Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs, 8526-8528 [2010-3730]
Download as PDF
<![CDATA[
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
8526
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 37 / Thursday, February 25, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
working toward being able to create
such a database. However, it has not yet
been established. Meanwhile, we
believe it is useful to remove an obstacle
to the implementation of State laws that
do exist now. We simply recognize that
the States are also stepping up to play
a role in suspending CDLs based on Part
40 results and we do not want to
discourage such actions where
appropriate. We do not want Part 40 to
pose an impediment to employers in
their efforts to comply with their own
respective State’s legal requirements.
Some of the commenters who favored
the IFR, as well as some of those who
opposed it, suggested that we require
the States to tailor their laws to include
certain provisions, protections and
limitations. Some of the commenters
wanted us to order the States to have
certain service agents report the results.
Others wanted us to require that the
individual driver’s record be cleared of
the violation after 2 years (which is not
consistent with FMCSA requirements of
3 years tracking and would not provide
a window into follow-up testing).
Others asked that we order the States to
notify drivers when the information is
reported to the State and to provide the
drivers with privacy rights, due process,
and the right to correct their records in
the State databases. Some commenters
wanted assurance that the States would
purge records regarding violations once
the CDL holder completed the return-toduty process under Part 40. Many of the
commenters felt that, if DOT set
standards for the States to meet within
the scope of the respective legislation,
this would address the concerns about
inconsistent State laws.
The purpose of the IFR was simply to
avoid a conflict between State and
Federal law with respect to State laws
that direct employers and TPAs for
owner-operators to report violation
information to State agencies. Going
beyond this limited purpose and
imposing additional requirements on
States, even where such additional
requirements would arguably be good
policy, would exceed the scope of the
IFR and require an additional notice of
proposed rulemaking and comment
period. We do not believe that taking
such additional rulemaking steps is
justified at this time.
Some of those who opposed the IFR
appeared to suggest that, if we did not
finalize this IFR, they would not need
to comply with their State reporting
laws. On a related, but slightly different
note, some commenters assumed that
this IFR was requiring compliance with
State laws—and that the DOT Agencies
would find employers and service
agents out-of-compliance with Part 40
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:14 Feb 24, 2010
Jkt 220001
and the Federal Agency regulations, if
these parties failed to properly comply
with the State law requirements. These
are not correct assumptions.
This IFR is intended to permit but not
require employers and TPAs for owneroperator CMV drivers with CDLs to
comply with State laws without running
afoul of Part 40. We have not created
compliance responsibilities under State
law. That is within the jurisdiction of
the States. It is up to the States to ensure
compliance with their laws. Since we
are not creating responsibilities, we also
disagree with the commenter who
believed that this IFR would impose
significant costs resulting from new
compliance requirements to conform to
State laws. This IFR does not impose
duties. It merely relieves a potential
enforcement problem for certain
employers and TPAs for owner-operator
CMV drivers with CDLs.
Finally, there were some comments
outside the scope of this rulemaking.
One commenter suggested that the DOT
rely on an industry association to point
out who may be violating Part 40.
Others referenced new Federal
requirements that should be imposed
upon the States, including a
recommendation that Part 40 require
notification to States that individual
CDL holders have been identified as no
longer qualified to drive after a Part 40
violation. Some commenters suggested
higher fines levied by FMCSA for
violations of § 40.25 and other
provisions of Part 40. Others wanted
this IFR to bring forward the FMCSA
centralized database. All of these
comments, and any others outside the
scope of this rulemaking, have not
resulted in changes to the IFR.
There were no comments which
provided substantive information to
warrant changing the procedures in the
IFR, the Department will adopt the IFR
as final with no changes to the
procedures.
Regulatory Analyses and Notices
The statutory authority for this rule
derives from the Omnibus
Transportation Employee Testing Act of
1991 (49 U.S.C. 102, 301, 5331, 20140,
31306, and 54101 et seq.) and the
Department of Transportation Act (49
U.S.C. 322).
