FTA Drug And Alcohol Regulation Updates

FTA Drug and Alcohol Regulation Updates
Issue 12, page 2

Technical Assistance

Where To Find?.....

49 CFR Part 653 , Prevention of Prohibited Drug Use in Transit Operations
February 15, 1994
Federal Register Vol. 59
Pages 7572-7611

Amended:
August 2, 1995
Federal Register Vol. 60
Pages 39618-39620
Primary Topic: Exemption of Volunteers and Post-Accident Testing Provision

December 8, 1998
Federal Register Vol. 63
Pages 61612-67613
Primary Topic: Use of Law Enforcement Post-Accident Test Results

December 14, 1998
Federal Register Vol. 63
Pages 68818-68819
Primary Topic: Random Drug Testing Rate at 50%

January 5, 1999
Federal Register Vol. 64
Pages 425-427
Primary Topic: Safety-sensitive Maintenance Functions

Technical Corrections:
March 6, 1995
Federal Register Vol. 60
Pages 12296-12300
Primary Topic: Corrections and Clarifications

The information presented on this page should be used to update Chapter 6 of the Implementation Guidelines.

Calculations of Number of Random Tests

Every employer covered by the FTA drug and alcohol testing regulations is required to have a random testing program that serves as a strong deterrent against employees beginning or continuing prohibited drug use and/or alcohol misuse. The manner in which the random testing rates are used to generate the actual number of tests to be performed has been the source of significant confusion in the industry resulting in under-testing by many and some unnecessary over-testing by others. To clarify this issue, the following step-by-step method of calculation is provided.

Determine how frequently random draws are made (daily, weekly, monthly, quarterly). This is the testing period. See Updates, Issue 2 Page 3 for article on establishing testing period and frequency of draw.
For each testing period, determine the number of safety-sensitive employees that are in the pool. Be sure to update the file to ensure that all new hires and individuals placed into active status have been added to the pool and those who have been discharged or put on inactive status have been removed. See Updates, Issue 3 Page 7 for article on status change.
Calculate the number of tests to be performed during the testing period as follows:

Multiply the number of safety-sensitive employees in the pool at the beginning of the testing period by the required testing rate (50% for drugs and 10% for alcohol in 1999).

Divide the total by the number of testing periods in the year (quarterly = 4; monthly = 12; weekly =52; daily = 365).

The result is the number of tests to be performed for that testing period. This method is demonstrated in the example provided in the accompanying box.

Calculations of Number of Random Tests

Once the total number of tests per testing period has been calculated, the total should be adjusted for cancelled tests. Only completed tests can be used to meet the random test rate. Thus, if any of the individuals selected during the current test period were not tested or the test was cancelled, an adjustment must be made when calculating the number of tests to be performed during the next testing period to ensure that the required rates are achieved within the year. Progress toward rate achievement should be monitored throughout the year to avoid the need to make one major adjustment at the end of the year.

Also, note that the same method of calculation holds true for consortia as well. The employer and consortium must have procedures in place to ensure that the pool is up-to-date before each draw and to inform the consortium of cancelled or incomplete tests that will require an adjustment in the number of draws made for the next testing period.

Some program managers have also been confused because of a reporting requirement in the annual MIS Drug and Alcohol Data Collection Forms. These forms require each employer to report the number of covered employees that were employed in each safety-sensitive function. The report requires that the number of covered employees reported be a cumulative total of all employees performing safety-sensitive functions over the course of the reporting year. Given employee turnover, cumulative totals usually exceed the number of safety-sensitive positions as they include a counting of all individuals that sometime during the year fell under the FTA regulatory authority. Many people have assumed that the random test rate should be based on this cumulative total. This is not the case, and would result in over testing for systems with larger staff turnover. Rather the method described above should be used, reflecting the fluctuation in staffing levels.