REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE

NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89)                        Prescribed by ANSI Std. 239-18 298-102

Preface

This annual report represents the cooperative efforts of many people. Extensive appreciation is extended to the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Transit Administration, the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, and the following individuals who were instrumental in guiding this project and contributing to its success:

Harry Saporta
Director, Office of Transit Safety and Security
Federal Transit Administration

Mark A. Snider
Drug and Alcohol Program Manager
Federal Transit Administration

James A. Harrison
Program Manager/Transportation Industry Analyst
Volpe National Transportation Systems Center

Michael R. Redington
Transportation Industry Analyst
Volpe National Transportation Systems Center

Executive Summary

Federal Transit Administration (FTA) regulations require that each recipient (both direct and indirect) of FTA funds (1) implement an anti-drug program to deter and detect the use of prohibited drugs, (2) establish a program to prevent the misuse of alcohol, and (3) report the results of its programs to FTA upon request. Compliance with FTA’s drug and alcohol testing program is a condition of Federal assistance. Failure of a recipient to establish and implement a drug and alcohol testing program  either in its own operations or in those of an entity operating on its behalf  may result in the suspension of FTA funding to the recipient.

In 2001, FTA amended its drug and alcohol testing regulations (originally published as 49 CFR Part 653 and Part 654, respectively) and combined them in a single regulation: CFR Part 655, Prevention of Alcohol Misuse and Prohibited Drug Use in Transit Operations. Part 655 was issued shortly after the minimum uniform DOT testing program requirements (49 CFR Part 40, Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs) were revised and reissued, in 2000. Part 655 eliminated the previous requirement that all direct funding recipients report their drug and alcohol testing program data to FTA annually. It now requires that recipients report their data only if requested by FTA. All direct recipients must still annually prepare and maintain a summary of the results of the programs that they oversaw during the previous calendar year. Direct recipients must also continue to annually certify regulatory compliance of those programs, and submit the certifications to their FTA regional office. Those who are requested to report must still do so on standard paper forms or electronically by March 15.

In 2001, FTA used a stratified random sampling system to select the funding recipients that were required to submit their data. Sample sizes were determined for each of the three size groups¹ recognized by FTA (large, small, and rural) to ensure a distribution that accurately reflects the relative populations of the three groups. Thus in 2001, for the first time since the initial publication in 1995, the annual results of the FTA Drug and Alcohol Program are based on the results of only a portion of employers that receive FTA funding--406 large employers, 72 small employers, and 187 rural employers.

2001 Testing Results

Results are summarized for the following areas:

• Violation rates (positive tests and test refusals combined) for random testing

• Accidents resulting in positive post-accident tests

• Positive test rates for four types of testing-- random, post-accident, reasonable suspicion, and pre-employment

• Return to duty

FTA considers random testing to be the most effective deterrent to drug use and alcohol misuse. The results of random tests also provide the best indication of the overall level of drug use and alcohol misuse, and are used by FTA in determining minimum annual random testing rates for the following year. For this reason, employers were requested to report the number of refusals to take a random test, as well as the number of positive test results. Accordingly, violation rates are presented for random tests. Violation rate is used here to refer to the number of positives and refusals combined per person selected to take a random test:

Drug violation rate²= (verified positives + refusals) ÷ (specimens collected + refusals)

Alcohol violation rate = (confirmed positives³+ refusals) ÷ (screens collected + refusals)

In 2001, results were reported for 77,842 persons who were selected for a drug test and for 26,478 persons who were selected for an alcohol test. Of those selected for a drug test, 627 had a verified positive result, and 68 refused to take the test. Of those selected for an alcohol test, 36 had a confirmed blood alcohol level of at least .04, and 13 refused to take the test. As shown in the graph at right, the violation rate was 0.89 percent for drugs and 0.19 percent for alcohol. This was the first time that the random violation rate for drugs was below 1.0 percent. If it is below 1.0 percent again in 2002, the FTA Administrator will have the option to lower the rate at which employers must test for drugs from 50 percent to 25 percent. Because the alcohol violation rate was below 0.5, the rate for testing for alcohol will remain at 10 percent in 2002.

As shown in the following three graphs, the random violation rates were much higher for contractors than for transit agency employees, and the drug rates were lower for large employers than for the other two size categories while the alcohol rates were similar for all three size categories. Nearly 85 percent of those selected for a random test (both drugs and alcohol) were transit agency employees. More than 95 percent of those selected (both drug and alcohol) worked for a large employer.

Random Drug Violation Rates by FTA Region

As shown on the map at right, the random drug violation rate was lowest in New York and New Jersey (Region 2) at 0.58 percent, and was highest in the northern mountain and great plains states (Region 8) at 1.45 percent. Only three regions had rates lower than the national average of 0.89 percent.

Random Alcohol Violation Rates by FTA Region

As shown on the map at right, the random alcohol violation rate was also lowest in Region 2 at 0.11 percent, and was highest in the central states (Region 7) at 0.43 percent. Half of the regions had rates lower than the national average of 0.19 percent.

Refusal data were not collected by employee category or by type of drug.

