Implementation Guidelines - Federal Transit Administration - U.S. ...
Implementation Guidelines - Federal Transit Administration - U.S. ... Implementation Guidelines - Federal Transit Administration - U.S. ...
Section 2. CONSIDERATIONS IN ESTABLISHING CONSORTIA Although there are many advantages, particularly for small transit operators, to establish consortia, the advantages have a “cost.” Consider those costs to your organization prior to establishing or joining a consortium and allow for the following: • Shared design • Reduced control • Financial considerations • Administrative burden Shared Design. Often, employers establish the consortium’s operating policies and procedures by consensus. This process enables the consortium to achieve its various goals while addressing the needs of its individual members, which will require some level of compromise. Consequently, you may need to compromise on some elements of your program design and conform to the design wishes of other consortium members. For example, you may join a consortium that provides services that comply with the FTA and DOT regulations, but may not provide other elements that you consider important (e.g., monthly random number selections rather than quarterly). Accordingly, you may need to contract for these services on your own, or settle for a less than optimum design. Reduced Control. By joining a consortium, each employer loses operational autonomy over its testing program. If you operated your own program, your agency’s DAPM would be solely responsible for its administration following policies and procedures under your sole control. This will not be the case in a consortium. As a result, it will be more difficult and time consuming to effect changes in the program. Conversely, the consortium may make changes that you do not agree with, but are powerless to avoid. In addition, timely services may be difficult to ensure, such as obtaining records or resolving problems. Your best protection against reduced control is a sound contract with the consortium. While you still may not be able to effect changes by yourself, you can ensure compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. You might also limit the consortium’s ability to make changes without your approval and provide for prompt withdrawal if warranted. Financial Considerations. Although a consortium should reduce your substance abuse program costs, financial risks do exist. Failure of some consortium members to pay their costs may increase the burden on others under some consortia models. Consortia usually require a membership fee when you join, in addition to payments for testing services. This fee may include the provision of initial services such as policy development or educational materials. Charging a membership fee is a reasonable and common practice, and in virtually all cases the membership fee will be less than the initial investment of an in-house program. Nonetheless, the membership fee may be several times the cost of a single drug test, and small agencies that anticipate joining consortia should expect the fee and budget accordingly. Chapter 11. Joining a Consortium 11-5 August 2002
Members of a consortium that incorporate all of its members into a single random pool may not be able to anticipate the exact number of random tests that will be conducted on their employees. Even though the pool as a whole must meet the minimum criteria for drug and alcohol tests (50 percent for drugs and 10 percent for alcohol), individual employers may have more or fewer tests given the “luck of the draw.” For example, a transit system with 10 safety-sensitive employees would conduct 5 random tests if they were in a random pool of their own. However, this same system may conduct seven tests one year and two tests the next as part of a larger consortium. This uncertainty can make budgeting difficult. Shared Compliance. Each consortium member will impact the random testing rate compliance of the other members. If the consortium as a whole meets the criteria, then all members are in compliance. However, if the consortium falls short of the minimum requirements, then all members are out of compliance. Therefore, if you belong to a consortium with employers that do not conduct all their random tests, routinely purge their employee list, or communicate cancelled or omitted tests with the pool administrator, the consortium will not meet its goals and all members will be out of compliance. This risk can be minimized by aggressive program management and by establishing pools of like-minded employers. Administrative Burden. The amount of time and effort required to administer a consortium depends upon its size, type, and available expertise. Generally, consortia require a great deal of time to establish and maintain. The program requires the dedication and ongoing commitment of many people. Problem solving is a time-consuming task and requires significant effort by members. Also, a growing membership requires increased investments in administration and problem-solving efforts. Section 3. C/TPA LIMITATIONS The C/TPA and/or individual service agents may perform most tasks needed to comply with the regulations (see Exhibit 11-2 in the Sample Documentation section at the end of this chapter). The choice of which tasks will be delegated to a C/TPA, however, is left to the discretion of the employer. However, there are some limitations on the functions that a C/TPA or service agent can perform (§40.355). A C/TPA or service agent must not do the following: • Require an employee to sign a consent, release, waiver of liability, or indemnification agreement for any part of the drug or alcohol testing process covered by Part 40; • Act as an intermediary in the transmission of drug test results from the laboratory to the MRO; • Transmit drug test results directly from the laboratory to the employer--all employer interaction with the laboratory must be through the MRO; • Act as an intermediary in the transmission of alcohol test Chapter 11. Joining a Consortium 11-6 August 2002
