Control of Alcohol and Drug Use: Coverage of Maintenance of Way (MOW) Employees and Retrospective Regulatory Review-Based Amendments, 37893-37948 [2016-13058]
Download as PDF
Vol. 81
Friday,
No. 112
June 10, 2016
Part IV
Department of Transportation
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Railroad Administration
49 CFR Part 219
Control of Alcohol and Drug Use: Coverage of Maintenance of Way
(MOW) Employees and Retrospective Regulatory Review-Based
Amendments; Final Rule
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4717
Sfmt 4717
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37894
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
49 CFR Part 219
[Docket No. FRA–2009–0039, Notice No. 3]
RIN 2130–AC10
Control of Alcohol and Drug Use:
Coverage of Maintenance of Way
(MOW) Employees and Retrospective
Regulatory Review-Based
Amendments
Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
AGENCY:
In response to Congress’
mandate in the Rail Safety Improvement
Act of 2008 (RSIA), FRA is expanding
the scope of its drug and alcohol
regulation to cover MOW employees.
This rule also codifies guidance from
FRA compliance manuals, responds to
National Transportation Safety Board
(NTSB) recommendations, and adopts
substantive amendments based upon
FRA’s regulatory review of 30 years of
implementation of this part.
The final rule contains two significant
differences from FRA’s July 28, 2014
Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(NPRM). First, it adopts part 214’s
definition of ‘‘roadway worker’’ to
define ‘‘MOW employee’’ under this
part. Second, because FRA has
withdrawn its proposed peer support
requirements, subpart K contains a
revised version of the troubled
employee identification requirements
previously in subpart E.
DATES: This rule is effective June 12,
2017. Petitions for reconsideration must
be received on or before August 9, 2016.
Petitions for reconsideration will be
posted in the docket for this proceeding.
Comments on any submitted petition for
reconsideration must be received on or
before September 13, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Petitions for
Reconsideration related to Docket No.
FRA–2009–0039 may be submitted by
any of the following methods: Web site:
The Federal eRulemaking Portal, https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments.
Fax: 202–493–2251.
Mail: Docket Management Facility,
U.S. DOT, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
W12–140, Washington, DC 20590.
Hand Delivery: Room W12–140 on the
Ground level of the West Building, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Instructions: All submissions must
include the agency name and docket
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
number or Regulatory Identification
Number (RIN) for this rulemaking.
Please see the Privacy Act heading in
the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section
of this document for Privacy Act
information related to any submitted
comments or materials.
Docket: For access to the docket to
read background documents or
comments received, go to
www.regulations.gov or to Room W12–
140 on the Ground level of the West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC between 9 a.m. and 5
p.m. Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
A complete version of part 219 as
amended in this final rule is available
for review in the public docket of this
rulemaking (docket no. FRA–2009–
0039). Interested persons can review
this document to learn how this rule
affects part 219 as a whole.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Gerald Powers, Drug and Alcohol
Program Manager, Office of Safety
Enforcement, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Mail Stop 25, Washington,
DC 20590 (telephone 202–493–6313),
Patricia V. Sun, Trial Attorney, Office of
Chief Counsel, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Mail Stop 10, Washington,
DC 20590 (telephone 202–493–6060),
patricia.sun@dot.gov; or Elizabeth A.
Gross, Trial Attorney, Office of Chief
Counsel, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Mail Stop 10, Washington,
DC 20590 (telephone 202–493–1342),
elizabeth.gross@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents for Supplementary
Information
I. Executive Summary
II. Rulemaking Proceedings
III. Effective Date
IV. Maintenance-of-Way Employees and
Contactors
A. Definitions
B. MOW Employees and the Small
Railroad Exception
C. MOW Contractors and the Small
Railroad Exception
D. Railroad and Contractor Responsibility
for Compliance
E. Pre-employment Drug Testing of MOW
Employees
F. Initial MOW Employee Random Testing
Rates
G. MOW Employee Minimum Random
Testing Pool Size
V. Restructuring of Part 219
A. Division of Reasonable Suspicion and
Reasonable Cause Testing into Subparts
D and E
B. Transfer of Revised and Retitled
Troubled Employee Requirements to
Subpart K
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
VI. Section-by-Section Analysis
VII. Regulatory Impact and Notices
A. Executive Orders 12866 and13563 and
DOT Policies and Procedures
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive
Order 13272; Final Regulatory Flexibility
Assessment
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Federalism Implications
E. Environmental Impact
F. Executive Order 12898 (Environmental
Justice)
G. Executive Order 13175 (Tribal
Consultation)
H. International Trade Impact Assessment
I. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
J. Energy Impact
K. Privacy Act Information
I. Executive Summary
In the first major updating of its drug
and alcohol regulation (49 CFR part 219)
since its inception in 1985, FRA is
expanding the scope of part 219 to cover
Maintenance-of-Way (MOW) employees.
Historically, FRA has conducted only
post-mortem post-accident toxicological
(PAT) testing of MOW employees, since
an MOW employee, unlike a covered
service employee, has been subject to
part 219 testing only when he or she has
died as the result of a reportable railroad
accident or incident. Even in this
comparatively small sample of postmortem results, however, FRA found a
disproportionately high level of positive
test results among deceased MOW
employees compared to the PAT testing
and random testing results of covered
employees who are already wholly
subject to part 219.
Congress, in the Rail Safety Act of
2008 (RSIA), recognized the substance
abuse problem among MOW employees
by directing FRA to make them fully
subject to the policies and protections of
part 219. Partly in response to
comments received, FRA is adopting the
definition of roadway worker in part
214 of this chapter to define who is an
MOW employee for purposes of part
219. FRA will introduce MOW
employees to random drug and alcohol
testing at the same initial minimum
random testing rates it initially applied
to covered employees. FRA is also
adding a new definition, ‘‘regulated
employee,’’ to encompass both covered
and MOW employees.
In this rule, FRA is making MOW
employees subject to all part 219 testing,
namely, random testing, PAT testing,
reasonable suspicion testing, reasonable
cause testing, pre-employment testing,
return-to-duty testing, and follow-up
testing. Because many MOW employees
work for multiple contractors or
contract for short-term jobs, FRA is
addressing not only the roles and
responsibilities of railroads with respect
to those employees who directly
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
perform MOW activities for them, but
also the roles and responsibilities of
contractors and subcontractors who
provide MOW services to railroads on a
contract basis. As has been its practice,
FRA is holding railroads, contractors,
and subcontractors equally responsible
for ensuring that their employees who
perform MOW activities are in
compliance with the requirements of
this rule. FRA is also continuing its
practice of counting only a railroad’s
total number of covered employees to
determine whether that railroad
qualifies for certain exceptions as a
small entity.
In addition, FRA has used this
lookback at part 219 to conduct a
complete retrospective regulatory
review of the rule. As a result, FRA has
largely restructured and rewritten large
sections of this rule and incorporated
longstanding compliance guidance, to
make part 219’s requirements easier to
read, find, and implement.
Finally, in response to widespread
opposition from commenters, FRA is
not adopting its proposal to require peer
support programs. FRA is instead
transferring part 219’s requirements for
troubled employee programs to a new
subpart in a revised, expanded, and
clarified format.
Costs and Benefits of Final Rule
The final rule will impose costs that
are outweighed by the quantified safety
benefits. For the 20-year period
analyzed, the estimated costs that will
be imposed on industry total
approximately $24.3 million
(undiscounted), with discounted costs
totaling $14.2 million (Present Value
(PV), 7 percent) and $18.9 million (PV,
3 percent). The estimated quantified
benefits for this 20-year period total
approximately $115.8 million
37895
(undiscounted), with discounted
benefits totaling $57.4 million (PV, 7
percent) and $83.6 million (PV, 3
percent).
The costs will primarily be derived
from implementation of the statutory
mandate to expand the scope of part 219
to cover MOW employees. The benefits
will primarily accrue from the expected
injury, fatality, and property damage
avoidance resulting from the expansion
of part 219 to cover MOW employees, as
well as the PAT testing threshold
increase. The table below summarizes
the quantified costs and benefits
expected to accrue over a 20-year period
from adoption of the final rule and
identifies the statutory costs and
benefits (those required by the RSIA
mandate to expand part 219 to MOW
employees) and the discretionary costs
and benefits (those that are due to the
non-RSIA requirements).
Statutory
Discretionary
Total
PAT Testing—Adding MOW ............................................................................................
PAT Testing—Impact Def + Xing ....................................................................................
Reasonable Suspicion Testing ........................................................................................
Pre-Employment Testing—Adding MOW ........................................................................
Pre-Employment Testing—Sm, RR .................................................................................
Random Testing ..............................................................................................................
Annual Reporting .............................................................................................................
Recordkeeping Requirement ...........................................................................................
$ 52,000
............................
842,398
673,897
............................
20,863,074
160,911
1,397,840
............................
$241,974
............................
............................
29,904
............................
............................
............................
$ 52,000
241,974
842,398
673,897
29,904
20,863,074
160,911
1,397,840
Costs Subtotal ..........................................................................................................
23,990,120
271,878
24,261,998
Accident Reduction ..........................................................................................................
PAT Testing Threshold Reduction ..................................................................................
115,369,281
............................
............................
388,295
115,369,281
388,295
Benefits Subtotal ......................................................................................................
115,369,281
388,295
115,757,576
Net Benefit .........................................................................................................
91,379,161
116,417
91,495,578
Costs (20 year)
Benefits (20 year)
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
II. Rulemaking Proceedings
On July 28, 2014, in response to a
Congressional mandate (see sec. 412 of
the RSIA (Pub. L. 110–432, October 16,
2008)) and NTSB recommendation R–
08–07, FRA published an NPRM (79 FR
48380) which proposed to expand the
scope of part 219 to cover MOW
employees. See 79 FR 43830. FRA also
proposed to modify its post-accident
toxicology (PAT) testing criteria and to
replace its subpart E programs
addressing troubled employees with a
peer support program in new subpart K.
The NPRM also proposed to adopt
longstanding program guidance, and to
clarify and restructure part 219 to make
its requirements easier to understand
and implement.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
On September 15, 2014, in a jointly
filed petition, the American Public
Transportation Association (APTA),
American Short Line and Regional
Railroad Association (ASLRRA),
Association of American Railroads
(AAR), and National Railroad
Construction and Maintenance
Association, Inc. (NRCMA), requested a
60 day extension of the NPRM’s
comment period, which had been
scheduled to close on September 26,
2014. FRA agreed to this request, and
published a notice allowing commenters
until November 25, 2014, to submit
comments. (September 25, 2014, 79 FR
57495).
FRA received 16 comments during
this extended comment period,
including an AAR/ASLRRA (hereinafter
referred to as the ‘‘Associations’’) joint
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
submission, as well as comments from
APTA, the NRCMA, the NTSB, SMART
(the American Train Dispatchers
Association, Brotherhood of Locomotive
Engineers and Trainmen, Brotherhood
of Maintenance of Way Employees
Division, International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers; and Sheet Metal,
Air, Rail and Transportation), Twin
Cities & Western Railroad Company
(TC&W), Drug Abuse Program
Administrators Administration
Worldwide (SAPAA), Pacific Southwest
Railway Museum (PSRM), SAPlist.com,
and Southeastern Pennsylvania
Transportation Authority (SEPTA). Six
individuals also submitted comments.
(Although SMART had requested a
public hearing in its November 28, 2014
comment, the deadline for filing such a
request was 30 days after the
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37896
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
publication of the NPRM, or August 27,
2014).
In this final rule, FRA will not
address comments that raised issues
outside the scope of, or not specific to,
the proposals in the NPRM, or
comments submitted after the extended
comment period had closed. In
addition, the NPRM proposed to make
this part more user-friendly, by
reorganizing sections, re-designating
paragraphs, updating terms, and
amending language for consistency.
