Since 2011, Newtown has been fortunate to have something of a secret weapon when it comes to making arrests of drivers suspected of operating under the influence of substances other than alcohol: Sergeant Matt Wood.

But when he is called upon to evaluate an alleged impaired driver, Sgt Wood typically approaches the subject with equipment one might expect an EMT or paramedic to carry.

Armed with a "DRE kit" stocked with a stethoscope, blood pressure cuff, thermometer, pinpoint flash light, tissue or fluid sampling swabs, test tubes, and evidence bags, Sgt Wood is poised to combine a keen sense of trained observation with scientific or forensic evidence to ensure that any legally impaired driver is removed from Newtown's roadways and prosecuted successfully.

Beyond that, and due to the unique training he has received as one of only 30 drug recognition experts or DREs in Connecticut, he is on call to assist officers throughout the region.

"Right now, besides me, there is one DRE in Greenwich, one in Wilton, one in Waterbury, and two State Troopers out of Troop G [Bridgeport] to cover most of western Connecticut," he told The Newtown Bee during a recent interview. "Ultimately our goal is not only to improve DUI enforcement, but to be more accurate so we can get people off the streets who need to be off the streets."

More recently, Sgt Wood has advanced to the status of DRE training officer, only one of four across the entire state. While he has averaged about one call for service every couple of months, on occasion he has found his training has helped to keep the handcuffs off of a couple of drivers instead of helping affect an arrest.

"I've had two cases where I have been called, I ended up ruling out a DUI," he said. "In both cases I was able to apply my training to determine that these individuals were affected because of legitimate legally prescribed medications or illness, and not because they were impaired by alcohol or [illegal] drugs."

Maintaining Certification

To keep his DRE certification active, Sgt Wood must perform at least four evaluations per year, complete eight hours of continuing education in the classroom, and perform at least one evaluation in the presence of another certified DRE instructor. The evaluations can be performed on duty here in Newtown, or when he is called to assist another regional police department.

In the process of becoming a DRE, he first received certification in an advanced DUI training course, and then became certified as an ARIDE or advanced roadside impaired driver detection officer - which is a requirement that qualified him to enter the drug recognition expert program.

"To become a DRE, there is a two-day kind of pretraining session, and you have to pass that to get into DRE school," he said. "That is about 50 hours of training, deep diving on systems of the body, anatomy, field sobriety testing, and then all the specialized testing you have to do as a DRE. Once you pass that, you have to pass a field evaluation, which I completed in Tucson, Ariz. Then there is a final exam we have to pass."

As a DRE, Sgt Wood is not necessarily expected to make more arrests, but he does have to make, or assist other officers in making, drug impaired DUI arrests that can sustain successfully through the prosecution phase.

"A DRE can and is used for routine arrests, as well as in incidents with greater consequences," he said.

He said in the coming year, the state is expected to host a training program for a dozen new DREs at Post University in Waterbury. And the state is establishing a DRE hotline, so any department can immediately reach the closest DRE who is on duty and available to respond if needed.

"The idea is to eventually get a good spread of DREs across the state," he said. "But I've been called to Monroe and several other towns based on my availability. I know in other parts of the state, the DREs are very busy. Some of these officers are making 15 to 20 evaluations a year."

The Massachusetts Factor

With Massachusetts the closest neighboring state to legalize the recreational use of marijuana, the possibility of Rhode Island fast-tracking similar legislation, and the escalation of opioid users who may be high behind the wheel, Sgt Wood knows his skills will remain in demand, as the prospect of drugged driving evaluations will likely be increasing faster than the state can get DREs trained to respond.

Shortly after Election Day in 2016, with a successful vote in Massachusetts to legalize recreational use of marijuana, Connecticut's two AAA affiliates held a Drugged Driving Summit in part to promote the DRE initiative. Attendees also examined the best and most effective ways DREs can affect arrests that stick, since at the national level, one of the most controversial issues is figuring out a protocol for establishing true impairment.

"The issue is, we have a limit for alcohol impairment, and it's easy to test for - the trouble with drugs is, they affect you differently than alcohol, and they move through your body differently than alcohol," Sgt Wood explained. "This makes it much more difficult. And from a scientific standpoint, no matter what you are drinking - whisky, beer, wine - detection is based on the blood alcohol content (BAC) level. There are thousands of drugs and each one works differently than alcohol, so to try and set limits for each one would be impossible."