This final rule is not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866 or
the DOT’s regulatory policies and
procedures. It represents a minor
modification to our regulation to ensure
that employers and TPAs for owneroperators are not held out-ofcompliance with our regulation for
providing information required by the
State. The rule does not increase costs
PO 00000
Frm 00066
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
on regulated parties. In fact, it will
reduce the chance of civil penalty action
and increase safety for employers and
TPAs for owner-operators.
Consequently, the Department certifies
under the Regulatory Flexibility Act that
this final rule does not have a
significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities. To
the extent that there is any such impact,
it is expected to be negligible.
Issued at Washington DC, this 10th day of
February 2010.
Ray LaHood,
Secretary of Transportation.
PART 40—PROCEDURES FOR
TRANSPORTATION WORKPLACE
DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING
PROGRAMS
Accordingly, the Interim Final Rule
amending 49 CFR Part 40 which was
published at 73 FR 33735 on June 13,
2008 is adopted as a final rule without
change.
[FR Doc. 2010–3729 Filed 2–24–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary
49 CFR Part 40
[Docket OST–2007–26828]
RIN 2105–AD64
Procedures for Transportation
Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing
Programs
Office of the Secretary, DOT.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
SUMMARY: This final rule responds to the
comments received regarding the
interim final rule (IFR) procedures for
the use of a new alcohol screening
device (ASD) which is qualified for use
in DOT Agency regulated alcohol
testing. The Department did not receive
any comments which were germane to
the rulemaking. As such, the
Department will adopt the rule as final
without change.
DATES: This rule is effective February
25, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Bohdan Baczara, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Office of Drug and
Alcohol Policy and Compliance, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington,
DC 20590; 202–366–3784 (voice), 202–
366–3897 (fax), or
bohdan.baczara@dot.gov (e-mail).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
E:\FR\FM\25FER1.SGM
25FER1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 37 / Thursday, February 25, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
Purpose
Department regulations require that in
order for an employer to utilize a
specific ASD to conduct required DOT
alcohol tests, the device must (a) Have
been approved by the National Highway
Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)
as meeting required model
specifications, (b) be published by
NHTSA in the Federal Register on their
most current ASD CPL, and (c) have
Department-approved procedures in
part 40 for its use. By publishing the
IFR, the Department ensured that
procedures were in place so that when
NHTSA published its ASD CPL in the
Federal Register, the breath tube ASD
was immediately available for use by
DOT regulated employers.
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
Background and Purpose
When it originally published its
alcohol testing rules on February 15,
1994 [54 FR 7302 et seq.], the
Department established breath testing
using evidential breath testing devices
(EBTs) as the required method.
However, in response to comments
requesting additional flexibility in
testing methods, the Department said
that NHTSA would develop model
specifications for non-evidential alcohol
screening devices, evaluate additional
screening devices against those
specifications, and periodically publish
a conforming products list of screening
devices that met the model
specifications. The Department noted,
too, that the Department would also
have to undertake separate rulemaking
proceedings to establish part 40
procedures for use by DOT-regulated
industries of any devices approved by
NHTSA.
On April 20, 1995 [60 FR 19675], the
Department published procedures for
use of both breath and saliva ASDs. At
that time, the Department did not
anticipate that additional breath and
saliva screening devices would be
developed that would necessitate new
procedures for their use. As a result, the
revised part 40 published December 19,
2000 [65 FR 79462] stated, in part, that
ASDs on the NHTSA CPL could be used
for part 40 alcohol screening tests.
Because NHTSA added an ASD to their
CPL and the Department had no
procedures for its use, we were forced
to amend that rule. On August 9, 2001
[65 FR 41944], part 40 was amended to
read, ‘‘You may use an ASD that is on
the NHTSA CPL for DOT alcohol tests
only if there are instructions for its use
in this part.’’
On October 1, 2002 [67 FR 61521], the
Department published procedures for
the use of a breath tube ASD that had
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:14 Feb 24, 2010
Jkt 220001
been approved by NHTSA and added to
their May 4, 2001 CPL [66 FR 22639].
By 2005, that device was no longer
being manufactured, and was removed
from the CPL effective September 19,
2005 [70 FR 54972]. Subsequently,
NHTSA approved a new breath tube
ASD but had not yet added it to its ASD
CPL which was one of three critical
criteria to permitting DOT regulated
employers to use the device.