Accidents Resulting in Positive Post-Accident Tests

In 2001, employers reported 120 accidents that resulted in a positive post-accident drug test and 8 accidents that resulted in a post-accident alcohol test with a breath alcohol level of at least 0.04 percent. These numbers when normalized to the entire number of employers required to test by FTA were 277 and 17, respectively. None of the accidents reported resulted in a fatality.

Transit agencies reported 65 of the 120 accidents with positive drug tests, and 5 of the 8 accidents with positive alcohol tests. All but 5 of the accidents with positive drug tests were reported by large employers. All of the accidents with positive alcohol tests were reported by large employers.

Because return to duty tests and follow-up tests represent a different segment of the test population (i.e., specimens produced by persons who have already been removed from duty for drug or alcohol violations and have completed a rehabilitation program) and not all employers offer rehabilitation, the data from those tests are not included in presentations of overall rates.

Positive Rates by Test Type

As shown in the graph at right, the reasonable suspicion positive rates were much higher than the random, post-accident, or pre-employment rates for both drugs and alcohol. The random rate was lowest of the drug rates. In fact, the random violation rate (0.95 percent) was significantly lower than the positive rates for any of the other three test types. The post-accident rate was the lowest of the alcohol rates.

As shown in the following tables, the positive drug rates for the four test types combined are approximately three times higher for contractors than for transit agency employees, the alcohol rates are slightly higher for contractors, both the drug and the alcohol rates by employer type for large employers are very similar to the overall rates by employer type, and small employers had the highest rates for drugs while large employers had the highest rates for alcohol. Of the 131,323 drug specimens collected for all four test types combined, 95 percent were from large employers. Of the 41,076 alcohol screens collected, 96 percent were from large employers.

Because refusal data are not reported by employee category, random positive rates are presented below by employee category, as well as the rates for all four test types combined. Though the random drug rate was lowest for the CDL/ non-revenue vehicle category, the combined rate was highest for that category. The revenue vehicle operation category had the highest random rate for both drugs and alcohol. The revenue vehicle and equipment maintenance category had the highest combined rate for alcohol.

As shown in the following charts, marijuana was detected as often as all of the other drugs combined in random testing, and more often than the others combined in pre-employment tests and for all four test types combined. Cocaine was detected more often than the others combined in post-accident and reasonable suspicion tests. Marijuana was detected second most often in those tests. PCP was detected least often in each of the four test types, and not at all in post-accident and reasonable suspicion tests.

In 2003, employers reported that 289 safety-sensitive employees were returned to duty following a positive drug test or refusal, and 53 were returned following a positive alcohol test or refusal. These numbers when normalized to the entire number of employers required to test by FTA were 689 and 133, respectively.

Transit agencies returned 251 of the employees following a drug positive test or refusal, and returned 48 following an alcohol positive or refusal. Large employers returned 274 of the 289 returned following a drug positive or refusal, and returned 49 of the 53 returned following an alcohol positive or refusal.

Before being returned to duty, employees must complete a rehabilitation program and submit a negative test for the substance for which they were removed from safety-sensitive duty. Many employers require both a drug and alcohol return to duty test. The returned employees must then complete a series of follow-up tests (for the substance for which they were removed, or both drugs and alcohol) for a specified period following return to duty.

In 2001, 859 return to duty drug tests and 4,956 follow-up drug tests were reported. As shown at right, more than 2 percent of each were positive. None of the 513 return to duty alcohol tests reported were positive, and only 11 of 4,080 follow-up alcohol tests reported were positive.

The following six graphs subdivide the rates at right by employer type, employer size, and employer size and type combined. The return to duty graphs show drug rates only because no return to duty alcohol positives were reported. The follow-up chart by employer size and type contains alcohol rates for large employers only because no follow-up alcohol positives were reported by small or rural employers.

Trends: 1996 Through 2001

As shown in the graph at right, the drug violation rate dropped for the fifth consecutive year, in 2001, a drop of 15 percent from 2000 and almost 45 percent since 1996. As also shown in that graph, the random alcohol violation rate rose by more than 25 percent in 2001 (to 0.19 percent), but was still nearly 10 percent below the rate for 1996.

Random Drug and Alcohol Test Violation Rate Trend

The combined positive rates for all six required test circumstances—random, post-accident, reasonable suspicion, pre-employment, return to duty, and follow-up—have been higher for both drugs and alcohol than the random violation rates for each of the six years from 1996 to 2001.