Because FRA received no comment on
these minor edits, FRA is not repeating
the NPRM’s discussion of them.
III. Effective Date
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
FRA received only one comment
concerning the rule’s effective date. The
Associations requested that the final
rule become effective two years after its
publication, to allow for the
implementation of new testing policies
and procedures, and for the creation of
random testing pools for MOW
employees. FRA notes, however, that
many MOW employees are already
subject to drug and alcohol testing
under Federal authority, company
authority, or both. For example, any
MOW employee whose duties require
the holding of a Commercial Driver’s
License (CDL) is subject to Federal
Motor Carrier Safety Administration
(FMCSA) testing requirements. MOW
employees may also be subject to testing
under company authority, often in a
‘‘look-alike’’ (a company testing
program that mirrors FRA standards and
procedures) program. This familiarity
with drug and alcohol programs will
facilitate the implementation of part 219
requirements for MOW employees.
Moreover, railroads have thirty years
of experience implementing part 219
requirements for their covered service
employees; while employers who are
newly subject to part 219, such as
contractors who provide MOW service
to railroads, have service agents (e.g.,
random testing consortia and third party
administrators) readily available to
facilitate adoption and compliance with
this part. Given the experience and
resources railroads and contractors have
to draw on, FRA believes a one year
implementation window is reasonable
for the requirements in this rule.
IV. Maintenance-of-Way Employees
and Contractors
A. Definitions
As proposed, FRA is expanding the
scope of part 219 to cover employees
and contractors who perform MOW
activities. This rule also adopts FRA’s
proposal to define the term ‘‘employee’’
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
to include employees, volunteers, and
probationary employees of railroads and
contractors (including subcontractors) to
railroads, and to adopt the term
‘‘regulated service’’ to encompass both
covered service and MOW activities.
Performance of regulated service makes
an individual a ‘‘regulated employee’’
subject to part 219, regardless of
whether the individual is employed by
a railroad or a contractor to a railroad.
In the NPRM, FRA requested
comment on who should be subject to
the expanded scope of this part. As
alternatives, FRA asked whether part
219’s definition of MOW employee
should: (1) Be identical to the roadway
worker definition in part 214, Roadway
Workplace Safety; (2) include all
employees subject to disqualification
under 49 CFR 209.303, as recommended
by the NTSB; or (3) incorporate a
modified version of part 214’s definition
of roadway worker which would
include certain roadway worker
functions but not others, as proposed in
the NPRM. Of those who commented on
FRA’s proposed definition of MOW
activities, SEPTA stated that the
definition of MOW activities in part 219
should be consistent with the definition
of roadway worker duties in part 214.
While the Associations supported FRA’s
proposed exclusions from MOW
activities, they agreed with SEPTA’s
view that part 219’s definition of MOW
activities and § 214.7’s definition of
roadway worker duties should be
consistent. SMART, however,
commented that FRA’s proposed MOW
activities definition was both too
inclusive and too exclusive, while the
NRCMA unqualifiedly supported the
proposed definition.
In its comments, the NTSB continued
to advocate for adoption of
Recommendation R–08–07, which
recommended that FRA expand the
scope of part 219 to include all
employees subject to § 209.303. No
other commenter supported so wide an
expansion. As noted in the NPRM,
§ 209.303 encompasses many employees
besides those who perform covered
service and MOW activities, no matter
how such activities are defined. As
examples, § 209.303 includes employees
who conduct tests and training, and
mechanics who maintain locomotives,
and freight and passenger cars, among
others.
In Skinner v. Railway Labor
Executives’ Assn., 489 U.S. 602 (1989),
the Supreme Court held that an alcohol
or drug test conducted under FRA
authority is a Fourth Amendment
search, and in its determination of who
should be subject to part 219 testing,
FRA must carefully balance public
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
safety interests against individual
privacy rights. FRA has done so, and
can find no overriding safety interest
that would justify making every
employee covered by § 209.303 subject
to part 219 testing. In its comment to the
NPRM, the NTSB cited no accidents or
data to support adoption of R–08–07. To
date, FRA has no data suggesting that
the functions of testers, trainers, and
mechanics are of such a safety-sensitive
nature that employees who perform
these functions should be subject to
drug and alcohol testing. FRA therefore
finds no compelling reason to expand
the scope of part 219 to equal that of
§ 209.303.
Upon consideration of the other
comments, however, FRA has
reevaluated its proposed definition of
MOW employee. Almost all commenters
pointed out that an employee who
performs activities on or near a
railroad’s roadbed or track is by
definition one who performs work that
could pose risks to the safety of both the
employee and the public. As
demonstrated by the high positive rate
among MOW employee fatalities
(detailed in the NPRM), the misuse of
drugs or alcohol by these employees can
have disastrous consequences. Congress
determined when it enacted the RSIA,
that an employee who performs MOW
activities performs work that is
sufficiently safety-sensitive to trigger
FRA’s drug and alcohol requirements.
Adoption of the NPRM’s proposed
definition of MOW employee would
have required railroads to maintain fine
distinctions among MOW activities,
since the performance of certain
activities would make an employee
subject to both parts 214 and 219, while
the performance of others would make
an employee subject only to part 214 or
to part 219.
FRA’s proposed MOW definition
could have potentially required a
railroad or contractor to establish three
different categories of coverage, with the
attendant administrative burdens
necessary to sort and maintain such
categories. In contrast, because the term
‘‘roadway worker’’ has been long
established by part 214, the railroad
industry is already familiar with its
meaning and application. FRA is
therefore adopting, for its definition of
MOW employee, § 214.7’s definition of
roadway worker, which includes ‘‘any
employee of a railroad or a contractor to
a railroad, whose duties include
inspection, construction, maintenance
or repair of roadway track; bridges,
roadway, signal and communications
systems, electric traction systems,
roadway facilities or roadway
maintenance machinery on or near track
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
or with the potential of fouling a track,
and flagmen and watchmen/lookouts as
defined in this section.’’ By doing so,
FRA is adopting the recommendation of
the majority of commenters, who
asserted that an individual subject to
roadway worker protection under part
214 should also be a MOW employee
subject to drug and alcohol testing
under part 219.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
B. MOW Employees and the Small
Railroad Exception
Since the inception of its alcohol and
drug program in 1985, FRA has counted
the number of covered employees a
railroad has (including covered service
contractors and volunteers) as one factor
in determining the railroad’s risk of
alcohol and drug-related accidents. See
50 FR 31529, Aug. 2, 1985. Historically,
a small railroad, defined by FRA as one
that has 15 or fewer covered employees
and no joint operations with other
railroads, has proven less likely to have
a drug and alcohol-related accident than
a larger railroad. Therefore, FRA has
always required a larger railroad
(defined as one that has 16 or more
covered employees or is engaged in joint
operations) to implement all of part 219,
while § 219.3 previously excepted a
small railroad from the requirements of
subpart D (reasonable suspicion and
reasonable cause testing), subpart E
(previously identification of troubled
employees), subpart F (pre-employment
testing), and subpart G (random alcohol
and drug testing); these exceptions
lessened part 219’s regulatory burden on
small railroads.
As proposed, FRA is continuing its
longstanding approach of counting only
a railroad’s covered employees for
purposes of determining whether the
railroad qualifies for the small railroad
exception (the railroad also cannot
participate in any joint operations)
because FRA believes this is the best
measure of the risks posed by the
railroad’s operations. FRA received no
objections to this proposal.
C. MOW Contractors and the Small
Railroad Exception
With respect to a contractor who
performs MOW activities for a railroad,
FRA is amending § 219.3 to apply part
219 to an MOW contractor to the same
extent as it applies to the railroad for
which the MOW contractor performs
regulated service. As proposed, a
contractor’s level of part 219
compliance will be determined by the
size of the railroad for which it is
performing regulated service, regardless
of the size of the contractor itself. New
language in the small railroad exception
states that a contractor who performs
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
MOW activities exclusively for small
railroads that are excepted from full
compliance with part 219 will also be
excepted from full compliance. For
example, an MOW contractor with five
employees who perform regulated
service for a large railroad must
implement a full part 219 program if the
railroad for which it performs regulated
service must do so, while an MOW
contractor with 20 employees does not
have to implement a full part 219
program if it performs regulated service
for a small railroad that is excepted from
full compliance with part 219.
FRA recognizes that an MOW
contractor may perform regulated
service for multiple railroads, some of
which may not be required to comply
fully with part 219. To simplify
application, FRA is adding new
language to the small railroad exception
requiring an MOW contractor who
performs regulated service for multiple
railroads to implement a full part 219
program if the contractor performs
regulated service for at least one large
railroad fully subject to part 219. If an
MOW contractor performs regulated
service for at least one large railroad, it
must incorporate all of its regulated
employees into a full part 219 program,
even if only some of these employees
perform regulated service for large
railroads, regardless of whether or not a
particular employee is currently
performing regulated service for a large
or a small railroad. This approach
allows an MOW contractor to flexibly
allocate its employees between small
and large railroads. To ensure that it
does not encourage the hiring of MOW
contractors in lieu of MOW employees,
FRA is excluding both contractor
employees who perform MOW activities
and railroad employees who perform
MOW activities, for purposes of the
employee count to determine whether a
railroad qualifies as a small railroad.
Labor supported FRA’s decision.
D. Railroad and Contractor
Responsibility for Compliance
FRA is adopting its proposal to hold
both a railroad and its contractor(s)
responsible for ensuring that any
contractor employees who perform
regulated service for the railroad are in
compliance with part 219. In their
comments, the Associations objected
that the RSIA mandated that part 219
cover contractors who perform regulated
service, but did not make railroads
responsible for ensuring that
compliance, and that a contractor who
performs regulated service for more than
one railroad would be required to
comply with the drug and alcohol
training requirements of multiple
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
37897
railroads. The TC&W commented that
FRA should audit the drug and alcohol
compliance of contractors who perform
regulated service.
FRA notes that making a railroad
responsible for its contractor’s
compliance, and making a contractor
who performs regulated service
responsible for its own compliance, are
not new requirements, because existing
§ 219.9 makes every person—including
a railroad, an independent contractor
and an employee of an independent
contractor—who violates or causes a
violation of a part 219 requirement
subject to a civil penalty. To avoid
confusion, FRA is discussing a
contractor’s options to ensure part 219
compliance for its regulated employees
below, while the corresponding railroad
options to ensure that its contractor
employees who perform regulated
service are in compliance will be
discussed below in the section-bysection analysis of § 219.609.
A contractor who must establish a
random testing program for its regulated
service employees may do so through
any of the following methods. As
discussed in the NPRM, a contractor
may choose to:
• Establish its own part 219 program
and provide the railroad with
documentation of its compliance with
part 219. If a contractor chooses this
option, FRA will not audit the
contractor but will instead require the
railroad to maintain the contractor’s
documentation for FRA audit purposes.
If the contractor’s documentation or
program contains a deficiency or
violation that the railroad could not
have reasonably detected, FRA may use
its enforcement discretion to take action
solely against the contractor. As
discussed earlier in the preamble, the
extent of a regulated service contractor’s
responsibilities will be determined by
the size of the railroad(s) with which it
contracts.
• Contract with a consortium to
administer its part 219 program. The
consortium may either place the
contractor’s regulated employees in a
stand-alone random testing pool or in a
random testing pool with the regulated
employees of other regulated service
contractors. The contractor must then
submit documentation of its
membership in the consortium and its
compliance with part 219 to the
contracting railroad. As with the option
described above, if the contractor’s
documentation or program contains a
deficiency or violation that the railroad
could not have reasonably detected,
FRA may use its enforcement discretion
to take action only against the
contractor. Upon request, FRA will
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37898
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
assist a railroad in reviewing the part
219 documentation of its regulated
service contractors.