Although DOT regulated employers
could still not use the ASD, the
Department realized that the breath tube
procedures currently in our regulation
were not consistent with instructions for
use of the newly approved ASD. As a
result, on January 11, 2007 the
Department published an IFR [72 FR
1298] where it amended part 40 by
eliminating procedures specific for the
breath tube ASD which is no longer
being manufactured and added
procedures for use of the newly
approved device.
The IFR provided instructions for use
of the new ASD which were generally
similar to those for the previously
approved breath tube device. The
principal difference was in how the
alcohol result is read by the technician.
Instead of comparing the color of the
crystals in the ASD with the colored
crystals in a manufacturer-produced
control tube, the new ASD used an
electronic analyzer to provide the
technician and the employee with an
automated visual result of negative (a
flashing green light) or positive (a
flashing red light) at 0.02. The
Department also retained the
requirement to read the result within 15
minutes of the test to ensure a
confirmation test, when necessary, was
conducted in a timely manner. Finally,
because of the manufacturer’s
requirement to only use the detector
device with a pre-calibrated electronic
analyzer, the IFR also added a fatal flaw
to the current list of fatal flaws.
Specifically, the alcohol screening test
was to be cancelled if an electronic
analyzer was not used with a specified
lot of detector devices.
Discussion of Comments to the Docket
There were two comments to the
docket which were not germane to the
interim final rule and, therefore, the
Department will not address them.
Because there were no comments which
provided substantive information to
warrant changing the procedures in the
IFR, the Department will adopt the text
in the IFR as final.
Regulatory Analyses and Notices
The statutory authority for this rule
derives from the Omnibus
PO 00000
Frm 00067
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
8527
Transportation Employee Testing Act of
1991 (49 U.S.C. 102, 301, 322, 5331,
20140, 31306, and 54101 et seq.) and the
Department of Transportation Act (49
U.S.C. 322).
This final rule is not significant for
purposes of Executive Order 12866 or
the DOT’s regulatory policies and
procedures. It finalizes minor
modifications, already in effect, to our
procedures that do not increase costs on
regulated parties. In fact, it facilitates
the use of an alcohol screening device
that may increase flexibility and lower
costs for employers who choose to use
them over more expensive options
previously approved by the Department.
The rule will impose no burdens on any
parties, and NHTSA has already
determined that the device is
technically acceptable for use in the
DOT alcohol testing program. While
small entities are among those who may
use the device, the Department
consequently certifies, under the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, that this rule
does not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small
entities.
We issued the IFR on this subject to
ensure that employers could use the
ASD when it is placed on NHTSA’s CPL
as a qualified device (meeting DOT
specifications for accuracy and
precision). We determined, at that time,
under section 553 of the Administrative
Procedure Act, that prior notice and an
opportunity for public comment were
unnecessary, impracticable, or contrary
to the public interest. Given the absence
of any comment on the IFR, and the fact
that this rule simply finalizes a rule
already in effect, the Department finds
good cause under 553 to make this rule
effective immediately.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 40
Administrative practice and
procedures, Alcohol abuse, Alcohol
testing, Drug abuse, Drug testing,
Laboratories, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Safety,
Transportation.
Issued at Washington DC, this 9th day of
February 2010.
Ray LaHood,
Secretary of Transportation.
PART 40—PROCEDURES FOR
TRANSPORTATION WORKPLACE
DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING
PROGRAMS
Accordingly, the Interim Final Rule
amending 49 CFR part 40 which was
published at 72 FR 1298 on January 11,
■
E:\FR\FM\25FER1.SGM
25FER1
8528
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 37 / Thursday, February 25, 2010 / Rules and Regulations
2007 is adopted as a final rule without
change.
[FR Doc. 2010–3730 Filed 2–24–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910–9X–P
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary
49 CFR Part 40
[Docket DOT–OST–2008–0088]
RIN OST 2105–AD84
Procedures for Transportation
Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing
Programs
Office of the Secretary, DOT.