The fact that the random rate that includes refusals has been lower every year for both drugs and alcohol than the combined rate for all tests, including random, that does not include refusals is conclusive evidence that random testing is an effective deterrent to drug use and alcohol misuse. Furthermore, as shown above, the combined rate for drugs has leveled since 1999 (and even increased slightly in 2001) while the random violation rate for drugs continued to decrease significantly in both 2000 and 2001

Table of Contents

Page

1. Introduction

1.1 Regulatory Background 1-1

1.2 Reporting and Certification Requirements 1-2

1.3 Reporting Assistance 1-3

1.4 Data Analysis and Validation 1-3

1.5 Organization of Report 1-4

2. Overview of Part 40 and Part 655 Testing Requirements

2.1 Overview of Required Testing Program 2-1

2.2 Safety-Sensitive Functions 2-2

2.3 Types of Tests 2-3

2.4 Types of Drugs 2-6

3. Drug and Alcohol Test Data

3.1 Random Test Violation Data 3-4

3.1.1 Random Test Violation Data by Employer Type and Size 3-5

3.1.2 Random Violation Rates by FTA Region 3-6

3.2 Accident and Fatality Data Associated with Positive

Post-Accident Tests 3-9

3.3 Data for Four Test Types 3-10

3.3.1 Data for Four Test Types by Employer Type and Size 3-10

3.3.2 Data for Four Test Types by Employee Category 3-13

3.3.3 Data for Four Test Types by FTA Region 3-22

3.4 Test Data by Type of Drug 3-25

3.4.1 Data by Drug Type, Test Type, and Employer Type 3-26

3.4.2 Data by Drug Type, Test Type, and Employer Size 3-27

3.4.3 Data by Drug Type, Test Type, and Employee Category 3-29

3.5 Other Alcohol Violations 3-32

3.5.1 Confirmed Alcohol Specimens Between 0.02 and 0.039 3-32

3.5.2 Non-Test Alcohol Violations 3-34

4. Return to Duty Data

4.1 Employees Returned to Duty in 2001 4-1

4.2 Return to Duty Test Data 4-2

4.2.1 Return to Duty Test Data by Employer Type and Size 4-2

4.2.2 Return to Duty Test Data by Employee Category 4-3

4.2.3 Return to Duty Test Data by FTA Region 4-5

4.2.4 Return to Duty Test Data by Type of Drug 4-5

4.3 Follow-Up Test Data 4-6

4.3.1 Follow-Up Test Data by Employer Type and Size 4-7

4.3.2 Follow-Up Test Data by Employee Category 4-8

4.3.3 Follow-Up Test Data by FTA Region 4-10

4.3.4 Follow-Up Test Data by Type of Drug 4-10

5. Trend Analysis

5.1 Random Violation Rates 5-1

5.2 Random Positive Rates 5-3

5.3 Combined Positive Rates for All Test Results 5-4

Appendix A. Glossary A-1

Appendix B. FTA Regions B-1

Appendix C. Accident and Fatality Data Associated with Positive

Post-Accident Tests by FTA Region C-1

1 The population that surrounds the transit agency determines its size category. Large agencies are in areas of 200,000 or more, small is 50,000 to 200,000, and rural is less than 50,000. Transit agencies and contracted service providers are treated as individual entities in each group.

2 For clarity in presenting the test results, the term “violation rate” is used differently here than in Part 655, where “violation rate” refers only to random alcohol tests.

3 A positive alcohol test is a specimen with a confirmed breath alcohol level of at least 0.04.

4 For clarity in presenting the test results, “positive rate” is used differently here than in Part 655, where it refers only to random drug tests and is the drug equivalent of the violation rate for alcohol.

1. Introduction

This report is the sixth annual summary of data submitted for entry in the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) Drug and Alcohol Management Information System (DAMIS). The report summarizes data reported for calendar year 2001, and includes trend analyses based on the annual data submitted for calendar years 1996 through 2001. DAMIS contains the data from all the drug and alcohol tests conducted under FTA regulations between 1996 and 2000, but contains 2001 data from only selected agencies, as explained in Section 1.2. DAMIS also contains the data from all the tests conducted by large agencies in 1995.

FTA regulations require recipients and subrecipients of funding under Title 49 of United States Code (U.S.C.) Sections 5307, 5309, and 5311, and 23 U.S.C. Section 103(e)(4) and their contractors to implement and maintain a program to deter and detect use of prohibited drugs and misuse of alcohol by safety-sensitive employees, unless the recipient is also an operating railroad regulated by the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA).
 

FTA issued its first drug and alcohol testing regulations on February 15, 1994 as two separate rules: 49 CFR Part 653, Prevention of Prohibited Drug Use in Transit Operations, and 49 CFR Part 654, Prevention of Alcohol Misuse in Transit Operations. The FTA rules were issued in response to The Omnibus Transportation Employee Testing Act, enacted by Congress in 1991. They expanded the minimum uniform DOT testing program requirements published earlier in 1994 in 49 CFR Part 40, Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs.

The Omnibus Testing Act was intended to promote the health and safety of transportation employees and the traveling public. It required all DOT administrations to issue regulations requiring funding recipients to perform four types of testing of all safety-sensitive employees for five controlled substances and alcohol, and to establish a prescribed program of rehabilitation and follow-up testing for employees who are given the opportunity to return to safety-sensitive duty after testing positive or refusing to be tested. The Act also required recipients to follow the testing procedures established by the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS).

After making two notable amendments and several minor changes to its rules, FTA issued CFR Part 655, Prevention of Alcohol Misuse and Prohibited Drug Use in Transit Operations, which supersedes and combines Parts 653 and 654. Part 655 was published in 2001 to expand the minimum requirements of the revised Part 40, which was published in 2000. The current Part 40 and 655 testing requirements are summarized in Chapter 2 of this report.