• Ensure that any employees who
perform regulated service for a railroad
are incorporated into the railroad’s part
219 program.
To facilitate part 219 implementation
for railroads and contractors, FRA has
developed two sets of model drug and
alcohol plans (including testing plans);
a set for an entity subject to all of part
219 and another for an entity that
qualifies for the small railroad
exception. Both sets are currently
available at FRA’s Web site: https://
www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0345.
FRA had proposed an alternative twopronged approach, which would require
a contractor to provide a railroad with:
(1) Written certification that all of its
regulated employees are in compliance
with part 219, and (2) a summary of its
part 219 data at least every six months.
The NRCMA commented that it was
unnecessary to require certification of
compliance with part 219, noting that
railroad contracts routinely require a
contractor to certify compliance with all
relevant Federal, state, and local laws
and regulations. The NCRMA also
objected to providing summary data,
commenting that this was both
unnecessary and an undue
administrative burden. FRA agrees, and
has decided not to adopt these proposed
requirements.
A railroad has the additional option of
accepting a contractor’s plan for random
testing, regardless of whether that plan
is managed by the contractor or by a
consortium/third party administrator
(C/TPA). If a railroad adopts this
approach, the contractor must:
• Certify in writing to the railroad
that all of its regulated employees are
subject to part 219 (including, as
applicable, random testing under
subpart G, pre-employment drug testing
under subpart F, and a previous
employer background check as required
by § 40.25); and
• Report, in an FRA model format,
summary part 219 testing data to the
railroad at least every six months.
The railroad should review this
summary data since it remains
responsible for monitoring the
contractor’s compliance.
E. Pre-Employment Drug Testing of
MOW Employees
As proposed, FRA is exempting all
current MOW employees from subpart F
pre-employment drug testing (with
certain limitations, pre-employment
alcohol testing is authorized but not
required). Only MOW employees hired
after the effective date of this rule must
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
have a negative DOT pre-employment
drug test result before performing
regulated service for the first time. As
with its initial minimum random testing
rates, FRA used a similar approach to
exempt current covered employees from
pre-employment drug testing in 1986.
Although these employees do not have
to be pre-employment drug tested,
current MOW employees are subject to
FRA’s initial minimum random drug
testing rate of 50%.
FRA realizes that a large percentage of
MOW employees may already have a
negative pre-employment drug test
result under the alcohol and drug
testing regulations of another DOT
agency; usually these MOW employees
are required by their employers to hold
a Commercial Driver’s License (CDL),
and are therefore subject to the
regulations of both FRA and FMCSA. To
hold a CDL, an individual must have a
negative FMCSA pre-employment drug
test. See § 382.301. To ease the
compliance burden on both employees
and employers, an employing railroad
may use a negative pre-employment
drug test conducted under the rules and
regulations of another DOT agency to
satisfy FRA’s pre-employment drug test
requirements for employees initially
transferring into regulated service after
the effective date of this rule. This
amendment adopts previous FRA
guidance on pre-employment drug
testing.
F. Initial MOW Employee Random
Testing Rates
This rule makes MOW employees
subject to FRA random testing, with the
exception of those who perform
regulated service solely for a small
railroad. For covered employees, FRA
has annually set minimum random drug
and alcohol testing rates determined by
the overall railroad random testing
violation rates for covered employees.
FRA determines this overall rate from
program data that railroads submit to its
Management Information System (MIS).
See 49 CFR 219.602 and 219.608. When
FRA first established minimum random
testing rates for covered employees, it
set the initial minimums for drugs and
alcohol at the top end of their respective
ranges, at 50 percent for drugs and 25
percent for alcohol. At that time, FRA
had no rail industry random testing data
because the MIS had been newly
established. FRA later lowered both
minimum annual random testing rates
to the bottom of their ranges after MIS
data showed consistently low overall
random testing violation rates for
covered employees. These minimum
rates, which have been unchanged since
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
2000, are 25 percent for drugs and 10
percent for alcohol in 2016.
Similarly, because MOW employees
are being introduced to random testing,
FRA has no overall railroad random
testing violation rate data for these
employees. To develop this data, FRA is
setting the initial minimum random
testing rates for MOW employees at 50
percent for drugs and 25 percent for
alcohol, as it initially did for covered
employees. A railroad must therefore
create and maintain a separate random
testing pool for its MOW employees,
both to allow these employees to be
tested at their own minimum random
testing rates and, from those railroads
required to file an MIS report, to
establish a separate database. As it did
with covered employees, FRA could
lower these minimum random testing
rates in the future if the data for MOW
employees show consistently low
overall random testing violation rates.
G. MOW Employee Minimum Random
Testing Pool Size
As proposed, to maintain the
deterrent effect of random testing for
very small railroads and contractors,
FRA is requiring each individual
random testing pool established under
subpart G to select and randomly test at
least one entry per quarter, even if fewer
tests are needed to meet FRA’s
minimum random testing rates.
Conversely, the requirement to conduct
at least four tests throughout the year
does not excuse a railroad (or contractor
to a railroad, or a C/TPA) from
complying with FRA’s minimum
random testing rates. For example, a
railroad that maintains a pool of 16
MOW employees must conduct at least
eight, not four, random drug tests in a
year to comply with a minimum random
drug testing rate of 50%.
V. Restructuring of Part 219
A. Division of Reasonable Suspicion
and Reasonable Cause Testing Into
Subparts D and E
Previously, the requirements for both
reasonable suspicion and reasonable
cause testing were found in subpart D.
Because of their similar names and their
location in the same subpart, railroads
and employees often confused the two
types of testing, even though reasonable
suspicion and reasonable cause testing
have very different requirements. To
clarify the substantive differences
between the two, the requirements for
reasonable suspicion testing will remain
in subpart D, while the requirements for
reasonable cause testing have been
moved to subpart E, which formerly
addressed voluntary referral and co-
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
worker report policies (‘‘Identification
of Troubled Employees,’’ now found in
subpart K). This differentiation is
important since small railroads are
required to conduct reasonable
suspicion testing, but not reasonable
cause testing. FRA received no
objections to its proposal to divide
reasonable suspicion and reasonable
cause testing into two distinct subparts.
B. Transfer of Revised and Retitled
Troubled Employee Requirements to
Subpart K
To accommodate the placement of
reasonable cause testing into subpart E,
FRA has transferred a revised and
retitled version of the ‘‘Identification of
Troubled Employees’’ requirements
previously in subpart E to new subpart
K. (As noted above, this is in lieu of
FRA’s proposal to require peer support
programs in subpart K, which, for the
reasons discussed below, FRA is not
adopting).
VI. Section-by-Section Analysis
As discussed earlier, throughout most
of part 219 FRA is substituting
‘‘regulated employee’’ and ‘‘regulated
service’’ where the terms ‘‘covered
employee’’ and ‘‘covered service’’
formerly appeared. ‘‘Regulated
employee’’ and ‘‘regulated service’’ are
terms-of-art encompassing all
individuals and duties subject to part
219, including both covered service and
MOW activities. The terms ‘‘covered
employee’’ and ‘‘covered service,’’
however, are retained where necessary,
such as in § 219.12, which addresses
issues of overlap between part 219 and
the HOS laws that apply only to covered
employees.
Authority Citation
The authority citation for part 219
adds a reference to Section 412 of the
RSIA, which mandated the expansion of
part 219 to cover all employees of
railroads and contractors or
subcontractors to railroads who perform
MOW activities.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Subpart A—General
Section 219.1—Purpose and Scope
This section now includes a reference
to the new definition of ‘‘employee’’ in
§ 219.5, which includes any individual
(including a volunteer or a probationary
employee) who performs regulated
activities for a railroad or a contractor to
a railroad.
Section 219.3—Application
The small railroad exception in
§ 219.3(b)(2) has provided, in part, that
a railroad with 15 or fewer covered
employees that does not engage in joint
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
operations with another railroad is not
subject to the requirements for
reasonable suspicion or reasonable
cause testing (both previously found in
subpart D), identification of troubled
employees (previously subpart E), preemployment drug testing (subpart F), or
random testing (subpart G).
FRA is modifying the small railroad
exception so that small railroads are no
longer excepted from the reasonable
suspicion testing requirements of
subpart D. Subpart D requires a railroad
to conduct Federal reasonable suspicion
testing whenever one or more trained
supervisors reasonably suspects that an
employee has violated an FRA
prohibition against the use of alcohol or
drugs. See § 219.300(a). FRA’s decision
not to authorize small railroads to
conduct FRA-authority reasonable cause
testing (moved to subpart E of this rule)
remains unchanged, however.
FRA is also amending the small
railroad exception so that small
railroads are no longer excepted from
subpart F. As is already required for
larger railroads, a small railroad must
conduct a pre-employment drug test and
obtain a negative result before allowing
an individual to perform regulated
service for the first time. See
§ 219.501(a). As with larger railroads,
this requirement applies only to those
regulated employees hired by a small
railroad after the effective date of this
final rule, because all regulated
employees hired before the effective
date of this rule are exempted from preemployment drug testing.
FRA received no comments on the
clarifications in this section, which are
adopted without further comment.
Section 219.5—Definitions
As proposed, FRA is amending this
section by adding, clarifying, and
deleting definitions. Additional or
clarified definitions include:
Administrator
FRA is defining ‘‘Administrator’’ to
include the Administrator of the FRA or
the Administrator’s delegate.
Associate Administrator
FRA is clarifying that ‘‘Associate
Administrator’’ means both the FRA’s
Associate Administrator for Railroad
Safety and the Associate
Administrator’s delegate.
Contractor
As proposed, FRA’s new definition of
‘‘contractor’’ includes both a contractor
and a subcontractor performing
functions for a railroad.
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
37899
DOT-Regulated Employee
A ‘‘DOT-regulated employee’’ means a
person who is subject to drug or alcohol
testing, or both, under any DOT agency
regulation, including an individual
currently performing DOT safetysensitive functions and an applicant for
employment subject to DOT preemployment drug testing.
DOT Safety-Sensitive Duty or DOT
Safety-Sensitive Function
The performance of a ‘‘DOT safetysensitive duty’’ or ‘‘DOT safety-sensitive
function’’ makes a person subject to the
drug testing and/or alcohol testing
requirements of a DOT agency. The
performance of regulated service is a
DOT safety-sensitive duty or function
under this part.
Drug and Alcohol Counselor or DAC
FRA is adopting this part’s definition
for ‘‘Drug and Alcohol Counselor’’ or
‘‘DAC’’ from § 242.7 of its conductor
certification rule.
Employee
An ‘‘employee’’ is any person,
including a volunteer, and a
probationary employee, who performs
activities for a railroad or a contractor to
a railroad.
Evacuation
Under § 219.201(a)(1)(ii)(A), one of
the criteria for a ‘‘major train accident’’
requiring PAT testing is an evacuation.
To qualify as an evacuation, an event
must involve the relocation of at least
one person who is not a railroad
employee to a safe area to avoid
exposure to a hazardous material
release. This relocation would normally
be ordered by local authorities and
could be either mandatory or voluntary.
This definition does not include the
closure of public roadways for
hazardous material spill containment
purposes, unless that closure was
accompanied by an evacuation order.
Flagman or Flagger
FRA is adopting its proposal to define
a ‘‘flagman’’ (also known as a ‘‘flagger’’)
and ‘‘watchman/lookout’’ in § 219.5 as
those terms are currently defined in
§ 214.7.
Highway-Rail Grade Crossing
FRA is adopting the definition of
‘‘highway-rail grade crossing’’ found in
§ 225.5 of its accident and incident
reporting regulation, which includes all
crossing locations within industry and
rail yards, ports, and dock areas.