Final rule.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
jlentini on DSKJ8SOYB1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY: The Department of
Transportation is making technical
amendments to its drug and alcohol
testing procedures to authorize
employers to begin using the updated
U.S. DOT Alcohol Testing Form (ATF)
and the Management Information
System (MIS) Data Collection Form. The
Department updated the information
collection notice on the forms to
conform to requirements under the
Paperwork Reduction Act.
DATES: The rule is effective February 25,
2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For
program issues, Bohdan Baczara, Office
of Drug and Alcohol Policy and
Compliance, 1200 New Jersey Avenue,
SE., Washington, DC 20590; (202) 366–
3784 (voice), (202) 366–3897 (fax), or
bohdan.baczara@dot.gov (e-mail).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background and Purpose
In compliance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104–
13, (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.) the
Department submitted a request to the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for the extension of the currently
approved Procedures for the
Transportation Drug and Alcohol
Testing Program. OMB approved the
submission which included a revised
U.S. DOT Alcohol Testing Form (ATF)
and the Management Information
System (MIS) Data Collection Form.
As part of the approval process, the
Department asked for public comment
on ways to enhance the quality, utility,
and clarity of the information being
collected on the Alcohol Testing Form
(ATF) and Management Information
System (MIS) form Federal Register [73
FR 14300] and [73 FR 33140]. There was
one response, which contained several
comments. As a result of the comments
VerDate Nov<24>2008
16:14 Feb 24, 2010
Jkt 220001
and other input from OMB and DOT
agencies, both forms were updated.
Specifically, the ATF and MIS were
updated to include an updated
Paperwork Reduction Act Burden
Statement, the current address of the
Department, new DOT form numbers.
We provided additional instructions on
the reverse side of Page 3 of the ATF
that tamper evident tape must not
obscure the printed information. Also,
the legends in the test result boxes on
the front of the ATF were adjusted and
printed in a smaller font so they don’t
obscure test results printed directly on
the ATF. Other than these changes, the
content and format of ATF from the
previous versions remain the same.
The Department recognizes that
employers and alcohol testing
technicians may currently have a large
supply of old ATFs. To avoid
unnecessarily wasting these forms, the
Department will permit the use of the
old ATF until supplies are exhausted,
but the old ATF must not be used
beyond August 1, 2010. Employers are
authorized to begin using the updated
ATF immediately.
In 2006, the Department published a
Federal Register notice [71 FR 49383] to
update the MIS form and its
accompanying instructions to change
the name the Research and Special
Programs Administration (RSPA) to the
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA). This change
reflects a February 2005 reorganization
and renaming of that DOT agency. Since
the change did not appear in the
Federal Register notice, we are
publishing the form with its
accompanying instructions sheet again.
The MIS form is a single-page form,
and the information reported on the MIS
data form can be submitted
electronically via the Internet at https://
damis.dot.gov. As a result, it is less
likely any employer would have a large
number of MIS forms. Thus, employers
required to report MIS data must begin
using the revised MIS form in 2011 to
report calendar year 2010 MIS data.
Both revised forms can be found on
our Web site at https://www.dot.gov/ost/
dapc/documents.html.
Regulatory Analyses and Notices
The statutory authority for this rule
derives from the Omnibus
Transportation Employee Testing Act of
1991 (49 U.S.C. 102, 301, 322, 5331,
20140, 31306, and 45101 et seq.) and the
Department of Transportation Act (49
U.S.C. 322).
This rule is a non-significant rule both
for purposes of Executive Order 12886
and the Department of Transportation’s
Regulatory Policies and Procedures. The
PO 00000
Frm 00068
Fmt 4700
Sfmt 4700
Department certifies that it will not have
a significant economic effect on a
substantial number of small entities, for
purposes of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act. The Department makes these
statements on the basis that, as a series
of technical amendments that correct or
clarify existing regulatory provisions,
this rule will not impose any significant
costs on anyone. The costs of the
underlying Part 40 final rule were
analyzed in connection with its
issuance in December 2000. Therefore,
it has not been necessary for the
Department to conduct a regulatory
evaluation or Regulatory Flexibility
Analysis for this final rule. The forms
comply with the Paperwork Reduction
Act. It has no Federalism impacts that
would warrant a Federalism assessment.
