THIS IS THE SECOND PART OF A 2-PART ARTICLE DEALING WITH AN ANALYSIS OF THE PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH POLICE HANDLING OF PUBLIC INEBRIATES. THE FIRST PART OF THE ARTICLE INDICATES THAT THE HANDLING OF PUBLIC INEBRIATES DEPENDS PARTLY ON A RECOGNITION OF THE MYRIAD OF OBJECTIVES RELATING TO PUBLIC POLICY, ORGANIZATION, AND SELF-INTEREST, THAT COMPETE FOR DOMINANCE. THIS PORTION OF THE ARTICLE INITIALLY EXAMINES A MODEL THAT IDENTIFIES THE VARIOUS FACTORS INFLUENCING THE POLICE OFFICER IN HIS EXERCISE OF DISCRETION. ASSUMING THAT POLICY ANALYSIS HAS BEEN CONCLUDED AND A COHERENT POLICY APPROACH FOR DEALING WITH PUBLIC INEBRIATES HAS BEEN DEFINED BOTH LEGALLY AND ADMINISTRATIVELY, THE NEXT TASK INVOLVES THE PURSUIT OF ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES THAT WILL AFFECT THE FACTORS CONTROLLING THE USE OF POLICE DISCRETION IN A MANNER CONDUCIVE TO POLICY IMPLEMENTATION. THE DETERMINATION OF METHODS OF POLICE PATROL AND PICKUP OF PUBLIC INEBRIATES ARE CONSIDERED OF FUNDAMENTAL IMPORTANCE IN POLICY IMPLEMENTATION. SPECIALIZED TRANSPORT VEHICLES, THE INCREASED USE OF FOOT PATROL OFFICERS, AND THE USE OF JAILS AS A DROP-OFF POINT FOR SUBSEQUENT DELIVERY TO A THERAPEUTIC FACILITY OR FOR PROTECTIVE CUSTODY ARE CONSIDERED AS METHODS OF PATROL AND PICKUP. SOURCES OF INCENTIVES AND DISINCENTIVES AVALIABLE TO POLICYMAKERS AND ADMINISTRATORS IN INFLUENCING POLICE HANDLING OF PUBLIC INEBRIATES ARE IDENTIFIED AND THEIR APPLICATION IS DISCUSSED. ECONOMIC INCENTIVES, POWER AND AUTHORITY RELATIONSHIPS, AND COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION INCENTIVES ARE THE GENERAL CLASSIFICATIONS FOR INCENTIVES AND DISINCENTIVES CONSIDERED. SUGGESTIONS ARE ALSO OFFERED FOR IMPROVING POLICE AND DETOXIFICATION CENTER COOPERATION. PROGRAMS USING NONPOLICE PERSONNEL IN PICKUP AND DELIVERY SYSTEMS ARE LISTED, AND PARTICULAR ATTENTION IS GIVEN TO THE SAN FRANCISCO MOBILE ASSISTANCE PATROL, A CIVILIAN VAN PICKUP PROGRAM. IN ADDITION TO BEING DESCRIBED, MOBILE ASSISTANCE PATROL IS EVALUATED IN RELATION TO PUBLIC POLICY GOALS. FOR PART 1, SEE NCJ-51352. (RCB)