1.2 Reporting and Certification Requirements

Part 655.72 eliminated the requirement that all direct funding recipients report their drug and alcohol testing program data to FTA annually. It requires that recipients report their data only if requested by FTA. FTA believes that random sampling is now sufficient to produce an accurate representation of the overall transit industry because five years of universal reporting and analysis has provided an accurate portrait of drug and alcohol testing (including positive rates) in the industry. The intent is to reduce the paperwork burden on a portion of the industry and to reduce FTA’s tabulation and analysis effort.

Recipients requested to report must still do so on standard forms by March 15. All direct recipients must still annually prepare and maintain a summary of the results of the programs that they oversaw during the previous calendar year. Direct recipients must also continue to annually certify regulatory compliance of those programs, and submit the certifications to their FTA regional office.
 

FTA operating funds are granted directly to most large transit agencies. All other operating grants are provided to the states or to metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), which distribute the funds to individual transit agencies.

Some recipients and subrecipients (transit agencies funded by states or MPOs) rely on additional public or private entities to provide services in whole or in part. The states and MPOs must ensure the accuracy and timeliness of each report submitted by their subrecipients. All direct recipients must ensure the accuracy and timeliness of each report submitted by a service provider, operating or maintenance contractor, consortium or joint enterprise, or a third-party administrator acting on the behalf of a transit agency.

Failure of a recipient to establish a drug and alcohol testing program and to annually certify regulatory compliance and report information as requested, either in its own operations or in those of a subrecipient or an entity operating on its behalf, may result in the suspension of Federal transit funding to the recipient. Falsifying compliance information or certifications is a criminal offense.

1.3 Reporting Assistance

The required reporting forms are available in paper, on data diskette, and on the internet. Copies of reporting guidance and reporting forms and diskettes are available from the DAMIS Project Office at (617) 494-6336. The FTA Safety and Security Clearinghouse can be reached at (617) 494-2108 for additional copies of this report, as well as previously published annual reports. Other technical assistance materials, including the Implementation Guidelines for Drug and Alcohol Regulations in Mass Transit and Best Practices Manual: FTA Drug and Alcohol Testing Program, can be obtained from the FTA Office of Safety and Security at (202) 366-2896 and on the Office of Safety and Security’s Web site: http://transit-safety.volpe.dot.gov/damis.

1.4 Data Analysis and Validation

Data submitted for entry in DAMIS are subjected to extensive analysis and validation, both manual and automated. The process entails detailed review of the consistency and reasonableness of the data in each report, identification of errors or questionable entries, and resolution of any problems in consultation with the reporting agencies. This process enables detection and correction of errors of significant magnitude. However, some statistically minor errors may remain.

1.5 Organization of Report

The remainder of this report contains five chapters and three appendices:

• Chapter 2 presents an overview of the current Part 40 and 655 testing requirements, including descriptions of safety-sensitive functions, the types of tests to be performed, and the substances to be tested for.
• Chapter 3 compares the results of the required drug and alcohol tests listed in Chapter 2 and pre-employment alcohol tests. The results are further compared by employer type (transit agencies and contractors), employer size (large, small, and rural), the employee categories listed in Chapter 2, FTA region, and drug type.
• Chapter 4 provides statistics on the number of employees returned to safety-sensitive duty in 2001 following a positive test or refusal, and summarizes the results of the tests (described Chapter 2) that are required for such persons, using the same categories of comparison as in Chapter 3.
• Chapter 5 discusses the trends in testing results from 1996 through 2001, and presents random violation rates, random positive rates, and positive rates for all tests performed for each of those years.
• Appendix A lists the terms, and their definitions, associated with the FTA drug and alcohol testing program.
• Appendix B lists the ten FTA regions and their headquarters.
• Appendix C presents by FTA region the number of accidents reported in which a transit agency employee or contractor tested positive in an FTA post-accident test.

2. Overview of Part 40 and Part 655 Testing Requirements

As mentioned in Chapter 1, CFR Parts 653 and 654 were replaced during calendar year 2001 with Part 655, which combines the previously separate drug and alcohol rules into a single rule and expands the requirements in the revised Part 40. FTA believes that combining the drug and alcohol rules will produce one multi-faceted program that can be implemented more efficiently. It also brings FTA into line with the eight other DOT operating administrations that have drug and alcohol testing regulations. The revised regulations contain no significant changes regarding the employees to be tested, type of tests to be performed, substances to be tested for, and the return to duty qualification. This chapter summarizes the requirements of the combined program (in Section 2.1) and describes in detail FTA safety-sensitive duties, the tests required by FTA, and the drugs that safety-sensitive employees must be tested for (in Sections 2.2, 2.3, and 2.4, respectively).

2.1 Overview of Required Testing Program

Employees who perform any of five safety-sensitive functions must be tested for five controlled substances in four circumstances. Such employees must also be tested for alcohol use in each of those circumstances except pre-employment, though employers may, and many do, require pre-employment tests per Part 40 testing procedures. An additional circumstance (return to duty/follow-up) is required for safety-sensitive employees who are a given opportunity to resume safety-sensitive duties after testing positive for drugs or alcohol or refusing to submit to a required test.
 