The amendments made in this rule are
technical and corrective, to an existing
rule that went through an extensive
public notice and comment process.
The amendments are purely technical,
do not make significant changes to Part
40, and we would not anticipate the
receipt of meaningful comments on
them. Consequently, the Department has
determined, for purposes of section 553
of the Administrative Procedure Act,
that prior notice and comment are
unnecessary, impracticable, or contrary
to the public interest. For the same
reasons, and because it will be very
useful to program participants to be
authorized to use the revised forms
immediately, we have determined,
under section 553, that there is good
cause to make the rule effective
immediately upon publication.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 40
Administrative practice and
procedures, Alcohol abuse, Alcohol
testing, Drug abuse, Drug testing,
Laboratories, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Safety,
Transportation.
Issued this 9th day of February 2010, at
Washington, DC.
Ray LaHood,
Secretary of Transportation.
For reasons discussed in the
preamble, the Department of
Transportation is amending 49 CFR part
40, Code of Federal Regulations, as
follows:
■
PART 40—PROCEDURES FOR
TRANSPORTATION WORKPLACE
DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING
PROGRAMS
1. The authority citation for 49 CFR
part 40 continues to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 102, 301, 322, 5331,
20140, 31306, and 45101 et seq.
E:\FR\FM\25FER1.SGM
25FER1
]]>Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 37 (Thursday, February 25, 2010)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 8526-8528]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-3730]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Office of the Secretary
49 CFR Part 40
[Docket OST-2007-26828]
RIN 2105-AD64
Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing
Programs
AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This final rule responds to the comments received regarding
the interim final rule (IFR) procedures for the use of a new alcohol
screening device (ASD) which is qualified for use in DOT Agency
regulated alcohol testing. The Department did not receive any comments
which were germane to the rulemaking. As such, the Department will
adopt the rule as final without change.
DATES: This rule is effective February 25, 2010.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bohdan Baczara, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Office of Drug and Alcohol Policy and Compliance, 1200
New Jersey Avenue, SE., Washington, DC 20590; 202-366-3784 (voice),
202-366-3897 (fax), or bohdan.baczara@dot.gov (e-mail).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
[[Page 8527]]
Purpose
Department regulations require that in order for an employer to
utilize a specific ASD to conduct required DOT alcohol tests, the
device must (a) Have been approved by the National Highway Traffic
Safety Administration (NHTSA) as meeting required model specifications,
(b) be published by NHTSA in the Federal Register on their most current
ASD CPL, and (c) have Department-approved procedures in part 40 for its
use. By publishing the IFR, the Department ensured that procedures were
in place so that when NHTSA published its ASD CPL in the Federal
Register, the breath tube ASD was immediately available for use by DOT
regulated employers.
Background and Purpose
When it originally published its alcohol testing rules on February
15, 1994 [54 FR 7302 et seq.], the Department established breath
testing using evidential breath testing devices (EBTs) as the required
method. However, in response to comments requesting additional
flexibility in testing methods, the Department said that NHTSA would
develop model specifications for non-evidential alcohol screening
devices, evaluate additional screening devices against those
specifications, and periodically publish a conforming products list of
screening devices that met the model specifications. The Department
noted, too, that the Department would also have to undertake separate
rulemaking proceedings to establish part 40 procedures for use by DOT-
regulated industries of any devices approved by NHTSA.
On April 20, 1995 [60 FR 19675], the Department published
procedures for use of both breath and saliva ASDs. At that time, the
Department did not anticipate that additional breath and saliva
screening devices would be developed that would necessitate new
procedures for their use. As a result, the revised part 40 published
December 19, 2000 [65 FR 79462] stated, in part, that ASDs on the NHTSA
CPL could be used for part 40 alcohol screening tests. Because NHTSA
added an ASD to their CPL and the Department had no procedures for its
use, we were forced to amend that rule. On August 9, 2001 [65 FR
41944], part 40 was amended to read, ``You may use an ASD that is on
the NHTSA CPL for DOT alcohol tests only if there are instructions for
its use in this part.''