An individual who is a habitual user of any substance, including alcohol, can develop a tolerance or learn a few tricks that may get them back the keys following field sobriety testing.

"With marijuana specifically, it works differently in your system so it can be very, very difficult to pinpoint impairment," Sgt Wood said, "and there is really no way to apply a single standard for measuring the amount of the active ingredient that causes impairment, THC, in somebody's system."

In Connecticut, opioid impairment is also high on Sgt Wood's list of concerns, as well as prescription drug impairment. Inhalant use is another matter, he said, and challenging to categorize for the purpose of determining impairment.

"With inhalants, we actually have seven different categories and those are challenging because their effect can back off quickly," he said. "And then there are those under the influence of multiple substances. So we try to be as accurate as possible to help build our case as thoroughly as possible."

Detailed Analysis

When Sgt Wood arrives on the scene to evaluate a suspected drugged driver, he runs through an extensive interview that also resembles a questionnaire one might complete for a doctor or emergency room visit.

The 12-step evaluation also includes getting detailed information from the officer making the stop about his or her observation of the suspect, how the suspect was driving, and if any substances were found in the vehicle.

Then the suspect is questioned about everything from possible past or current traumatic brain injuries to current medications, other medical conditions - even whether they've had a routine cold recently.

The next step is controlled eye examinations that are compared to the arresting officer's field sobriety test, and other more advanced sobriety testing beyond what may be practical or safe to do on the roadside.

Then, he uses a drug matrix chart to hone the signs of impairment to the types of drugs that could cause those impairments.

"No matter what your tolerance level, there are ways to use pupil size and reaction testing that can't be affected by even high tolerance levels," he said. "Then we look up your nose, and in your mouth for signs of ingestion, and we look for signs of opioid injection points as well as the stage of the injection to determine past or recent use. That gives us a fairly accurate picture of whether it's an impairment, a drug-related impairment, or a medical condition that mimicked impairment."

Setting State Protocols

As Connecticut pivots to become better prepared for the eventual escalation of drivers who may be heading to Massachusetts once recreational marijuana purveyors open there in 2018, the state will need to have a set protocol for establishing impairment for its DREs and front line officers to employ to make arrests.

As recently as February 10, a new study was released that examined how instant roadside saliva testing by suspecting officers could help prove an operator has ingested THC-infused cookies, brownies, candy, or other "edibles." But any results of such a test would likely be combined with the type of observational details a DRE might extract from a suspect during his or her 12-step evaluation.

Even devices being tested now to determine the active amount of THC in a driver's system would likely not be used exclusively to determine impairment.

According to  airing shortly after voters in Massachusetts endorsed legalizing pot for recreational use, "There are many reasons why chemical tests do not measure the effects of marijuana on things like brake and gas pedal coordination, distance perception, and general attention.a report by WBUR in Boston

"Marijuana may show up in urine, saliva, or blood tests for weeks, long after the effects have worn off, because marijuana is stored in body fat," the WBUR report continues. "A regular and first-time user might have the same chemical test result but very different levels of impairment. And test results will vary based on whether you smoke or eat weed."

Washington and Colorado, both with legal recreational use permitted, use a standard of five nanograms of THC per milliliter of blood derived from blood drawn during DUI arrests. But a May 2016 study released by AAA, concluded the connection between blood concentration and impairment is arbitrary.

"Based on this analysis, a quantitative threshold for per se laws for THC following cannabis use cannot be scientifically supported," the AAA report concludes.

 investigation of marijuana involvement in fatal crashes in the state of Washington in years 2010 - 2014 looks at whether stats changed after the state's legalization of recreational use of marijuana, and creation of a new per se limit for driving under the influence of marijuana, took effect in December 2012.An earlier AAA

And it points out the challenge of determining impairment, noting that "results do not indicate that drivers with detectable THC in their blood at the time of the crash were necessarily impaired by THC or that they were at fault for the crash," since "the data available cannot be used to assess whether a given driver was actually impaired, and examination of fault in individual crashes was beyond the scope of this study."