permit to drive, or 
  6.1   nonresident operating privilege, for a period of one year even 
  6.2   if a test was obtained pursuant to this section after the person 
  6.3   refused to submit to testing.  
  6.4      (d) Upon certification by the peace officer that there 
  6.5   existed probable cause to believe the person had been driving, 
  6.6   operating, or in physical control of a commercial motor vehicle 
  6.7   with the presence of any alcohol in violation of section 169.121 
  6.8   or 169.1211, and that the person refused to submit to a test, 
  6.9   the commissioner shall disqualify the person from operating a 
  6.10  commercial motor vehicle for a period of one year under section 
  6.11  171.165 and shall revoke the person's license or permit to drive 
  6.12  or nonresident operating privilege for a period of one year.  
  6.13     (e) Upon certification by the peace officer that there 
  6.14  existed probable cause to believe the person had been driving, 
  6.15  operating or in physical control of a motor vehicle in violation 
  6.16  of section 169.121 and that the person submitted to a test and 
  6.17  the test results indicate an alcohol concentration of 0.10 or 
  6.18  more or the presence of a controlled substance listed in 
  6.19  schedule I or II, other than marijuana or tetrahydrocannabinols, 
  6.20  the commissioner of public safety shall revoke the person's 
  6.21  license or permit to drive, or nonresident operating privilege: 
  6.22     (1) for a period of 90 days; or 
  6.23     (2) if the person is under the age of 21 years, for a 
  6.24  period of six months; or 
  6.25     (3) for a person with a prior impaired driving conviction 
  6.26  or prior license revocation within the past five years, for a 
  6.27  period of 180 days.  
  6.28     (f) On certification by the peace officer that there 
  6.29  existed probable cause to believe the person had been driving, 
  6.30  operating, or in physical control of a commercial motor vehicle 
  6.31  with any presence of alcohol and that the person submitted to a 
  6.32  test and the test results indicated an alcohol concentration of 
  6.33  0.04 or more, the commissioner of public safety shall disqualify 
  6.34  the person from operating a commercial motor vehicle under 
  6.35  section 171.165.  
  6.36     (g) If the person is a resident without a license or permit 
  7.1   to operate a motor vehicle in this state, the commissioner of 
  7.2   public safety shall deny to the person the issuance of a license 
  7.3   or permit for the same period after the date of the alleged 
  7.4   violation as provided herein for revocation, subject to review 
  7.5   as hereinafter provided. 
  7.6      (h) As used in this subdivision, the terms "prior impaired 
  7.7   driving conviction" and "prior license revocation" have the 
  7.8   meanings given in section 169.121, subdivision 3, paragraph (a). 
  7.9      Sec. 7.  Minnesota Statutes 1996, section 169.123, 
  7.10  subdivision 5a, is amended to read: 
  7.11     Subd. 5a.  [TEST REFUSAL; DRIVING PRIVILEGE LOST.] (a) On 
  7.12  behalf of the commissioner of public safety, a peace officer 
  7.13  requiring a test or a drug recognition evaluation, or directing 
  7.14  the administration of a chemical test shall serve immediate 
  7.15  notice of intention to revoke and of revocation on a person who 
  7.16  refuses to permit a test or on a person who submits to a test 
  7.17  the results of which indicate an alcohol concentration of 0.10 
  7.18  or more or the presence of a controlled substance listed in 
  7.19  schedule I or II, other than marijuana or tetrahydrocannabinols. 
  7.20     (b) On behalf of the commissioner of public safety, a peace 
  7.21  officer requiring a test or directing the administration of a 
  7.22  chemical test of a person driving, operating, or in physical 
  7.23  control of a commercial motor vehicle shall serve immediate 
  7.24  notice of intention to disqualify and of disqualification on a 
  7.25  person who refuses to permit a test, or on a person who submits 
  7.26  to a test the results of which indicate an alcohol concentration 
  7.27  of 0.04 or more. 
  7.28     (c) The officer shall either: 
  7.29     (1) take the driver's license or permit, if any, send it to 
  7.30  the commissioner of public safety along with the certificate 
  7.31  required by subdivision 4, and issue a temporary license 
  7.32  effective only for seven days; or 
  7.33     (2) invalidate the driver's license or permit in such a way 
  7.34  that no identifying information is destroyed. 
  7.35     Sec. 8.  Minnesota Statutes 1996, section 169.123, 
  7.36  subdivision 6, is amended to read: 
  8.1      Subd. 6.  [HEARING.] (a) A hearing under this section shall 
  8.2   be before a district judge in any county in the judicial 
  8.3   district where the alleged offense occurred.  The hearing shall 
  8.4   be to the court and may be conducted at the same time and in the 
  8.5   same manner as hearings upon pretrial motions in the criminal 
  8.6   prosecution under section 169.121, if any.  The hearing shall be 
  8.7   recorded.  The commissioner of public safety shall appear and be 
  8.8   represented by the attorney general or through the prosecuting 
  8.9   authority for the jurisdiction involved.  The hearing shall be 
  8.10  held at the earliest practicable date, and in any event no later 
  8.11  than 60 days following the filing of the petition for review.  