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37900
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Accident/
Incident
This definition is essentially identical
to the description of highway-rail grade
crossing impacts found in the definition
for ‘‘accident/incident’’ in FRA’s
accident and incident reporting
regulation. See 49 CFR 225.5.
Joint Operations
The phrase ‘‘rail operations’’ in this
definition encompasses dispatching and
other types of operations. As examples,
even if Railroad A has fewer than
sixteen covered employees, Railroad A
is engaged in joint operations with
Railroad B if it either dispatches trains
for Railroad B and/or enters Railroad B’s
yard to perform switching operations.
Railroad A is also engaged in joint
operations with Railroad B if they
operate over the same track at different
times of the day.
Railroad A is not, however, engaged
in joint operations with Railroad B, if
they operate over the same track but are
physically separated (e.g., through a
split rail derail or the removal of a
section of rail), since this separation
prevents Railroad A’s operations from
overlapping with those of Railroad B.
FRA is also excluding from joint
operations certain minimal operations
on the same track for the purposes of
interchange, so long as these operations:
(1) Do not exceed 20 mph; (2) are
conducted under restricted speed; (3)
proceed no more than three miles; (4)
and, if extending into another railroad’s
yard(s), operate into another railroad’s
yard(s) solely to set out or pick up cars
on a designated interchange track. FRA
is excluding these minimal operations
from its new ‘‘joint operations’’
definition because of their
comparatively lesser safety risk.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
On-Track or Fouling Equipment
This new definition includes any
railroad equipment positioned on or
over the rails or fouling a track.
Other Impact Accident
An ‘‘other impact accident’’ includes
any accident/incident involving contact
between on-track or fouling equipment
that is not otherwise classified as
another type of collision (e.g., a head-on
collision, rear-end collision, side
collision, raking collision, or derailment
collision). This new definition also
includes an impact in which a single car
or cut of cars is damaged during
operations involving switching, train
makeup, setting out, etc.
Person
As amended, this definition adopts
the existing language in § 219.9 and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
adds an independent contractor who
provides goods or services to a railroad
to the scope of whom or what is
considered a ‘‘person’’ under this part
(e.g., a service agent such as a collection
site or laboratory) See 49 CFR part 40,
subpart Q—Roles and Responsibilities
of Service Agents. Service agents are
already required to comply with both
part 219 and part 40, so this amendment
is a clarification that makes no
substantive changes.
employee. FRA has also updated the
reference to the hours of service laws
(49 U.S.C. ch. 211). Neither change is
substantive.
Plant Railroad
FRA Representative
As proposed, the definition of ‘‘FRA
representative’’ is amended to include
the oversight contractor for FRA’s Drug
and Alcohol Program and the staff of
FRA’s Associate Administrator for
Railroad Safety.
For clarification, FRA has added
language defining when an entity’s
operations do not qualify for plant
railroad status.
Raking Collision
As newly defined, a ‘‘raking
collision’’ occurs when there is a
collision between parts, with the lading
of a train on an adjacent track, or with
a structure such as a bridge. A collision
that occurs at a turnout is not a raking
collision.
Regulated Employee and Regulated
Service
A regulated employee is any
employee subject to this part: a covered
employee, an MOW employee, and an
employee of a railroad or a contractor to
a railroad who performs covered service
or MOW activities. Correspondingly,
regulated service is any duty which
makes an employee subject to this part.
Side Collision
A side collision occurs when one
consist strikes the side of another
consist at a turnout, including a
collision at a switch or at a railroad
crossing at grade.
Tourist, Scenic, Historic, or Excursion
Operation That Is Not Part of the
General Railroad System of
Transportation
To be considered not part of the
general railroad system of
transportation, a tourist, scenic, historic,
or excursion operation must be
conducted only on track used
exclusively for that purpose (i.e., there
are no freight, intercity passenger, or
commuter passenger railroad operations
on the track).
Watchman/Lookout
This definition is identical to that in
§ 214.7, subpart C of part 214, roadway
worker protection.
Revised definitions include:
Covered Employee
As revised, a ‘‘person’’ includes an
employee, volunteer, and probationary
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Covered Service
FRA is adding examples of covered
service and a reference to appendix A to
49 CFR part 228, Requirements of the
Hours of Service Act: Statement of
Agency Policy and Interpretation. No
substantive changes are intended.
Impact Accident
In its initial implementation of this
part, FRA excepted derailment and
raking collisions from its definition of
‘‘impact accident’’ because it formerly
believed these types of collisions were
not caused by human factors. (See 50 FR
31539 and 31542, Aug. 2, 1985 and 54
FR 39647, Sep. 27, 1989). FRA is
removing these exceptions after learning
that human factors such as fatigue and
impairment can and do contribute to
both derailment and raking collisions.
As additional clarification, FRA is
excluding the impact of rail equipment
with ‘‘naturally-occurring obstructions
such as fallen trees, rock or snow slides,
livestock, etc.’’ from its definition of an
impact accident. FRA is also
incorporating guidance stating that an
impact with a derail does not qualify as
an ‘‘impact with a deliberately-placed
obstruction, such as a bumping post,’’
since bumping posts are usually
permanently placed at the end of a line,
while derails can easily be moved from
place to place.
Medical Facility
As amended, a ‘‘medical facility’’ is
an independent (i.e., not maintained by
the railroad) site which is able to collect
blood and urine specimens for PAT
testing and, if necessary, treat an
employee who has been injured in a
PAT testing event.
Railroad Property Damage or Damage to
Railroad Property
As proposed, the amended definition
of ‘‘railroad property damage or damage
to railroad property’’ means damage to
railroad property, including damage to
on-track equipment, signals, track, track
structure, or roadbed; and labor costs,
including hourly wages, transportation
costs, and hotel expenses; but excluding
damage to lading and the cost of
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
clearing a wreck; except that the cost of
contractor services, of renting and
operating machinery, and of any
additional damage caused while
clearing the wreck is included when
calculating railroad property damage to
determine whether PAT testing is
required under FRA’s regulations. These
clarifications are meant to enable easier
compliance with this part, and no
substantive changes are intended.
Train Accident
As amended, the definition of ‘‘train
accident’’ refers to rail equipment
accidents under § 225.19(c) which
include, but are not limited to,
collisions, derailments, and other events
involving the operation of on-track or
fouling equipment.
Train Incident
As amended, a ‘‘train incident’’ is
defined as an event involving the
operation of on-track or fouling
equipment that results in a casualty, but
does not result in damage to railroad
property exceeding the applicable
reporting threshold.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Deleted Definitions
As proposed, FRA is deleting the
definitions of ‘‘General Railroad System
of Transportation,’’ and ‘‘Train,’’ since
these terms have been superseded by
newly added definitions and
amendments in this rule. FRA received
no comments on these deletions.
Section 219.11—General Conditions for
Chemical Tests
In its comments, the NCRMA asked
FRA to impose conditions on urine
specimen collections conducted under
this part (e.g., that FRA require a
railroad to transport an employee to a
company owned or contracted facility,
or that drinking water not be used
during the urine specimen collection
process). With the exception of its PAT
testing program, which is discussed
below, FRA is prohibited from doing so,
because the Department’s Procedures for
Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing
Programs (49 CFR part 40 or part 40)
control the procedures and facilities
used in FRA (non-PAT) and other DOT
agency testing. FRA is authorized to
enforce railroad compliance with part
40 requirements, but may not impose
new requirements of its own. Therefore,
for example, FRA cannot specify that
only non-drinking water sources be
used during random testing, because
part 40 already regulates collection site
conditions.
Because it predates part 40, FRA PAT
testing is exempt from part 40’s
requirements. FRA therefore has the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
authority to set its own PAT testing
protocols, which are found in appendix
C to this part. PAT testing blood and
urine specimens must be collected at an
independent medical facility, such as a
hospital or physician’s office. By
definition an independent medical
facility cannot be railroad owned or
controlled, and it meets the NCRMA’s
requests for privacy, heat, and sanitation
during specimen collection.
New paragraph (a)(2) clarifies that a
regulated employee who is required to
participate in Federal testing under part
219 must be on duty and subject to
performing regulated service at the time
of a breath alcohol test or urine
specimen collection. This requirement
does not apply to pre-employment drug
testing of applicants for regulated
service positions.
Paragraph (b)
Paragraph (b)(1) clarifies that
regulated employees must participate in
Federal testing as required by part 219
and as implemented by a representative
of the railroad or an employing
contractor.
As proposed, in paragraph (b)(2), FRA
is replacing the phrase ‘‘has sustained a
personal injury’’ with ‘‘is suffering a
substantiated medical emergency,’’ to
allow treatment for medical emergencies
that do not involve a personal injury
(e.g., a stroke) to take priority over
required FRA testing. A medical
emergency must be an acute medical
condition requiring immediate medical
care, and a railroad may require an
employee to submit proof that that he or
she had experienced one by providing,
within a reasonable time period after,
verifiable documentation of the
emergency from a credible outside
professional.
Paragraph (g)
In addition to the PAT testing
requirements of subpart C and the signs
and symptoms of drug and alcohol
influence, intoxication, and misuse,
paragraph (g) now requires a supervisor
to be trained on the signs and symptoms
of certain prescription drugs that can
have acute behavioral and apparent
physiological effects. To facilitate this
training, FRA is developing a module
for both supervisors and employees that
will cover the required material and be
made available on its Web site. In lieu
of the previous minimum of three hours
of training, FRA is requiring a
supervisor to be able to demonstrate an
understanding of the course material,
usually through a written or oral
examination at the end of the course.
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
37901
PAT and Reasonable Suspicion Testing
Paragraph (a) adopts FRA’s longestablished guidance that a railroad may
exceed employee HOS limitations if all
three of the following conditions are
met: (1) The excess service was
necessary and solely caused by the
railroad’s completion of PAT or
reasonable suspicion testing; (2) the
railroad used due diligence to minimize
the excess service; and (3) the railroad
collected the PAT or reasonable
suspicion specimens within the time
limits of § 219.203(d) (for PAT testing)
or § 219.305 (for reasonable suspicion
testing). The railroad must still submit
an excess service report, however.
Reasonable Cause Testing
Reasonable cause testing, like PAT
and reasonable suspicion testing, is
triggered by the occurrence of a
specified but unpredictable event (in
this case, a train accident, train
incident, or rule violation, the cause or
severity of which may be linked to a
safety issue involving alcohol or drug
use by a regulated employee). For this
reason, FRA will not pursue an HOS
violation if any excess service was
caused solely by a railroad’s decision to
conduct reasonable cause testing,
provided the railroad used reasonable
due diligence to complete the test and
did so within the time limitations of
§ 219.407 (i.e., within eight hours of the
observation, event or supervisory
notification that was the basis for the
test). However, because reasonable
cause testing, unlike both PAT and
reasonable suspicion testing, is
authorized, but not required by part 219,
paragraph (b) correspondingly
authorizes, but does not require, a
railroad to exceed HOS limitations to
complete reasonable cause testing. As
with mandatory PAT and reasonable
suspicion testing, a railroad must file an
excess service report if it decides to
exceed HOS limitations to conduct
optional reasonable cause testing.
Random Testing
As proposed, paragraph (c) adopts
FRA’s longstanding guidance that
completion of a random test does not
excuse compliance with a regulated
employee’s HOS limits, unless the
circumstances of the employee’s test
require the employee to provide a
directly observed urine specimen. A
directly observed urine collection must
be performed whenever an employee’s
previous test results or current behavior
indicate the possibility of specimen
tampering (see § 40.67). As with PAT,
reasonable suspicion, and reasonable
cause tests, the occurrence of such
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37902
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
circumstances is unpredictable. FRA
will therefore not pursue an HOS
violation provided the railroad conducts
the random test with due diligence and
files an excess service report.