On October 1, 2002 [67 FR 61521], the Department published
procedures for the use of a breath tube ASD that had been approved by
NHTSA and added to their May 4, 2001 CPL [66 FR 22639]. By 2005, that
device was no longer being manufactured, and was removed from the CPL
effective September 19, 2005 [70 FR 54972]. Subsequently, NHTSA
approved a new breath tube ASD but had not yet added it to its ASD CPL
which was one of three critical criteria to permitting DOT regulated
employers to use the device.
Although DOT regulated employers could still not use the ASD, the
Department realized that the breath tube procedures currently in our
regulation were not consistent with instructions for use of the newly
approved ASD. As a result, on January 11, 2007 the Department published
an IFR [72 FR 1298] where it amended part 40 by eliminating procedures
specific for the breath tube ASD which is no longer being manufactured
and added procedures for use of the newly approved device.
The IFR provided instructions for use of the new ASD which were
generally similar to those for the previously approved breath tube
device. The principal difference was in how the alcohol result is read
by the technician. Instead of comparing the color of the crystals in
the ASD with the colored crystals in a manufacturer-produced control
tube, the new ASD used an electronic analyzer to provide the technician
and the employee with an automated visual result of negative (a
flashing green light) or positive (a flashing red light) at 0.02. The
Department also retained the requirement to read the result within 15
minutes of the test to ensure a confirmation test, when necessary, was
conducted in a timely manner. Finally, because of the manufacturer's
requirement to only use the detector device with a pre-calibrated
electronic analyzer, the IFR also added a fatal flaw to the current
list of fatal flaws. Specifically, the alcohol screening test was to be
cancelled if an electronic analyzer was not used with a specified lot
of detector devices.
Discussion of Comments to the Docket
There were two comments to the docket which were not germane to the
interim final rule and, therefore, the Department will not address
them. Because there were no comments which provided substantive
information to warrant changing the procedures in the IFR, the
Department will adopt the text in the IFR as final.
Regulatory Analyses and Notices
The statutory authority for this rule derives from the Omnibus
Transportation Employee Testing Act of 1991 (49 U.S.C. 102, 301, 322,
5331, 20140, 31306, and 54101 et seq.) and the Department of
Transportation Act (49 U.S.C. 322).
This final rule is not significant for purposes of Executive Order
12866 or the DOT's regulatory policies and procedures. It finalizes
minor modifications, already in effect, to our procedures that do not
increase costs on regulated parties. In fact, it facilitates the use of
an alcohol screening device that may increase flexibility and lower
costs for employers who choose to use them over more expensive options
previously approved by the Department. The rule will impose no burdens
on any parties, and NHTSA has already determined that the device is
technically acceptable for use in the DOT alcohol testing program.
While small entities are among those who may use the device, the
Department consequently certifies, under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act, that this rule does not have a significant economic impact on a
substantial number of small entities.
We issued the IFR on this subject to ensure that employers could
use the ASD when it is placed on NHTSA's CPL as a qualified device
(meeting DOT specifications for accuracy and precision). We determined,
at that time, under section 553 of the Administrative Procedure Act,
that prior notice and an opportunity for public comment were
unnecessary, impracticable, or contrary to the public interest. Given
the absence of any comment on the IFR, and the fact that this rule
simply finalizes a rule already in effect, the Department finds good
cause under 553 to make this rule effective immediately.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 40
Administrative practice and procedures, Alcohol abuse, Alcohol
testing, Drug abuse, Drug testing, Laboratories, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Safety, Transportation.
Issued at Washington DC, this 9th day of February 2010.
Ray LaHood,
Secretary of Transportation.
PART 40--PROCEDURES FOR TRANSPORTATION WORKPLACE DRUG AND ALCOHOL
TESTING PROGRAMS
0
Accordingly, the Interim Final Rule amending 49 CFR part 40 which was
published at 72 FR 1298 on January 11,
[[Page 8528]]
2007 is adopted as a final rule without change.
[FR Doc. 2010-3730 Filed 2-24-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