Any employee who has a verified positive drug test, has a confirmed alcohol test result of 0.04 or greater, or refuses to submit to a test must be immediately removed from safety-sensitive duty. The employee must then be informed of the resources available for evaluating and resolving problems associated with prohibited drug use and alcohol misuse, including the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of substance abuse professionals (SAPs) and counseling and treatment programs. The employer then decides the disciplinary action to take. To return the employee to a safety-sensitive function, the employer must ensure that the employee successfully completes a course of treatment prescribed by a SAP and produces a negative return to duty test for drugs or alcohol or both, depending on the violation. Once returned to duty, the employee must continue a treatment program administered by the SAP, which includes a series of follow-up tests.

Additionally, an employee with a confirmed alcohol concentration of at least 0.02 but less than 0.04 must be removed from duty for at least 8 hours or until a re-test conducted by the employer shows an alcohol concentration of less than 0.02. If the employee is removed from duty for 8 hours, a re-test need not be administered unless the employee exhibits signs of alcohol use upon returning to duty.

Part 40 also prohibits use, manufacture, distribution, dispensing, and possession of all controlled substances by safety-sensitive employees. Furthermore, Parts 40 and 655 prohibit safety-sensitive employees from consuming alcohol in three circumstances:

• While performing a safety sensitive function

• Four hours before performing a safety sensitive function unless the employee produces a breath specimen with a concentration below 0.02 (Employees must be given the opportunity to acknowledge use of alcohol in the past 4 hours and to be tested when they arrive for duty.)

• Eight hours following an accident that meets FTA post-accident testing criteria (described in Section 2.3) or until an alcohol test is performed unless the employee’s involvement can be completely discounted as a contributing factor to the accident and there were no fatalities

2.2 Safety-Sensitive Functions

The revenue vehicle operation safety-sensitive job category includes employees who operate a revenue service vehicle, regardless of whether it is in service and regardless of whether a fare is collected.

The revenue vehicle and equipment maintenance category includes employees who maintain revenue service vehicles or equipment. It also includes many maintenance contract employees who perform routine, ongoing repair or maintenance for FTA recipients and subrecipients that have employees, including supervisors, who perform or could be called upon to perform any of the FTA safety-sensitive functions. Maintenance contractors of 5311 funding recipients are not subject to the testing regulations.

Revenue vehicle control/dispatching includes employees who control the movement of revenue service vehicles. This function was much debated during the recent rule revision process because the title “dispatcher” covers a broad range of duties, not all of which are safety sensitive, throughout the industry. The key consideration is the type of work performed rather than a particular job title. FTA decided not attempt a universal definition of “dispatchers” in Part 655. Instead, each employer determines whether its particular dispatcher performs or may perform a safety-sensitive function.

CDL/non-revenue vehicle includes employees not included in another safety-sensitive category who operate a non-revenue service vehicle (e.g., ancillary vehicle) that requires a Commercial Drivers License (CDL).

Armed security personnel are employees who provide security and carry a firearm.

2.3 Types of Tests

Random testing is considered by FTA to be the most effective deterrent to drug use and alcohol misuse, as well as the most reliable indicator of drug use and alcohol misuse within an agency and in the industry as a whole, provided it is unannounced and unpredictable. Thus, random testing is required to be conducted throughout all workdays and hours of service, and must be conducted at least once per calendar quarter. Selections for testing must be based on a scientifically valid random-number selection method, to ensure that all safety-sensitive employees have an equal chance of being selected for testing each time a selection is made.

In 2001, the number of random drug tests conducted had to equal at least 50 percent of the number of persons in the selection pool when selections were made, and the number of alcohol tests had to equal at least 10 percent of the pool. These percentages can be amended (per Part 655.45) by the FTA Administrator based on the combined percentage of positive tests plus test refusals, i.e.:

(verified positives + refusals) ÷ (specimens collected + refusals)

for modifying drug test rates

(confirmed positives + refusals) ÷ (screens collected + refusals)

The Administrator has the option to reduce a random drug or alcohol testing rate of 50 percent to 25 percent if the combined percentage of positives plus refusals is less than 1.0 for two consecutive calendar years. The Administrator has the option to raise a drug or alcohol testing rate from 25 percent to 50 percent if the combined percentage of positives plus refusals for the previous calendar year was at least 1.0. Additionally, the Administrator can reduce an alcohol testing rate of 25 percent or 50 percent to 10 percent if the combined percentage of positives plus refusals was less than 0.5 for two consecutive calendar years. Conversely, the Administrator can also raise a rate of 10 percent to 25 or to 50 percent if the combined percentage in the previous calendar year was at least 0.5 or 1.0, respectively.

The random testing quotas for 2002 did not change. As shown in Section 3.1, the combined percentage of alcohol positives plus refusals remained below 0.50 (at 0.19), and although the combined percentage of drug positives plus refusals dropped below 1.0 in 2001 (to 0.89), the combined percentage for 2000 was 1.05. If the combined percentage for drugs is below 1.0 again in 2002, the Administrator will have the option to reduce the drug test quota to 25 percent for 2003.