Paragraph (d)
As proposed, paragraph (d) clarifies
that because follow-up tests, like
random tests, are scheduled by the
railroad, follow-up testing must be
completed within a covered employee’s
HOS limits. A railroad may place an
employee on duty solely for the purpose
of a follow-up drug test any time the
employee is subject to being called for
duty; a railroad may place an employee
on duty for a follow-up alcohol test only
if the employee’s return-to-duty
agreement requires total abstention from
alcohol use, since legitimate alcohol use
is allowed so long as it is in compliance
with the prohibitions of § 219.101. A
railroad that chooses to place an
employee on duty solely for the purpose
of follow-up testing must document
why it did so and provide the
documentation to FRA upon request.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Paragraph (c)
As proposed, a railroad can make this
part’s required educational materials
available to its regulated employees by
posting them continuously in an easily
visible location at a designated reporting
place, provided the railroad also
supplies a copy to each labor
organization representing a class or craft
of regulated employees (if applicable).
Alternatively, a railroad can make these
materials available by posting them on
a Web site accessible to all regulated
employees; any distribution method that
can ensure the accessibility of these
materials to all regulated employees is
acceptable.
For MOW employees only, however,
FRA is initially requiring distribution of
individual hard copies of educational
materials, since these employees are
being introduced to the requirements of
part 219. This individual distribution
requirement applies for three years after
the effective date of this final rule,
although it does not apply to an
applicant for a regulated service
position who refuses a pre-employment
test or has a pre-employment test result
indicating a part 219 violation.
Section 219.25—Previous Employer
Drug and Alcohol Checks
This new section reminds railroads
and contractors that they must comply
with § 40.25, which requires an
employer to conduct a search (for nonnegative test results, e.g., positives,
substitutions, and adulterations) of a
new hire’s past two years of drug and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
alcohol test records before that
individual can perform any DOT safetysensitive functions. This requirement
applies only to the railroad or
contractor’s direct employees (e.g., a
railroad has no responsibility to conduct
a background check on a contractor’s
direct employees, since that
responsibility belongs to the contractor).
A railroad must also comply with the
prior drug and alcohol conduct
requirements of § 240.119(c) for certified
locomotive engineers and § 242.115(e)
for certified conductors.
Subpart B—Prohibitions
Section 219.101—Alcohol and Drug Use
Prohibited
Paragraph (a)(1)
In the NPRM, FRA had asked for
comment on whether it should remove
part 219.101’s prohibitions against the
on-duty possession of alcohol and
controlled substances. FRA modeled
these prohibitions after those in Rule G,
a longstanding railroad operating rule
which originally prohibited the on-duty
use and possession of alcohol, and was
later amended to include controlled
substances as well. See 49 FR 24266,
June 12, 1984.
Many commonly prescribed drugs,
such as muscle relaxants and pain
relievers, are controlled substances. As
strictly read, § 219.101 prohibits the onduty possession of not only illicit drugs
but many prescription drugs with
legitimate medical uses (with the
exception of any controlled substance
prescribed in accordance with
§ 219.103). Similarly, because § 219.101
prohibits the on-duty possession of
alcohol, if strictly read, this section also
bans the on-duty possession of any overthe-counter cough and cold remedy that
contains alcohol. In the NPRM, FRA
asked for comment on whether it should
remove § 219.101’s prohibitions against
on-duty possession of controlled
substances and alcohol because they
could be construed to prohibit the
possession of legal drugs and remedies
on railroad property. FRA noted that no
other DOT agency prohibits the on-duty
possession of both controlled substances
and alcohol, and that a railroad remains
free to impose discipline for such
possession under its own authority.
Labor commented that FRA should
clarify its policy on prescription use, as
did the NTSB. The NTSB opposed
FRA’s proposal to remove 219.101’s
prohibitions against the on-duty
possession of controlled substances and
alcohol, without explanation.
As proposed, FRA is therefore
retaining but clarifying this prohibition,
which, as amended, prohibits the use or
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
possession of controlled substances and
alcohol by a regulated employee while
‘‘on duty and subject to performing
regulated service for a railroad.’’ This
prohibition applies not only when a
regulated employee is actually
performing regulated service, but also
when the employee is subject to
performing regulated service.
Paragraph (a)(4)
Paragraph (a)(4) prohibits an
employee whose Federal test indicates
an alcohol concentration of 0.02 or
greater, but less than 0.04, from
performing covered service until the
start of his or her next regularly
scheduled duty period, but not less than
eight hours from the administration of
the test. However, since an alcohol
concentration of 0.02 or greater but less
than 0.04 is not a violation of § 219.101,
an alcohol test result in this range may
not be used for locomotive engineer or
conductor certification purposes under
part 240 or part 242.
As proposed, FRA is adding new
paragraph (a)(4)(ii) to clarify that a
railroad is not prohibited from taking
further action under its own authority
against an employee whose Federal test
result indicates an alcohol
concentration 0.02 or greater but less
than 0.04, since a result in this range
indicates the presence of alcohol in the
employee’s system. Although Labor
opposed allowing a railroad to impose
discipline under its own authority in
this circumstance, this is not a
substantive change, since FRA guidance
has long allowed this narrow exception.
Paragraph (a)(5)
Paragraph (a)(5) states that a Federal
test result with an alcohol concentration
below 0.02 is a negative result that a
railroad may not use as evidence of
alcohol misuse, either as evidence in a
company proceeding or as a basis for
subsequent testing under company
authority. A railroad may conduct
additional company testing only if it has
an independent basis for doing so.
As proposed, FRA is amending this
paragraph to adopt its previously stated
policy that a railroad has an
independent basis for a subsequent
company authority alcohol test only
when an employee continues to exhibit
signs and symptoms of alcohol use after
having had a negative FRA reasonable
suspicion alcohol test result. If a
railroad has an independent basis to
conduct a subsequent alcohol test under
company authority, the company test
result stands independent of the prior
FRA test result.
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Paragraph (b)
Section 219.103—Use of Prescription
and Over-the-Counter Drugs
In the NPRM, FRA asked railroads to
submit comments on their 30 years of
administering this section, which has
been unchanged since the inception of
part 219 in 1985. The NTSB, the sole
responder, commented that this section
did not adequately address the safety
concerns raised by the use of
prescription and over-the-counter (OTC)
drugs, particularly diphenhydramine
and other sedating antihistamines that
could impair performance. In its
comment, the NTSB reiterated R–13–01,
in which it recommended that FRA
address employees’ underlying medical
conditions by developing medical
certification regulations, a
recommendation that is beyond the
scope of this rule.
In response to the NTSB’s other
concerns, however, FRA is developing a
training module which will cover the
more commonly used prescription and
OTC drugs that could have adverse
effects, including diphenhydramine.
This module, which will be
downloadable for free on FRA’s Web
site, will also contain general
information on the best practices to
follow when using prescription and
OTC drugs. FRA will inform its
regulated entities when this module is
available for distribution.
Previously, paragraph (b) required a
railroad, before ‘‘withdrawing’’ an
employee from covered service, to
provide notice to the employee of the
reason for his or her withdrawal. This
notice must be in writing, although a
railroad may first notify an employee
verbally, if the railroad provides written
notice to the employee as soon as
practicable. In its written removal
notice, the railroad must include a
statement prohibiting the employee
from performing any DOT safetysensitive functions until he or she has
successfully completed the evaluation,
referral, and treatment processes
required for return-to-duty under part
40. FRA believes receipt of this
information will discourage an
employee from job hopping in an effort
to avoid compliance with part 40’s
return-to-duty requirements. A railroad
may use this notice to comply with
§ 40.287’s requirement to provide each
employee who violates a DOT drug and
alcohol regulation with a listing of SAPs
who are both readily available to the
employee and acceptable to the railroad,
by providing the contact information
(name, address, telephone number, and,
if applicable, email address) for each
SAP on its list. (Of course, a railroad
may also provide this information
separately.)
Section 219.104—Responsive Action
Paragraph (c)
FRA is amending this section to
clarify that: (1) With the exception of
the right to a hearing, an applicant for
regulated service who has refused to
take a pre-employment test is entitled to
all of the protections of this part; (2) the
notice a railroad must provide to a
regulated employee before removing
him or her from regulated service must
be in writing; and (3) a regulated
employee is entitled to request a hearing
under this section following an alleged
violation of § 219.101 or § 219.102.
Previously, paragraph (c)(1) allowed
an employee to request a hearing if the
employee denied ‘‘that the test result is
valid evidence of alcohol or drug use
prohibited by this subpart.’’ FRA has
removed this phrase because the
removal from duty and hearing
procedures in this section also apply to
violations of § 219.101 or § 219.102 that
have not been detected through testing
(e.g., a refusal or a violation of the
prohibition against possessing alcohol).
An employee may demand a hearing for
any violation of § 219.101 or § 219.102,
regardless of whether the alleged
violation was based on a test result.
Similarly, FRA is amending paragraph
(c)(4) to clarify that its statement that
part 219 does not limit any procedural
rights or remedies available (e.g., at
common law or through an applicable
bargaining agreement) to an employee,
applies to all violations of part 219, not
just those based on test results.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Paragraph (a)
Paragraph (a)(2) emphasizes that none
of the requirements in this section apply
to tests conducted under company
authority. FRA is also removing the
word ‘‘mandatory’’ because it is
inaccurate, since neither reasonable
cause nor pre-employment alcohol
testing are mandated by part 219. If,
however, a railroad does decide to
conduct a reasonable cause or preemployment alcohol test under FRA
authority, a regulated employee or
applicant for regulated service who
refuses the test is subject to the
consequences for refusals found in this
section.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
Paragraph (d)
As stated above, FRA PAT testing predates part 40 and has always been
excepted from DOT’s testing
procedures. Because the primary
purpose of FRA PAT testing is accident
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
37903
investigation, FRA has always tested a
wider variety of specimens (i.e., blood,
post-mortem tissue specimens) for a
wider variety of substances (e.g.,
barbiturates and benzodiazepines) than
part 40 testing does. A regulated
employee can therefore have a PAT test
with a positive result that would not be
detectable or duplicable under DOT
procedures (e.g., a positive PAT blood
test result for benzodiazepines). With
respect to responsive action, however,
PAT testing follows part 40
requirements, by requiring a negative
return-to-duty test and a minimum of
six negative follow-up tests for the
substance of the original positive in the
first 12 months after returning to
regulated service (certified locomotive
engineers and conductors have different
follow-up testing minimums, see
§§ 240.119(d)(2) and 242.115(f)(2)).
To ensure that any regulated
employee who has had a positive PAT
test result is in compliance with FRA’s
return-to-duty and follow-up
requirements, in addition to Part 40
tests, FRA is allowing company tests to
fulfill these requirements where
necessary. If and only if, the substance
of the employee’s original PAT positive
is not a drug listed in § 40.5’s definition
of ‘‘Drug,’’ a railroad may conduct
return-to-duty and follow-up tests for
that substance under its own authority,
provided the railroad’s procedures
mirror those of part 40 and the
substance is on the company test’s
panel. FRA is allowing company testing
in this limited circumstance because of
the important role return-to-duty and
follow-up tests play in maintaining an
employee’s abstinence from substance
abuse in the first year following the
employee’s return to performing
regulated service.
Paragraph (e)
FRA is adding new paragraph (e) to
clarify when § 219.104’s requirements
do not apply.
The language formerly in paragraph
(a)(3)(i), which stated that the
requirements of this section do not
apply to actions based on alcohol or
drug testing that is not conducted under
part 219, can now be found in paragraph
(e)(1).
