Implementation Guidelines - Federal Transit Administration - U.S. ...
Implementation Guidelines - Federal Transit Administration - U.S. ... Implementation Guidelines - Federal Transit Administration - U.S. ...
employees and 50 non-DOT employees, and assuming a testing rate of 50 percent, it is possible that no DOT-covered employees would be tested (100 employees, 50 tests, all 50 tests conducted on nonDOT employees). The likelihood of this happening, albeit remote, is possible under a truly random scheme. On the other hand, keeping the above two classes of employees in separate pools assures that at least 25 of the tests conducted by the company will be conducted on DOT employees. It is this assurance that ultimately mandates DOTcovered employees remain in separate random pools. Q. Can an employer combine employees covered by different operating administration rule into a single pool for random testing? A. The Department has determined that it is permissible for an employer to combine covered employees from different operating administrations, (e.g. Federal Motor Carrier’s Safety Administration, Coast Guard, and Federal Transit Administration) into a single selection pool for the purpose of conducting random drug testing under DOT authority. When exercising this option, however, the employer must ensure that the random testing rate is at least equal to the highest rate required by each of the operating administrations. Q. Is it permissible to separate union and nonunion employees, both covered by DOT, into stand-alone pools? A. The Department has determined that it is permissible for an employer to separate union and nonunion employees into separate pools for the purpose of random drug testing. If using this approach, the employer must ensure that the employees from each pool are tested at equal rates. For example, if pool “A” consists of 50 nonunion employees and pool “B” consists of 50 union employees, the employer must ensure, if testing is done at a 50 percent rate, that 25 tests are conducted annually on employees from each pool. Q: If an applicant admits to testing positive on or refusing to take a pre-employment test within the past 2 years, must the applicant be held out of safety-sensitive duties if he or she did not complete the return-to-duty process (i.e., the SAP process)? A: If the applicant admits that he or she had a positive or a refusal to test result on a pre- employment test, the employer is not permitted to use the applicant to perform safetysensitive duties until and unless the applicant documents successful completion of the returnto-duty process. This Part 40 requirement applies whether or not the pre-employment positive or refusal occurred before, on, or after August 1, 2001. Should no proof exist that the return-to-duty process was successfully complied with by the applicant, a current returnto-duty process must occur before the individual can again perform safety-sensitive functions. Q: When an employee leaves an employer for a period of time (but not exceeding 2 years) and returns to that same employer, must the employer once again seek to obtain information it may have received previously from other employers? Appendix G. Questions and Answers G-14 August 2002
A: No. If the information received previously is still on file with the employer, the employer need not seek to obtain the testing data again. However, the employer must seek information from all other employers for whom the employee performed safety-sensitive duties since the employee last worked for the employer. Q: Because Part 40 requires collectors, MROs, BATs and STTs, and SAPs to maintain their own training records, can employers or training entities refuse to provide these service agents their training records? A: No. Employers and trainers who provide training for these service agents must not withhold training documentation from them when they have successfully completed the training requirements. If a collector, BAT, STT, MRO, or SAP is not in possession of training documentation, he or she is in violation of Part 40. Therefore, Part 40 does not permit the withholding of such documentation from these service agents. Q: Is error correction training required if a drug test is cancelled due to a specimen having an insufficient amount of urine? A: If the laboratory finds there is an insufficient amount of urine in the primary bottle for analysis, the laboratory will report to the MRO that the specimen is “rejected for testing” (unless the laboratory can redesignate the specimens). Subsequently, the MRO must cancel the test. The MRO should seek to determine (with the assistance of the laboratory) if the specimen leaked in transit or if not enough urine was collected. Specimen leakage while in transit to a laboratory will not cause a cancellation requiring the collector to have error correction training. If the laboratory finds no evidence of leakage, indications would be strong that the collector failed to collect the appropriate amount of urine. If this were the case, the collector would need error correction training. If specimen leakage is a recurrent problem for a collection site, the MRO may be wise to inquire whether or not the shipping containers used are sufficient to adequately protect the specimens or whether or not collectors are securing the bottle lids properly. Q: Where can billing information be entered onto the Federal Drug Testing Custody and Control Form (CCF)? A: 40.45(c)(1) states that the CCF my include billing information if the information is in the area outside the border of the form. Therefore, if account codes or collection site codes are entered, they must be placed outside the border, only. CCFs with this information pre-printed inside the border (i.e., in the Step 1 box) may be used until the supply of these forms is exhausted. CCFs produced or re-ordered after February 15, 2002, must not have this information inside the border. No corrective action is needed nor will a result be impacted if the CCF contains this information inside the border. However, employers and service providers may be subject to enforcement action if this requirement is not met. Appendix G. Questions and Answers G-15 August 2002