  8.12  The judicial district administrator shall establish procedures 
  8.13  to ensure efficient compliance with this subdivision.  To 
  8.14  accomplish this, the administrator may, whenever possible, 
  8.15  consolidate and transfer review hearings among the county courts 
  8.16  within the judicial district.  
  8.17     (b) The scope of the hearing shall be limited to the issues 
  8.18  in clauses (1) to (9): 
  8.19     (1) Did the peace officer have probable cause to believe 
  8.20  the person was driving, operating, or in physical control of: 
  8.21     (i) a motor vehicle in violation of section 169.121; or 
  8.22     (ii) a commercial motor vehicle in violation of section 
  8.23  169.1211? 
  8.24     (2) Was the person lawfully placed under arrest for 
  8.25  violation of section 169.121 or 169.1211? 
  8.26     (3) Was the person involved in a motor vehicle accident or 
  8.27  collision resulting in property damage, personal injury or death?
  8.28     (4) Did the person refuse to take a screening test provided 
  8.29  for by section 169.121, subdivision 6? 
  8.30     (5) If the screening test was administered, did the test 
  8.31  indicate an alcohol concentration of 0.10 or more? 
  8.32     (6) At the time of the request for the test or the drug 
  8.33  recognition evaluation, did the peace officer inform the person 
  8.34  of the person's rights and the consequences of taking or 
  8.35  refusing the test or drug recognition evaluation as required by 
  8.36  subdivision 2? 
  9.1      (7) Did the person refuse to permit the test or the drug 
  9.2   recognition evaluation? 
  9.3      (8) If a test was taken: 
  9.4      (i) by a person driving, operating, or in physical control 
  9.5   of a motor vehicle, did the test results indicate an alcohol 
  9.6   concentration of 0.10 or more at the time of testing or the 
  9.7   presence of a controlled substance listed in schedule I or II, 
  9.8   other than marijuana or tetrahydrocannabinols; or 
  9.9      (ii) by a person driving, operating, or in physical control 
  9.10  of a commercial motor vehicle, did the test results indicate an 
  9.11  alcohol concentration of 0.04 or more at the time of testing? 
  9.12     (9) Was the testing method used valid and reliable and were 
  9.13  the test results accurately evaluated? 
  9.14     (c) It shall be an affirmative defense for the petitioner 
  9.15  to prove that, at the time of the refusal, the petitioner's 
  9.16  refusal to permit the test or the drug recognition evaluation 
  9.17  was based upon reasonable grounds. 
  9.18     (d) Certified or otherwise authenticated copies of 
  9.19  laboratory or medical personnel reports, records, documents, 
  9.20  licenses and certificates shall be admissible as substantive 
  9.21  evidence.  
  9.22     (e) The court shall order that the revocation or 
  9.23  disqualification be either rescinded or sustained and forward 
  9.24  the order to the commissioner of public safety.  The court shall 
  9.25  file its order within 14 days following the hearing.  If the 
  9.26  revocation or disqualification is sustained, the court shall 
  9.27  also forward the person's driver's license or permit to the 
  9.28  commissioner of public safety for further action by the 
  9.29  commissioner of public safety if the license or permit is not 
  9.30  already in the commissioner's possession. 
  9.31     Sec. 9.  [299D.11] [TRAINING IN IMPAIRED DRIVING 
  9.32  RECOGNITION.] 
  9.33     The state patrol shall offer training courses to instruct 
  9.34  peace officers in techniques to detect when a driver of a motor 
  9.35  vehicle is impaired by alcohol, controlled substances, or 
  9.36  hazardous substances.  At a minimum, the course must include the 
 10.1   following curricula developed by the National Highway Traffic 
 10.2   Safety Administration (NHTSA): 
 10.3      (1) the NHTSA standardized field sobriety testing 
 10.4   curriculum; and 
 10.5      (2) the NHTSA "drugs that impair driving" (Drug Block) 
 10.6   curriculum. 
 10.7   The state patrol shall update the training course periodically 
 10.8   as it deems appropriate. 
 10.9      Sec. 10.  [626.8456] [TRAINING IN IMPAIRED DRIVING 
 10.10  RECOGNITION.] 
 10.11     Subdivision 1.  [PRESERVICE TRAINING REQUIREMENT.] An 
 10.12  individual is not eligible to take the peace officer licensing 
 10.13  examination after August 1, 1998, unless the individual has 
 10.14  received the training described in section 299D.11, subdivision 
 10.15  1. 