Paragraph (e)(2) clarifies that this
section’s requirements do not apply to
Federal alcohol tests with a result less
than 0.04. As mentioned above in FRA’s
discussion of § 219.101(a)(4), a Federal
test result that is .02 or greater but less
than .04 proves that an employee has
recently used alcohol, but not that the
employee is impaired. Because an
employee who has a test result in this
range is not in violation of § 219.101,
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37904
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
the only consequence allowed under
this part is the removal of the employee
from regulated service for a minimum of
eight hours. All other actions following
an alcohol test result below .04,
including the administration of returnto-duty or follow-up tests, must
therefore be conducted under a
railroad’s own authority.
Paragraph (e)(3) clarifies that although
parts 240 and 242 require a substance
abuse evaluation for a locomotive
engineer or conductor who has had an
off-duty conviction for, or a completed
state action to, cancel, revoke, suspend,
or deny a motor vehicle-driver’s license
for operating while under the influence
of or impaired by alcohol or a controlled
substance, an off-duty conviction or
completed state action is not a violation
of § 219.101 or § 219.102.
Paragraph (e)(4) clarifies that this
section does not apply to an applicant
who declines to participate in preemployment testing before the test
begins.
Similarly, paragraph (e)(5) clarifies
that the hearing procedures in
paragraph (c) of this section do not
apply to an applicant who tests positive
or refuses a DOT pre-employment test.
In contrast, paragraph (e)(6) clarifies
that an applicant who has tested
positive or refused a DOT preemployment test must complete the
return-to-duty requirements in
paragraph (d) before performing DOT
safety-sensitive functions subject to the
drug and alcohol regulation of any DOT
agency. Section 40.25(j) prohibits an
employee who has tested positive or
refused a test from performing any DOT
safety-sensitive functions until and
unless the employee documents
successful completion of part 40’s
return-to-duty process.
Section 219.105—Railroad’s Duty To
Prevent Violations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Paragraph (a)
Paragraph (a) of this section provides
that a railroad may not with ‘‘actual
knowledge’’ permit an employee to
remain or go on duty in covered service
in violation of either § 219.101 or
§ 219.102. FRA is clarifying that a
railroad’s ‘‘actual knowledge’’ of such a
violation is limited to the knowledge of
a railroad manager or supervisor in the
employee’s chain of command. A
manager or supervisor is considered to
have actual knowledge of a violation
when he or she: (1) Personally observes
an employee violating part 219 by either
using or possessing alcohol, or by using
drugs (observing potential signs and
symptoms of alcohol/drug use does not
by itself constitute actual knowledge);
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
(2) learns from a § 40.25 background
check of a previous employer’s drug and
alcohol records that an employee had a
§ 219.101 or § 219.102 violation and did
not complete
§ 219.104’s return-to-duty
requirements; or (3) receives an
employee’s admission of prohibited
alcohol possession or misuse or drug
abuse.
Paragraph (b)
FRA is not amending paragraph (b) of
this section. Instead, as guidance FRA is
reprinting the 1989 preamble discussion
which, in proposing this section,
explained its purpose as:
to describe the limitations on railroad
liability with respect to the prevention of the
violations of the Subpart B prohibitions. . . .
In summary, the provisions require the
railroad to exercise a high degree of care to
prevent violations, but do not impose
liability where, despite such efforts, an
individual employee uses alcohol or drugs in
a manner that is prohibited (and the railroad
is not aware of the conduct).
54 FR 39649, Sep. 27, 1989. While this
paragraph places an affirmative duty on
a railroad to use due diligence to
prevent violations of § 219.101 or
§ 219.102, a railroad that can show it
has done so has only limited liability
under this part for violations of its
prohibitions by individual employees.
Since what constitutes due diligence
under this provision varies on a case-bycase basis, a railroad that is uncertain
about its applicability in a given
situation should contact FRA for
guidance.
Paragraph (c)
New paragraph (c) prohibits the
design and implementation of any
railroad drug and/or alcohol education,
prevention, identification, intervention,
or rehabilitation program or policy that
circumvents or otherwise undermines
the requirements of part 219. A railroad
must make all documents, data, or other
records related to such programs or
policies available to FRA upon request.
Paragraph (d)
Rule G Observations
In its guidance, FRA required a
railroad’s supervisors to make and
record each quarter a total number of
‘‘Rule G’’ observations equivalent, at a
minimum, to the railroad’s total number
of covered employees. Each Rule G
observation should be made sufficiently
close to an employee to enable the
supervisor to determine whether the
employee was displaying signs and
symptoms of impairment requiring a
reasonable suspicion test.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
In the NPRM, FRA requested
comment on whether § 219.105 should
adopt this guidance by requiring a
specific number of Rule G observations;
FRA was particularly interested in the
safety benefits versus the costs and
paperwork burdens of such a
requirement. In response, the
Associations commented that FRA’s
requirement for each supervisor to be
trained in signs and symptoms of drug
and alcohol abuse already ensured that
railroad supervisors were automatically
aware of what to look for when
observing an employee’s demeanor and
behavior. Therefore, according to the
Associations, requiring a specific
number of what were essentially
constant supervisory observations to be
systematically recorded would be a
paperwork exercise that added nothing
to safety.
Because reasonable suspicion and
reasonable cause testing share the same
check box on DOT’s drug and alcohol
chain of custody forms, FRA’s MIS data
does not distinguish between tests
conducted under mandatory reasonable
suspicion authority and tests conducted
under discretionary reasonable cause.
While there is no direct correlation
showing that Rule G observations
increase or result in reasonable
suspicion tests, FRA believes that each
year’s consistently low total of
reasonable suspicion tests indicates the
continuing need to focus supervisory
attention on the use and importance of
reasonable suspicion testing as
deterrence. To make Rule G
observations both more meaningful and
less burdensome, new paragraph (d)
adopts FRA’s previous guidance
requirements but: (1) Decreases the
minimum annual number of
observations supervisors must make and
record from four to two times a
railroad’s total number of covered
employees, and (2) requires each
observation to be sufficiently up close
and personal to determine if a covered
employee is displaying signs and
symptoms indicative of a violation of
the prohibitions in this part. The latter
requirement is intended to ensure that
supervisory observations are of
individuals rather than collective
sweeps of multiple employees.
Section 219.107—Consequences of
Refusal
This section requires an employee
who has refused to provide breath or
body fluid specimens when required by
part 219 to be disqualified from
performing covered service for nine
months. As suggested by SAPlist.com,
FRA is deleting the word ‘‘unlawful’’
from the title of this section, since it
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
implies that there are ‘‘lawful’’ refusals.
This is not a substantive change.
Paragraph (b)
Paragraph (b) requires a railroad,
before withdrawing an employee from
regulated service, to provide notice to
the employee of the reason for the
withdrawal and the procedures in
§ 219.104(c) under which the employee
may request a hearing. As proposed,
FRA is clarifying that this notice must
be in writing, although a railroad may
initially provide an employee with
verbal notice if the railroad provides
written notice to the employee as soon
as practicable.
Paragraph (c)
This section prohibits a railroad with
notice that an employee has been
withdrawn from regulated service from
authorizing or permitting the employee
to perform any regulated service on its
behalf. The railroad may, however,
authorize or permit the employee to
perform non-regulated service.
Subpart C—Post-Accident Toxicological
Testing
Section 219.201—Events for Which
Testing Is Required
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Paragraph (a)
This section defines the types of
accidents or incidents for which PAT
testing is required and states that a
railroad must make a good faith
determination as to whether an event
meets the criteria for PAT testing.
Specifically, existing paragraph (a)
requires a railroad to conduct PAT
testing after the following qualifying
events: (1) Major train accidents; (2)
impact accidents; (3) fatal train
incidents; and (4) passenger train
accidents. As proposed, FRA is
amending the definitions of these
qualifying events and adding a new
qualifying event that requires PAT
testing, ‘‘Human-Factor Highway-rail
Grade Crossing Accident/Incident.’’
• Major Train Accidents
As proposed, FRA is clarifying that
the fatality criteria for a major train
accident is met by the death of ‘‘any
person,’’ including an individual who is
not an employee of the railroad.
Also as proposed, FRA is increasing
the property damage threshold for major
train accidents from $1,000,000 to
$1,500,000 to account for inflation since
January 1, 1995, when FRA last raised
the damages threshold for major train
accidents from $500,000 to $1,000,000.
As noted by the AAR in its comment
supporting this amendment, reducing
the number of events qualifying as
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
major train accidents correspondingly
reduces the number of employees
subject to PAT testing, which reduces
such railroad costs as lost opportunities
and wages.
• Impact Accidents
See discussion in § 219.5 above.
Human-Factor Highway-Rail Grade
Crossing Accident/Incident
In § 219.201(b), FRA prohibits PAT
testing after a highway-rail grade
crossing accident. FRA carved out this
PAT testing exception after concluding
that there was no justification for testing
members of the train crew since they
could not have played any role in the
cause or severity of the highway-rail
grade crossing accident. By the time a
train crew spots a vehicle or other
obstruction on the track, the weight and
momentum of the train prevent the crew
from stopping in time to avoid a
collision.
FRA continues to believe that the
members of a train crew should be
excepted from PAT testing after the
occurrence of a highway-rail grade
crossing accident. As proposed,
however, FRA is narrowing this blanket
exception by adding a new qualifying
event, ‘‘Human-factor highway-rail
grade crossing accident/incident’’ in
paragraph (a)(5), to allow the PAT
testing of a signal maintainer, flagman,
or other employee only if a railroad’s
preliminary investigation indicates that
the employee may have played a role in
the cause or severity of the accident.
This amendment responds to NTSB
Recommendation R–01–17, in which
the NTSB had recommended that FRA
narrow its exception for highway-rail
grade crossing accidents to require PAT
testing of any railroad signal,
maintenance, or other employee whose
actions at or near a grade crossing may
have contributed to the cause or severity
of a highway-rail grade crossing
accident.
New paragraph (a)(5)(i) contains the
criteria for a ‘‘human-factor highwayrail grade crossing accident/incident.’’
This paragraph requires PAT testing
after a highway-rail grade crossing
accident/incident whenever there is
reason to believe that a regulated
employee has interfered with the
normal functioning of a grade crossing
signal system, in testing or otherwise,
without first providing for the safety of
highway traffic that depends on the
normal functioning of such a system.
Because this language is adapted from
the prohibition against such interference
in FRA’s grade crossing regulation (see
49 CFR 234.209), a grade crossing
accident/incident involving a § 234.209
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
37905
violation qualifies as a human-factor
highway-rail grade crossing accident/
incident for purposes of PAT testing.
Under paragraphs (a)(5)(ii) and (iii),
PAT testing after a highway-rail grade
crossing accident/incident is also
required if the event involved violations
of the flagging duties found in FRA’s
grade crossing regulation’. See 49 CFR
234.105(c), 234.106, and
234.107(c)(1)(i). The sections referenced
in these paragraphs permit trains to
operate through malfunctioning grade
crossings if an appropriately equipped
flagger, law enforcement officer, or
crewmember provides warning for each
direction of highway traffic. For
example, when a false activation occurs,
§ 234.107(c)(1)(i) requires flagging by an
appropriately equipped flagger if one is
available. Under paragraphs (a)(5)(ii)
and (iii), an employee who fails to
comply with this flagging requirement is
subject to PAT testing if a highway-rail
grade crossing accident/incident then
occurs. Under paragraph (a)(5)(iv), FRA
is further narrowing its PAT testing
exception for highway-rail grade
crossing accident/incidents by requiring
PAT testing if a fatality of a regulated
employee is involved. As with fatal
train incidents, a deceased regulated
employee is subject to post-mortem PAT
testing regardless of whether the
employee was at fault. For example, a
regulated employee who died while
operating an on-rail truck that collided
with a motor vehicle at a highway-rail
grade crossing is subject to post-mortem
PAT testing regardless of who was at
fault for the collision.