- Page 184 and 185: 45420 Federal Register / Vol. 65, N
- Page 186 and 187: 45422 Federal Register / Vol. 65, N
- Page 188: U.S. Department of Transportation (
- Page 194 and 195: Section 1. SAP QUALIFICATIONS A sub
- Page 196 and 197: Education/Treatment Program Referra
- Page 198 and 199: Employers are not required to follo
- Page 200 and 201: SAP, many employers have looked to
- Page 202 and 203: 10 weeks, with most sessions schedu
- Page 204 and 205: _____________________________ _____
- Page 206 and 207: FOLLOW-UP TESTING PROCESS SAP Input
- Page 208 and 209: Alcohol Test Results
- Page 210 and 211: when the applicant was assigned saf
- Page 212 and 213: may arrange to have the consortium
- Page 214 and 215: • Employers and service agents sh
- Page 216 and 217: The list of randomly selected trans
- Page 218 and 219: A. At a Nonprofit Agency or Indepen
- Page 220 and 221: Reporting Period: Laboratory Name a
- Page 222 and 223: Record Retention Checklists (page 2
- Page 224 and 225: Retains CCF1 Split Lab - CCF1 Labor
- Page 226 and 227: CCF1 Split Lab Retains - CCF1 Labor
- Page 228 and 229: U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION D
- Page 230 and 231: Chapter 11. CONSORTIA AND THIRD PAR
- Page 232 and 233: Greater Expertise. The FTA and DOT
- Page 236 and 237: esults (≥0.02) between the BAT an
- Page 238 and 239: consideration. Thus, the more diver
- Page 240 and 241: Section 5. IS A CONSORTIUM RIGHT FO
- Page 242 and 243: • Procurement of testing services
- Page 244 and 245: • Consider which consortium model
- Page 246 and 247: Exhibit 11-1 Role of State DOTs in
- Page 248 and 249: Exhibit 11-3 CONSORTIA RESPONSIBILI
- Page 250 and 251: Chapter 12. PROGRAM MONITORING As a
- Page 252 and 253: • Conduct periodic review of serv
- Page 254 and 255: compliance. You are encouraged to c
- Page 256 and 257: Chapter 13. THE DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE
- Page 258 and 259: Violations of the act may result in
- Page 260 and 261: Exhibit 13-1 DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE AC
- Page 262 and 263: Chapter 14. SUBSTANCE ABUSE MANAGEM
- Page 264 and 265: Notification of audit Requested mat
- Page 266 and 267: them to move throughout the facilit
- Page 268 and 269: above materials. ⎯⎯Procedures t
- Page 270 and 271: DAY 3 Time Activity Team Address of
- Page 272 and 273: Date of Collection Jan-01 Nov-00 Se
- Page 274 and 275: Time of the Test Time of the Test 8
- Page 276 and 277: Each auditor will discuss the porti
- Page 278 and 279: Sample Re-audit Agenda DAY 1 Time A
- Page 280 and 281: Index of Appendices Appendix A. Acr
- Page 282 and 283: AA Alcoholics Anonymous Appendix A.
Members of a consortium that<br />
incorporate all of its members into a<br />
single random pool may not be able to<br />
anticipate the exact number of random<br />
tests that will be conducted on their<br />
employees. Even though the pool as a<br />
whole must meet the minimum criteria<br />
for drug and alcohol tests (50 percent for<br />
drugs and 10 percent for alcohol),<br />
individual employers may have more or<br />
fewer tests given the “luck of the draw.”<br />
For example, a transit system with 10<br />
safety-sensitive employees would<br />
conduct 5 random tests if they were in a<br />
random pool of their own. However,<br />
this same system may conduct seven<br />
tests one year and two tests the next as<br />
part of a larger consortium. This<br />
uncertainty can make budgeting<br />
difficult.<br />
Shared Compliance. Each<br />
consortium member will impact the<br />
random testing rate compliance of the<br />
other members. If the consortium as a<br />
whole meets the criteria, then all<br />
members are in compliance. However,<br />
if the consortium falls short of the<br />
minimum requirements, then all<br />
members are out of compliance.<br />
Therefore, if you belong to a consortium<br />
with employers that do not conduct all<br />
their random tests, routinely purge their<br />
employee list, or communicate cancelled<br />
or omitted tests with the pool<br />
administrator, the consortium will not<br />
meet its goals and all members will be<br />
out of compliance. This risk can be<br />
minimized by aggressive program<br />
management and by establishing pools<br />
of like-minded employers.<br />
Administrative Burden. The<br />
amount of time and effort required to<br />
administer a consortium depends upon<br />
its size, type, and available expertise.<br />
Generally, consortia require a great deal<br />
of time to establish and maintain. The<br />
program requires the dedication and<br />
ongoing commitment of many people.<br />
Problem solving is a time-consuming<br />
task and requires significant effort by<br />
members. Also, a growing membership<br />
requires increased investments in<br />
administration and problem-solving<br />
efforts.<br />
Section 3. C/TPA<br />
LIMITATIONS<br />
The C/TPA and/or individual service<br />
agents may perform most tasks needed<br />
to comply with the regulations (see<br />
Exhibit 11-2 in the Sample<br />
Documentation section at the end of this<br />
chapter). The choice of which tasks will<br />
be delegated to a C/TPA, however, is<br />
left to the discretion of the employer.<br />
However, there are some limitations on<br />
the functions that a C/TPA or service<br />
agent can perform (§40.355). A C/TPA<br />
or service agent must not do the<br />
following:<br />
• Require an employee to sign<br />
a consent, release, waiver of<br />
liability, or indemnification<br />
agreement for any part of the<br />
drug or alcohol testing<br />
process covered by Part 40;<br />
• Act as an intermediary in the<br />
transmission of drug test<br />
results from the laboratory to<br />
the MRO;<br />
• Transmit drug test results<br />
directly from the laboratory<br />
to the employer--all<br />
employer interaction with the<br />
laboratory must be through<br />
the MRO;<br />
• Act as an intermediary in the<br />
transmission of alcohol test<br />
Chapter 11. Joining a Consortium 11-6 August 2002