 10.16     Subd. 2.  [IN-SERVICE TRAINING REQUIREMENT.] Peace officers 
 10.17  licensed before August 1, 1998, who are employed by law 
 10.18  enforcement agencies and assigned to general patrol duties shall 
 10.19  receive the training described in section 299D.11, subdivision 
 10.20  1, according to the following time schedule: 
 10.21     (1) at least 30 percent of the officers shall receive the 
 10.22  training on or before August 1, 1998; 
 10.23     (2) at least 60 percent of the officers shall receive the 
 10.24  training on or before August 1, 1999; and 
 10.25     (3) 100 percent of the officers shall receive the training 
 10.26  on or before August 1, 2000.  
 10.27     Sec. 11.  [626.8457] [DRUG RECOGNITION EXPERT TRAINING.] 
 10.28     Subdivision 1.  [DEFINITION.] As used in this section: 
 10.29     (1) "drug recognition evaluation" means the systematic, 
 10.30  standardized, investigative procedure defined by the National 
 10.31  Highway Traffic Safety Administration that is used to determine 
 10.32  whether a driver is impaired, whether the impairment relates to 
 10.33  drugs or a medical condition and, if drug-related, the 
 10.34  categories of drugs likely to have caused the impairment; and 
 10.35     (2) "drug recognition expert" means a peace officer who is 
 10.36  certified by the International Association of Chiefs of Police 
 11.1   to conduct drug recognition evaluations. 
 11.2      Subd. 2.  [MINNEAPOLIS AND ST. PAUL.] (a) By August 1, 
 11.3   1999, the chief law enforcement officers of the cities of 
 11.4   Minneapolis and St. Paul shall ensure that a sufficient number 
 11.5   of drug recognition experts are employed by the agencies so that 
 11.6   a drug recognition expert is available on a 24-hour basis to 
 11.7   evaluate suspected drug-impaired drivers who are apprehended 
 11.8   within the two cities.  Fifty percent of the number of drug 
 11.9   recognition experts needed to comply with this 24-hour coverage 
 11.10  requirement must be available by August 1, 1998. 
 11.11     (b) The chief law enforcement officers of the cities of 
 11.12  Minneapolis and St. Paul may enter into cross-jurisdictional 
 11.13  agreements with each other, with other law enforcement agencies, 
 11.14  and with the state patrol in order to comply with the 24-hour 
 11.15  coverage requirement required by this subdivision. 
 11.16     Subd. 3.  [SEVEN-COUNTY METROPOLITAN AREA.] By August 1, 
 11.17  1999, the head of the state patrol shall ensure that a 
 11.18  sufficient number of drug recognition experts are employed by 
 11.19  the state patrol so that a drug recognition expert is available 
 11.20  on a 24-hour basis to evaluate suspected drug-impaired drivers 
 11.21  who are apprehended within the seven-county metropolitan area, 
 11.22  excluding the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul. 
 11.23     Subd. 4.  [LARGER LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES.] (a) A law 
 11.24  enforcement agency employing at least 35 full-time but not more 
 11.25  than 59 full-time peace officers shall employ at least one drug 
 11.26  recognition expert by August 1, 1998.  This paragraph does not 
 11.27  apply to the metropolitan airports commission police department. 
 11.28     (b) A law enforcement agency employing at least 60 
 11.29  full-time but not more than 500 full-time peace officers shall 
 11.30  employ at least one drug recognition expert by August 1, 1998, 
 11.31  and at least two drug recognition experts by August 1, 1999. 
 11.32     Subd. 5.  [OTHER JURISDICTIONS IN GREATER MINNESOTA.] By 
 11.33  August 1, 1998, the head of the state patrol shall assign at 
 11.34  least one state trooper who is certified as a drug recognition 
 11.35  expert to each of (1) the cities of Worthington, Rochester, 
 11.36  Marshall, St. Cloud, Willmar, Morris, East Grand Forks, Thief 
 12.1   River Falls, Bemidji, International Falls, Virginia, Duluth, 
 12.2   Moose Lake, and Wadena; and (2) the counties of Rice, Blue 
 12.3   Earth, McLeod, Chisago, and Clay. 
 12.4      Sec. 12.  [APPROPRIATIONS.] 
 12.5      Subdivision 1.  [STATE PATROL.] $6,800,000 is appropriated 
 12.6   from the general fund to the state patrol for the fiscal 
 12.7   biennium ending June 30, 1999, to be used to conduct the 
 12.8   training courses required by section 9 and to fund 37 positions. 
 12.9      Subd. 2.  [COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC SAFETY.] $2,275,000 is 
 12.10  appropriated from the general fund to the commissioner of public 
 12.11  safety for the fiscal biennium ending June 30, 1999, to be 
 12.12  distributed to state and local law enforcement agencies to help 
 12.13  pay the costs of providing training to peace officers as 
 12.14  required by sections 9 and 10 and making drug recognition 
 12.15  experts available as required by section 11. 
 12.16     Sec. 13.  [EFFECTIVE DATE.] 
 12.17     Sections 1 to 8 are effective August 1, 1998, and apply to 
 12.18  violations occurring on or after that date.