Similarly, paragraph (a)(5)(v) requires
PAT testing after a highway-rail grade
crossing accident/incident if a violation
of an FRA regulation or railroad
operating rule by a regulated employee
may have played a role in the cause or
severity of the accident/incident. While
paragraphs (a)(5)(i)–(iv) of this section
specify the circumstances under which
PAT testing is required for highway-rail
grade crossing accidents/incidents
involving human-factor errors,
paragraph (a)(5)(v) serves as a catch-all
provision that requires PAT testing for
highway-rail grade crossing accidents/
incidents that involve human-factor
errors other than those specified in
paragraphs (a)(5)(i)–(iv).
Paragraph (b)
As discussed above, FRA is narrowing
this grade crossing exception to allow
PAT testing for human-factor highwayrail grade crossing accident/incidents,
and is amending the language in this
paragraph accordingly.
SEPTA had asked FRA to clarify
whether the contributing action of a
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37906
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
motor vehicle operator within a grade
crossing could trigger the PAT testing of
a MOW employee. Any employee
involved in a highway-rail grade
crossing accident is excepted from PAT
testing unless a railroad’s preliminary
investigation indicates that the
employee’s actions may have
contributed to the occurrence or severity
of the accident; this general exception
applies to all regulated employees and
is not affected by the addition of MOW
employees to this part.
Section 219.203—Responsibilities of
Railroads and Employees
Paragraph (a)(1)
Paragraph (a)(1) requires a regulated
employee whose actions may have
played a role in the cause or severity of
a PAT testing qualifying event (e.g., an
operator, dispatcher, or signal
maintainer) to provide blood and urine
samples for PAT testing, regardless of
whether the employee was present or
on-duty at the time or location of the
qualifying event, as required by FRA’s
amended PAT testing recall provisions
in paragraph (e) of this section.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Paragraph (a)(2)
Paragraph (a)(2) specifies that the
remains of an on-duty employee who
has been fatally injured in a qualifying
PAT testing event must undergo postmortem PAT testing if the employee
dies within 12 hours of the event. This
requirement applies regardless of
whether the employee was performing
regulated service, was at fault, or was a
direct employee, volunteer, or
contractor to a railroad. Part 219 already
requires such fatality testing. See
§§ 219.11(f) and 219.203(a)(4)(ii).
Paragraph (a)(3)
Paragraph (a)(3) specifies which
regulated employees must be tested for
major train accidents. In paragraph
(a)(3)(i), FRA requires all crew members
of on-track equipment involved in a
major train accident to be PAT tested,
regardless of fault—a requirement that
already applies to all train crew
members involved in a major train
accident. See § 219.203(a)(3). In
addition, paragraph (a)(3)(ii) requires a
regulated employee who is not an
assigned crew member of an involved
train or other on-track equipment to be
PAT tested, if it can be immediately
determined that the regulated employee
may have played a role in the cause or
severity of the major train accident.
Paragraph (a)(4)
In paragraph (a)(4), which applies
specifically to fatal train incidents, FRA
proposed that an individual must die
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
within 12 hours of the incident to
qualify for post-mortem PAT testing.
The NTSB suggested that FRA instead
define a PAT testing fatality as one that
occurred within 30 days of the incident,
to match its own definition and that of
FMCSA’s. FRA’s proposed 12-hour time
limit applies to the post-mortem testing
of a fatality, however, not to the
reporting of its occurrence, as the NTSB
and FMCSA time limits do. The result
of a post-mortem PAT test conducted up
to 30 days later would fail to indicate an
individual’s condition at the time of an
incident, and would have no probative
value because any alcohol and most
controlled substances present in the
individual when the accident occurred
would have metabolized long before the
test was conducted. FRA is therefore
adopting its proposal that post-mortem
PAT testing is required only if an
individual dies within 12 hours of an
incident.
Paragraph (a)(5)
Paragraph (a)(5) specifies which
regulated employees must be PAT tested
following human-factor highway-rail
grade crossing accidents/incidents.
Under § 219.201(a)(5)(i), only a
regulated employee who interfered with
the normal functioning of a grade
crossing signal system and whose
actions may have contributed to the
cause or severity of the event must be
PAT tested. Paragraphs (a)(5)(ii) and (iii)
clarify the testing requirements for
human-factor highway-rail grade
crossing accidents/incidents under
§ 219.201(a)(5)(ii) and (iii). If a grade
crossing activation failure occurs, these
paragraphs require PAT testing of a
regulated employee responsible for
flagging (either flagging highway traffic
or acting as an appropriately equipped
flagger as defined in § 234.5), if the
employee either fails to flag or to ensure
that the required flagging occurs, or if
the employee contributes to the cause or
severity of the accident/incident.
Paragraph (a)(5)(iv) states that only
the remains of a fatally-injured
regulated employee(s) involved in a
human-factor highway-rail grade
crossing accident/incident under
§ 219.201(a)(5)(iv) must be post-mortem
PAT tested.
Paragraph (a)(5)(v) states that only a
regulated employee who has violated an
FRA regulation or railroad operating
rule and whose actions may have
contributed to the cause or severity of
the event must be PAT tested in the
event of a human-factor highway-rail
grade crossing accident/incident.
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Paragraph (a)(6)
Paragraph 219.203(a)(3) requires a
railroad to exclude from PAT testing an
employee involved in an impact
accident or passenger train accident
with injury, or a surviving employee
involved in a fatal train incident, if the
railroad can immediately determine that
the employee had no role in the cause
or severity of the event. If a railroad
determines that an event qualifies for
PAT testing, the railroad must consider
the same immediately available
information to determine whether an
employee should be subject to or
excluded from PAT testing.
Correspondingly, paragraph (a)(6)
requires a railroad to make a PAT
testing determination when an
employee survives a human-factor
highway-rail grade crossing accident/
incident. There is no determination to
be made, however, when a regulated
employee has been involved in a major
train accident or an employee has been
fatally injured in a qualifying event
while on-duty; in these circumstances
the employee must be post-mortem PAT
tested, as specified in paragraphs
(a)(6)(i) and (ii).
Paragraph (b)—Railroad Responsibility
Paragraph (b)(1) requires a railroad to
take all practicable steps to ensure that
each regulated employee subject to PAT
testing provides the required specimens.
This includes a regulated employee who
may not have been present or on-duty
at the time of the PAT testing event, but
who may have played a role in its cause
or severity, since paragraph (e) of this
section amends FRA’s recall provisions
to allow employee recall in such
circumstances.
Paragraph (b)(3) adopts longstanding
FRA guidance that FRA PAT testing
takes precedence over any toxicological
testing conducted by state or local law
enforcement officials. See Interpretive
Guidance Manual at 20.
Paragraph (c)—Alcohol Testing
Paragraph (c) allows a railroad to
require a regulated employee who is
subject to PAT testing to undergo
additional PAT breath alcohol testing if
the employee is still on, and has never
left, railroad property.
Paragraph (d)—Timely Specimen
Collection
New paragraph (d)(1) requires a
railroad: (1) To make ‘‘every reasonable
effort to assure that specimens are
provided as soon as possible after the
accident or incident,’’ and, (2) if the
railroad was unable to collect specimens
within four hours of the qualifying
event, to prepare and maintain a record
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
stating why the test was not promptly
administered (the railroad is still
required to collect the specimens as
soon thereafter as possible, however,
under § 219.203(b)(1)).
Previously, § 219.209(c) required a
railroad to notify FRA’s Drug and
Alcohol Program Manager immediately
by phone whenever a specimen
collection took longer than four hours,
and to prepare a written explanation for
any delay in specimen collection
beyond four hours; submission of that
report, however, was required only
upon request by FRA. As amended in
§ 219.203(d)(1), FRA is reiterating most
of the requirements formerly in
§ 219.209(c), but is now requiring a
railroad to submit its written report
within 30 days after expiration of the
month during which the qualifying
event occurred.
Paragraph (e)—Employee Recall
As proposed, FRA eliminated its
previous requirement that a qualifying
PAT event had to have occurred during
the employee’s duty tour.
FRA has simplified its employee
recall provisions by requiring a
regulated employee to be immediately
recalled and placed on duty for PAT
testing if only two conditions are met:
(1) The railroad could not retain the
employee in duty status because the
employee went off duty under normal
carrier procedures before the railroad
instructed the employee to remain on
duty pending its testing determination;
and (2) the railroad’s preliminary
investigation indicates a clear
probability that the employee played a
role in the cause or severity of the
accident/incident. An employee who
has been transported to receive medical
care is considered to be on-duty for
purposes of PAT testing. A railroad may
also PAT test an employee who has
failed to remain available for PAT
testing as required.
Paragraph (e)(3) requires an employee
to be recalled regardless of whether the
qualifying event occurred while the
employee was on duty, although a
railroad is prohibited from recalling an
employee if more than 24 hours has
passed since the event. An employee
who has been recalled for PAT testing
must be placed on duty before he or she
is PAT tested.
Paragraph (e)(4) specifies that both
urine and blood specimens must be
collected from an employee who has
been recalled for PAT testing. An
employee who left railroad property
before being recalled can be PAT tested
for drugs only, since the employee
could have legitimately used alcohol
after leaving. For this reason, a recalled
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
employee can be PAT tested for alcohol
only if the employee never left the
railroad’s property and the railroad
completely prohibits the use of alcohol
on its property.
Paragraph (e)(5) requires a railroad to
document its attempts to contact an
employee who has to be recalled for
PAT testing. If a railroad cannot contact
and obtain a specimen from an
employee subject to mandatory recall
within 24 hours of a qualifying event,
the railroad must notify and submit a
narrative report to FRA as required by
paragraph (d)(1). In its report, the
railroad must show that it made a good
faith effort to contact the employee,
recall the employee, place the employee
on duty, and obtain specimens from the
employee.
Paragraph (f)—Place of Specimen
Collection
Paragraph (f) states that an
independent medical facility is required
only for the mandatory collection of
PAT urine and blood specimens since a
breath alcohol PAT test (which is
authorized, but not required) is not an
invasive procedure. Section 219.203(c)
authorizes a railroad to conduct FRA
breath alcohol testing following a
qualifying event, provided this testing
does not interfere with the timely
collection of urine and blood specimens
(as specified in the PAT testing
specimen collection procedures in
appendix C to this part.
Although FRA still considers it a best
practice for a railroad to pre-designate
medical facilities for PAT testing, FRA
has removed this requirement, which is
impracticable for several reasons. First,
because the prompt treatment of injured
employees must take precedence over
any railroad pre-designation, an
emergency responder may take an
injured employee to a closer but nondesignated medical facility. Second,
even if a railroad has pre-designated a
medical facility, the facility’s
responding employees may not be aware
of or honor this designation.
Paragraph (f)(1) states that a
phlebotomist (a certified technician
trained and qualified to draw blood in
accordance with state requirements) is a
‘‘qualified medical professional’’ who
may draw blood specimens for PAT
testing. (A qualified medical
professional does not need to meet the
requirements of part 40, since part 40
does not apply to FRA PAT testing.) A
qualified railroad or hospital contracted
collector may also collect or assist in the
collection of specimens, provided the
medical facility has no objections.
Paragraph (f)(2) clarifies that
employees who are subject to
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
37907
performing regulated service are
deemed to have consented to PAT
testing under § 219.11(a), just as
employees who perform covered service
already are. For PAT testing only, FRA
allows urine to be collected from an
injured regulated employee who has
already been catheterized for medical
purposes, regardless of whether the
employee is conscious. PAT testing is
not subject to part 40’s prohibition
against collecting urine from an
unconscious person.