Post-accident testing refers to tests required following an accident involving a fatality or an accident that meets any of three other criteria and the employee’s involvement cannot be completely discounted as a contributing factor: (1) when a person suffers a bodily injury and immediately receives medical attention away from the scene, (2) when any vehicle involved incurs damage requiring it to be transported away from the scene by a tow truck or other vehicle, or (3) the mass transit vehicle involved is a rail car, trolley car, trolley bus, or vessel and is removed from revenue service due to the accident.

Employees to be tested include the vehicle operator and any other safety-sensitive employee not in the vehicle whose performance could have contributed to the accident. Both drug and alcohol tests must be administered as soon as possible, but no later than 8 hours after the accident for alcohol and 32 hours for drugs. The results of a blood, urine, or breath test conducted by Federal, state, or local officials having independent authority for the test cannot be used to meet FTA requirements unless the employer is unable to perform a post-accident test within the required time period, the test conforms to the applicable Federal, state, or local testing requirements, and that the test results are obtained by the employer.

Reasonable suspicion testing refers to a drug and/or alcohol test that is ordered by a trained supervisor based on specific, contemporaneous, articulable observations concerning the appearance, behavior, speech, or body odor of a safety-sensitive employee.

Pre-employment testing refers to testing of candidates for a safety-sensitive position (including existing non-safety-sensitive employees as well as applicants for employment) and for employees who have not performed a safety-sensitive function for more than 90 consecutive calendar days, regardless of the reason, and were removed from the employer’s random selection pool during that time. A negative pre-employment test for drugs is required by FTA as a condition for performing safety-sensitive duties under these circumstances. Pre-employment alcohol tests are not required but are permitted under Part 655 providing they are performed in accordance with the testing procedures in Part 40. The alcohol tests are included in the data presented in Chapter 3 because they are conducted per DOT standards and are required by many employers.

The Omnibus Testing Act required a negative pre-employment alcohol test, but FTA suspended the requirement on May 10, 1995, as the result of a U.S. Court of Appeals decision. FTA decided to allow but not require pre-employment alcohol testing in Part 655. All of the other eight DOT administrations with testing programs added this section to their rules.

Part 655 also eliminated the term “hire” in the pre-employment provision. Previously, employers were required to administer a drug test and receive a negative result before hiring an employee. FTA deleted the term to provide employers discretion to administer a pre-employment drug test anytime before an employee first performs a safety-sensitive function and before an employee returns to safety-sensitive duty after being removed from the random pool for an extended period. Part 655 also established a limit, 90 consecutive calendar days, on the amount of time an employee can be removed from the pool without a negative drug test before returning to work.

Return to duty testing refers to a drug and/or alcohol test that is required for a safety-sensitive employee who completes a course of treatment prescribed by a SAP after testing positive for drugs or alcohol or refusing to submit to a required test. A negative result for the type (drug or alcohol) of positive or refused test is required before the employee can be returned to duty. SAPs often require the employee to submit to both a drug and an alcohol test even if only one of the tests was at issue.

Follow-up testing refers to a drug and/or alcohol test that is required for an employee who is returned to safety-sensitive duty. The employee is subject to at least six unannounced tests for at least 12 months after returning to duty. The exact number and frequency of tests is prescribed by the SAP, who may order tests for up to 60 months after return to duty. SAPs often require the employee to submit to both a drug and an alcohol test even if only one of the tests was at issue. Follow-up testing is separate from, and in addition to, random testing.

Part 655 incorporates follow-up testing under return to duty testing (i.e., return to duty/follow-up testing) as one of five required FTA tests. It was previously listed separately as one of six required FTA tests.

2.4 Types of Drugs

Marijuana is derived from the hemp plant and comes in a variety of colors such as green, brown, and a gray mixture of leaves. THC or (delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol) is the primary active chemical in marijuana. It is absorbed quickly into fatty tissues and stored for a long time. The potency and strength of the chemical causes people to use the drug for the mildly tranquilizing, mood and perception-altering effects it produces. The test for marijuana also includes its metabolites

Cocaine is an addictive substance that comes from coca leaves, or is made synthetically. It appears as a white powder that is snorted, ingested, injected, freebased (smoked), or applied directly to the nasal membrane or gums. Cocaine acts as a stimulant to the central nervous system. It gives the user a feeling of exhilaration. The chemicals in cocaine trick the brain into feeling it has experienced pleasure, when in fact it has not.

Phencyclidine (PCP), originally developed as an anesthetic, has adverse side effects that limit its medical use to a tranquilizer for large animals. In people, PCP acts as both a depressant and a hallucinogen, and sometimes as a stimulant. PCP can cause distorted bodily perceptions and a feeling of disassociation where the mind feels separated from the body. These effects can be very upsetting to some people, who may panic as a result.

Opiates, also known as narcotic analgesics, include heroin, morphine, and codeine. They are derived from a sap taken from a seedpod of the plant, “papaver somniferum” (or poppy plant). General effects include sedation, slowed reflexes, raspy speech, sluggish movements, slowed breathing, cold skin, and vomiting. The synthetic form of opiates, known as “designer drug,” is even more deadly and addictive.