- Page 292 and 293: Appendix C Americans with Disabilit
- Page 294 and 295: sensitive duties for the illegal us
- Page 296 and 297: If the individual is qualified and
- Page 298 and 299: allegation of discrimination under
- Page 300 and 301: Appendix D. Certified Laboratories
- Page 302 and 303: DrugProof, Divison of Dynacare 543
- Page 304 and 305: One Source Toxicology Laboratory, I
- Page 306 and 307: The following laboratories are volu
- Page 308 and 309: Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 141
- Page 310 and 311: Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 141
- Page 312 and 313: Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 141
- Page 314 and 315: Appendix F. Fact Sheets Drug Detect
- Page 316 and 317: Social Issues • Two-thirds of all
- Page 318 and 319: • The euphoric stimulation increa
- Page 320 and 321: • Paranoia • Profuse sweating a
- Page 322 and 323: connection between marijuana smokin
- Page 324 and 325: Opiates (Narcotics) Fact Sheet Opia
- Page 326 and 327: Phencyclidine (PCP) Fact Sheet Phen
- Page 328 and 329: Appendix G Questions and Answers
- Page 330 and 331: ecipient, and someone other than th
- Page 332 and 333: Q. Can transit operators receive wa
- Page 334 and 335: Q. If an employee changed jobs prio
- Page 336 and 337: Q. How much training are employers
- Page 338 and 339: acceptable for the company-required
- Page 340 and 341: Q. In a post-accident situation req
- Page 344 and 345: Q: What actual address is required
- Page 346 and 347: Q: Can a split specimen be sent to
- Page 348 and 349: actual employee of the employer may
- Page 350 and 351: Q: Must collectors, BATs, STTs, MRO
- Page 352 and 353: an observer, or a monitor for co-wo
- Page 354 and 355: Q: If a collector makes an error on
- Page 356 and 357: Appendix H Terms and Definitions
- Page 358 and 359: indirectly, one controls or has the
- Page 360 and 361: Confirmation validity test Confirme
- Page 362 and 363: These terms include any designee of
- Page 364 and 365: Medical Review Officer (MRO) A pers
- Page 366 and 367: Random test Reason to believe Reaso
- Page 368 and 369: Safety-sensitive function Any of th
- Page 370 and 371: trolley bus, or vessel. A “mass t
- Page 373 and 374: 49 CFR Part 40 Updated August 31, 2
- Page 375 and 376: § 40.89 What is validity testing,
- Page 377 and 378: Page 4 of 100 § 40.287 What inform
- Page 379 and 380: Page 6 of 100 Subpart A - Administr
- Page 381 and 382: Page 8 of 100 Medical Review Office
- Page 383 and 384: Page 10 of 100 § 40.17 Is an emplo
- Page 385 and 386: Page 12 of 100 (b) You must request
- Page 387 and 388: Page 14 of 100 (4) The collector's
- Page 389 and 390: Page 16 of 100 (1) To avoid distrac
- Page 391 and 392: Page 18 of 100 (f) Direct the emplo
A: No. If the information received previously is still on file with the employer, the employer<br />
need not seek to obtain the testing data again. However, the employer must seek information<br />
from all other employers for whom the employee performed safety-sensitive duties since the<br />
employee last worked for the employer.<br />
Q: Because Part 40 requires collectors, MROs, BATs and STTs, and SAPs to maintain<br />
their own training records, can employers or training entities refuse to provide these<br />
service agents their training records?<br />
A: No. Employers and trainers who provide training for these service agents must not withhold<br />
training documentation from them when they have successfully completed the training<br />
requirements. If a collector, BAT, STT, MRO, or SAP is not in possession of training<br />
documentation, he or she is in violation of Part 40. Therefore, Part 40 does not permit the<br />
withholding of such documentation from these service agents.<br />
Q: Is error correction training required if a drug test is cancelled due to a specimen having<br />
an insufficient amount of urine?<br />
A: If the laboratory finds there is an insufficient amount of urine in the primary bottle for<br />
analysis, the laboratory will report to the MRO that the specimen is “rejected for testing”<br />
(unless the laboratory can redesignate the specimens). Subsequently, the MRO must cancel<br />
the test. The MRO should seek to determine (with the assistance of the laboratory) if the<br />
specimen leaked in transit or if not enough urine was collected. Specimen leakage while in<br />
transit to a laboratory will not cause a cancellation requiring the collector to have error<br />
correction training. If the laboratory finds no evidence of leakage, indications would be<br />
strong that the collector failed to collect the appropriate amount of urine. If this were the<br />
case, the collector would need error correction training. If specimen leakage is a recurrent<br />
problem for a collection site, the MRO may be wise to inquire whether or not the shipping<br />
containers used are sufficient to adequately protect the specimens or whether or not<br />
collectors are securing the bottle lids properly.<br />
Q: Where can billing information be entered onto the <strong>Federal</strong> Drug Testing Custody and<br />
Control Form (CCF)?<br />
A: 40.45(c)(1) states that the CCF my include billing information if the information is in the<br />
area outside the border of the form. Therefore, if account codes or collection site codes are<br />
entered, they must be placed outside the border, only. CCFs with this information pre-printed<br />
inside the border (i.e., in the Step 1 box) may be used until the supply of these forms is<br />
exhausted. CCFs produced or re-ordered after February 15, 2002, must not have this<br />
information inside the border. No corrective action is needed nor will a result be impacted if<br />
the CCF contains this information inside the border. However, employers and service<br />
providers may be subject to enforcement action if this requirement is not met.<br />
Appendix G. Questions and Answers G-15 August 2002