Amphetamines include racemic, amphetamine, extroamphetamine, and methamphetamine. They are potent stimulants that may be swallowed, snorted, or injected. They induce exhilarating feelings of power, strength, energy, self-assertion, focus, and enhanced motivation. The need to sleep or eat is diminished. Amphetamines can induce a sense of aroused euphoria, which may last several hours. The body does not readily break down amphetamines. Thus, feelings are intensified and ephemeral. Subsequently, there is an intense feeling of mental depression and fatigue.

3. Drug and Alcohol Test Data

The following two charts compare the percentages of total verified drug positives and percentages of total drug specimens reported in 2001 for each of the six required test circumstances cited in Chapter 2.

The following two charts compare the percentages of total confirmed alcohol positives and percentages of total alcohol screens reported in 2001 for each of the six required test circumstances cited in Chapter 2.

Because return to duty tests and follow-up tests represent a different segment of the test population—specimens produced by persons who have already been removed from duty for drug or alcohol violations and have completed a rehabilitation program—and not all employers offer rehabilitation, the data from those tests are presented separately (in Chapter 4) from data for the other four test types. Data from random, post-accident, reasonable suspicion, and pre-employment testing are presented in this chapter. The next two charts compare the percentages of total verified drug positives and percentages of total drug specimens reported in 2001 for each of those four test types. Those charts are followed by two charts that compare the percentages of total confirmed alcohol positives and percentages of total alcohol screens reported in 2001.

The results of the random, post-accident, reasonable suspicion, and pre-employment tests are sorted and presented by various criteria to enable the following comparisons:

• Drug and alcohol

• Test type

• Employer type (transit agencies and contractors)

• Employer size (large, small, and rural)

• Employee category

• Regional

• Drug type

As mentioned in Section 2.3, the results of random tests provide the best indication of the overall level of drug use and alcohol misuse, and they are used by FTA in determining minimum random testing rates for the following year. For this reason, employers were requested to report the number of refusals to take a random test, as well as the number of positive test results. Accordingly, violation rates are presented for random tests. In this report, the violation rate refers to the number of positives and refusals combined per person selected to take a random test:

Drug violation rate¹ = (verified positives + refusals) ÷ (specimens collected + refusals)
Alcohol violation rate = (confirmed positives² + refusals) ÷ (screens collected + refusals)

Employers were not asked to report refusal data for post-accident, reasonable suspicion, and pre-employment tests. The results for those tests are presented as verified positives for drugs and confirmed positives for alcohol. The verified/confirmed positive rates for random tests are included in the comparisons of positive rates by test type.

Data in this chapter are presented in five sections:

3.1 Violation rates and supporting data for random drug and alcohol tests, subdivided by:

• Employer type

• Employer size

• FTA region

3.2 Data on non-fatal accidents, fatal accidents, and total fatalities that resulted in positive post-accident drug or alcohol tests, subdivided by:

• Employer type

• Employer size

3.3 Verified/confirmed positive rates and supporting data for the four types of drug and alcohol tests, subdivided by:

• Employer type

• Employer size

• Employee category

• FTA region (data only for totals for the four test types combined)

3.4 Verified positive rates and supporting data for the four types of drug tests by type of drug, subdivided by:

• Employer type

• Employer size

• Employee category

3.5 Non-positive alcohol violations:

• Alcohol specimens between 0.02 and 0.039 by test type, subdivided by employer type,employer size, employee category, and FTA region

• Non-test violations, subdivided by employer type and employer size

As mentioned in Chapter 1, not all subrecipients were requested to report their test data in 2001. The employers requested to report were chosen using a stratified random sampling technique. Three sample populations were developed, based on employer size—large, small, and rural.³ In 2001, 406 large employers, 72 small employers, and 187 rural employers were asked to report. To make the sample data meaningful, the results are expressed as rates where possible, i.e., in Sections 3.1, 3.3, 3.4, and 3.5.1. The data on accidents that resulted in positive post-accident tests (in Section 3.2) and non-test alcohol violations (in Section 3.5.2) are normalized by each size category to represent the total number of employers. The actual number of instances reported is also presented to provide basis for the rate or normalization.

3.1 Random Test Violation⁴ Data

3.1.1 Random Test Violation Data by Employer Type and Size

The following three graphs present the random violation rates by employer type, by employer size, and by employer size and type, respectively. Each graph is accompanied by a table that provides the statistical basis for the violation rates. The tables also include the refusal rates.

Persons Selected for Random Testing and Violations by Employer Size
	Drugs			Alcohol
	Large	Small	Rural	Large	Small	Rural
*Persons Selected	74,144	1,811	1,887	25,335	584	558
Refusals + Positives	650	22	23	47	1	1
Positives	586	19	22	35	0	1
Refusals	64	3	1	12	1	0
Refusal Rate	0.086%	0.166%	0.053%	0.047%	0.171%	0
*specimens collected + refusals for drugs screens collected + refusals for alcohol

3.1.2 Random Violation Rates by FTA Region

The following two maps show the random violation rates for drugs and for alcohol, respectively, for each of FTA’s ten regions. The shading variations provide quick comparison. The exact rates are also included. The statistical basis for the violation rates is provided in the accompanying tables.

Drug Violation Rates by FTA Region

Random Alcohol Violation Rates by FTA Region

These data are subdivided by employer type and by employer size on the following pages. The drug violation rates by employer type, the drug violation rates for large employers, and the alcohol violation rates for large employers are displayed on maps. The statistical basis for the violation rates is provided in the accompanying tables. Because of the small sizes of their populations, the other rates appear in tables, along with the statistical basis for those rates.

Random Drug Violation Rates by FTA Region and Employer Type

3.2 Accident and Fatality Data Associated with Positive Post-Accident Tests

Data are presented for the number of accidents in which a transit agency employee or contractor tested positive in an FTA post-accident test. Data are presented for both drug tests and alcohol tests, though it should be noted that one person may test positive for both drugs and alcohol and that most employers test the employee for both drugs and alcohol. Thus, the numbers for drugs and alcohol cannot be added to obtain the total number of persons who tested positive. Data were not reported on the total number of persons testing positive in a post-accident test or for persons testing positive for both drugs and alcohol.

Because these accident and fatality numbers cannot be expressed as a rate, the number of instances reported have been normalized for the total number of employers by each size category. The first table below presents these statistics for the number of non-fatal accidents, fatal accidents, and total fatalities when a positive drug test resulted and when a positive alcohol test resulted. The next two tables subdivide those data by employer type and employer size, respectively. The data reported cannot be normalized by FTA region. The actual number of instances reported by region are presented in Appendix C; those numbers are also subdivided by employer type and by employer size. These accident and fatality numbers were not reported by employee category.

3.3 Data for Four Test Types

The positive rates for each of the four types (random, post-accident, reasonable suspicion, and pre-employment) and for the four types combined, for both drug tests and alcohol tests, are presented in the following graph. The accompanying table provides the statistical basis for the positive rates. These data are subdivided by employer type and size, by FTA region, and by employee category later in this section.

3.3.1 Data for Four Test Types by Employer Type and Size

The data above are subdivided by employer type, by employer size, and by employer size and type, respectively, in this section. The rates for each of the three data sets are shown in a separate pair of graphs. Each graph pair is followed by a table that provides the statistical basis for the rates.

Positive Rates by Test Type and Employer Type

 

One of the rates in each of the next two graphs is presented on a separate scale because its sample size is too small to be representative of its population.

One of the rates in each of the next two graphs is presented on a separate scale because its sample size is too small to be representative of its population. Due to the large number of alcohol rates below 0.3 percent, the space below “0.3” in the second graph has been expanded under the divider line to allow greater clarity.

3.3.2 Data for Four Test Types by Employee Category

The next two graphs show the positive rates for each test type, as well as the rates for all four types combined, by employee category for drug tests and for alcohol tests, respectively. One of the drug rates is presented on a separate scale because its sample size is too small to be considered representative of its population. The table following the graphs provides the statistical basis for the positive rates. These data are further subdivided by employer type and by employer size on the pages that follow.

Positive Rates by Test Type and Employee Category

Because of the large number of alcohol rates below 0.4 percent, the space below “0.4” has been expanded under the divider line to allow greater clarity.

Positive Rates by Test Type and Employee Category

3.3.2.1 Data for Four Test Types by Employee Category and Employer Type

The following series of graphs and tables subdivide the preceding data by employer type. Two graphs, one for drugs and one for alcohol, are presented for the four test types combined and for each of the test types. They show the positive rates by employer type for each employee category. Each pair of graphs is accompanied by a table that provides the statistical basis for the rates.

Note: The graphs subdivided by employer type do not contain columns for employee categories that show a positive rate of “0” in the previous graphs.

Positive Rates for Four Test Types Combined by Employee Category and Employer Type

Random Positive Rates by Employee Category and Employer Type

Some of the post-accident rates and reasonable suspicion rates (in the next two pairs of graphs) are presented on a separate scale from the other rates because their sample sizes are too small to be considered representative of their populations.

Post-Accident Positive Rates by Employee Category and Employer Type

Reasonable Suspicion Positive Rates by Employee Category and Employer Type

Pre-Employment Positive Rates by Employee Category and Employer Type

3.3.2.2 Data for Four Test Types by Employee Category and Employer Size

The following series of graphs and tables subdivide the test type/employee category data by employer size. Two graphs, one for drugs and one for alcohol, are presented for the four test types combined and for each of the test types. The graphs show the positive rates by employer type for each employee category. Each pair of graphs is accompanied by a table that provides the statistical basis for the rates.

Note: The graphs subdivided by employer size do not contain columns for employee categories that show a positive rate of “0” in the test type/employee category graphs.

Positive Rates for Four Test Types Combined by Employee Category and Employer Size

Random Positive Rates by EmployeeCategory andEmployer Size

 

Post-Accident Positive Rates by Employee Category and Employer Size