Paragraph (g)—Obtaining Cooperation of
Facility
In the NPRM, FRA had proposed
replacing 1–800–424–8801 with 1–800–
424–8802 as the contact number for the
National Response Center (NRC). A
railroad must contact the NRC when a
treating medical facility refuses to
collect blood specimens because an
employee is unable to provide consent.
A commenter suggested that FRA
instead replace both 1–800–424–8801
and 1–800–424–8802 with 1–800–424–
0201, a toll-free phone number specific
to FRA. As the commenter noted, listing
1–800–424–0201 as the contact number
for the NRC would make this part
consistent with §§ 229.17, 230.22 and
234.7 of this chapter (respectively,
Locomotive Safety Standards, Steam
Locomotive Inspection and
Maintenance Standards, and Grade
Crossing Safety). FRA agrees, and is
listing 1–800–424–0201 as its sole NRC
contact number, in this paragraph, and
in §§ 219.207(b) and 219.209(a)(1) of
this part.
Section 219.205—Specimen Collection
and Handling
Paragraph (c)
A railroad may no longer order a PAT
testing kit directly from the designated
FRA PAT testing laboratory (the
laboratory specified in appendix B to
part 219); the railroad must instead
contact FRA’s Drug and Alcohol
Program Manager to request an order
form to obtain a PAT testing kit from the
laboratory. FRA will continue to follow
its standard practice of making fatality
PAT testing kits available only to Class
I, Class II, and commuter railroads. If a
small railroad has a PAT testing event
involving a fatality to an on-duty
employee, the small railroad should
contact the National Railroad Response
Center. FRA will then provide a fatality
kit to a medical examiner or assist the
small railroad in obtaining one from a
larger railroad.
As proposed, FRA is removing
paragraph (c)(3), which states that a
limited number of shipping kits are
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37908
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
available at FRA’s field offices, since
FRA field offices no longer have these
kits.
Paragraph (d)
For greater flexibility, FRA has
amended this paragraph to allow a
railroad to use other shipment methods
besides air freight, provided the 24-hour
delivery requirement is met. FRA is also
allowing a railroad to hold specimens in
a secure refrigerator for a maximum of
72 hours if a specimen’s delivery cannot
be ensured within 24 hours due to a
suspension in delivery services.
Paragraph (e)
To ensure greater specimen security,
FRA is prohibiting a railroad or medical
facility from opening a specimen kit or
a transport box after it has been sealed,
even if it is later discovered that an error
had been made either with the
specimens or the chain of custody form.
If such an error is discovered, the
railroad or medical facility must make a
contemporaneous written record of it
and send that record to the laboratory,
preferably with the transport box.
Section 219.207—Fatality
As discussed above, FRA is replacing
1–800–424–8801 and 1–800–424–8802,
the phone numbers for the NRC
previously listed in paragraph (b), with
1–800–424–0201. A railroad supervisor
who is having difficulty obtaining postmortem specimens from the local
authority or custodian should call 1–
800–424–0201 to notify the NRC duty
officer.
In paragraph (d), FRA is clarifying
that the information in ‘‘Appendix C to
this part [which] specifies body fluid
and tissue specimens for toxicological
analysis in the case of a fatality,’’ is also
available in the ‘‘instructions included
inside the shipping kits.’’
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Section 219.209—Reports of Tests and
Refusals
Paragraph (a)(1)
As discussed above, FRA is replacing
1–800–424–8802, the phone number
previously listed in this paragraph for
the NRC, with 1–800–424–0201. A
railroad should call the latter number to
notify the NRC of the occurrence of a
qualifying post-accident event. The
railroad must also notify the FRA Drug
and Alcohol Manager; the contact
number for doing so, 202–493–6313, is
unchanged.
Previously, paragraph (a)(2)(v) of this
section required a railroad reporting
PAT tests and refusals to include the
number, names, and occupations of the
involved employees. To protect
employee privacy interests and reduce
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
railroads, reporting burdens, FRA is
requiring railroads to report only the
number of employees tested.
Paragraph (b) required a railroad to
provide a ‘‘concise narrative report’’ to
FRA if, as a result of the noncooperation of an employee or any other
reason, the railroad was unable to obtain
PAT testing specimens from an
employee subject to PAT testing. As
amended, a railroad must also notify
FRA’s Drug and Alcohol Program
Manager immediately by phone of the
failure. If a railroad representative is
unable to speak directly to the FRA
Drug and Alcohol Program Manager, the
representative must leave a detailed
voicemail explaining the circumstances
and reasons for the railroad’s failure to
obtain PAT specimens. The purpose of
this telephonic report is to assist both
railroads and FRA in determining
whether a refusal has occurred.
Paragraph (c) previously required a
railroad to maintain records explaining
why PAT testing was not performed
within four hours of a qualifying event.
FRA is deleting this requirement from
§ 219.209 because it is already
addressed in § 219.203(d)(1), as
discussed above in the section-bysection analysis for that section.
clarification, FRA is adding that a
railroad must have additional
information regarding an employee’s
actions or inaction, independent of the
employee’s involvement in a qualifying
event, to justify holding the employee
out of service under company authority.
As with paragraph (b)’s prohibition
against standing down an employee
based solely on a confirmed laboratory
test result, reports, an employee’s
involvement in a PAT testing event is
not in itself a basis for a railroad’s
holding the employee out of regulated
service.
Section 219.211—Analysis and FollowUp
Since part 40 does not apply to FRA
PAT testing, FRA is amending
paragraph (b) of this section to adopt
part 40’s prohibition on standing down
(temporarily removing from service) an
employee based solely upon a
laboratory’s confirmation of a nonnegative test result, before the railroad’s
Medical Review Officer (MRO) has
completed the result’s verification. See
§ 40.21(a). As in part 40, a railroad may
remove an employee from regulated
service only after an MRO has verified
that the employee has had a confirmed
positive test, an adulterated test, or a
substituted test.
As amended, paragraph (c) now
provides the address of the FRA
Associate Administrator for Railroad
Safety.
For consistency throughout this part,
in paragraph (e), FRA is substituting
‘‘Drug and Alcohol Program Manager’’
for ‘‘Alcohol/Drug Program Manager.’’
Also, to enable employees to respond to
their test results more easily, FRA is
allowing responses to be sent by email.
Paragraph (g)(3) previously provided
that FRA’s PAT testing program does
not authorize railroads to hold an
employee out of service pending the
receipt of the test results, ‘‘nor does it
restrict a railroad from taking such
action in an appropriate case.’’ As
As proposed, reasonable suspicion
testing remains in subpart D while
reasonable cause testing is now in
subpart E; this division underscores the
importance of the differences between
these types of tests, despite their
similarity in names. (To accommodate
this restructuring, the Identification of
Troubled Employees requirements
previously in subpart E have been
moved to new subpart K.)
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Section 219.213—Refusals;
Consequences
Paragraph (b) now requires a railroad
to provide written notice to an employee
who is being withdrawn from service
under this part for refusing to provide
a specimen for PAT testing. As with
§ 219.107, FRA is adopting
SAPlist.com’s suggestion to delete the
term ‘‘unlawful’’ from this section’s
heading, since it implies that there are
‘‘lawful’’ refusals. This is not a
substantive change.
Subpart D—Reasonable Suspicion
Testing
Section 219.301—Mandatory
Reasonable Suspicion Testing
Paragraph (a) clarifies that a
reasonable suspicion alcohol test is not
required to confirm an on-duty
employee’s possession of alcohol.
Paragraph (c) requires all reasonable
suspicion tests to comply with § 219.303
(which is generally consistent with the
requirements previously found in
§ 219.300(b) and is discussed in more
detail below).
Paragraph (d) requires a regulated
employee to undergo reasonable
suspicion testing if the employee’s
condition has stabilized within eight
hours.
Section 219.303—Reasonable Suspicion
Observations
This section contains the
requirements for reasonable suspicion
observations that were formerly in
§ 219.300(b).
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Paragraph (b)
In paragraph (b), FRA clarifies that
although two supervisors are required to
make the required observations for
reasonable suspicion drug testing, only
one of these supervisors must be on-site
and trained in accordance with
§ 219.11(g). This amendment
incorporates long-standing FRA
guidance, since two on-site trained
supervisors are rarely available.
Before a reasonable suspicion drug
test can take place, a trained on-site
supervisor must describe the signs and
symptoms that the on-site supervisor
has observed of an employee’s
appearance and behavior to an off-site
supervisor, who must confirm that these
observations provide a reasonable basis
to suspect the employee of drug abuse.
Because of privacy concerns, this
communication between supervisors
may be made by telephone, but not by
radio or email.
Paragraph (c)
New paragraph (c) prohibits a railroad
from holding a regulated employee out
of service from the time of the
employee’s reasonable suspicion test to
the time of the railroad’s receipt of the
employee’s verified test result (a
practice known as ‘‘stand down’’). A
railroad may, however, use its own
authority to hold an employee out of
service during this period if the railroad
has an independent basis for doing so
(e.g., the employee is continuing to
exhibit signs and symptoms of alcohol
use).
Paragraph (d)
Paragraph (d) requires an on-site
supervisor to document as soon as
practicable the observed signs and
symptoms that were the basis for the
supervisor’s decision to reasonable
suspicion test a regulated employee.
FRA is not adopting Labor’s suggested
alternate language, which essentially
restates FRA’s own without adding any
clarification.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Section 219.305—Prompt Specimen
Collection; Time Limits
Paragraph (a)
Paragraph (a) reiterates language
formerly in § 219.302(a), which states
consistent with the need to protect life
and property, reasonable suspicion
testing must be promptly conducted
following the observations upon which
the reasonable suspicion determination
was based.
Paragraph (b)
Paragraph (b) requires a railroad to
prepare and maintain a record
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
explaining the reasons for the delay
whenever the railroad does not collect
reasonable suspicion breath and/or
urine specimens within two hours of the
determination to test. If, however, a
railroad has failed to collect reasonable
suspicion testing specimens within
eight hours of its determination to test,
the railroad must discontinue its
collection attempts and record why the
test could not be conducted. The eighthour deadline is met when the railroad
has delivered the employee to a
collection site where a collector is
present and asked the collector to begin
specimen collection.
Paragraph (b) also requires a railroad
to submit its reasonable suspicion
testing records upon request of the FRA
Drug and Alcohol Program Manager.
Paragraph (c)
Subpart E—Reasonable Cause Testing
As discussed above, FRA is dividing
reasonable suspicion and reasonable
cause testing into separate subparts to
emphasize that despite the similarity in
names, the authority and criteria for
mandatory reasonable suspicion testing
is very different from that for
discretionary reasonable cause testing.
Formerly, reasonable suspicion and
reasonable cause testing were both
located in subpart D; reasonable
suspicion testing remains in subpart D
while reasonable cause testing is moved
to subpart E. In addition, subpart E
contains new rule violations tailored to
the activities of MOW employees. FRA
has re-designated the provisions of
former subpart E as new subpart K.
Section 219.401—Authorization for
Reasonable Cause Testing
Previously, a railroad had three
options whenever the conditions for
reasonable cause testing were met; the
railroad could choose to: (1) Conduct a
reasonable cause test under FRA
authority, (2) conduct a reasonable
cause test under its own (company)
authority, or (3) not conduct a
reasonable cause test. The railroad
could switch among these choices
without advance notice. For example, a
railroad could conduct one employee’s
reasonable cause test under FRA
authority, and another’s under company
authority, without any explanation. In
many instances, an employee who had
received a reasonable cause test was
unsure as to what authority the test had
been conducted under, while the lack of
a consistency requirement led to
frequent complaints about disparate
treatment among employees.
FRA is now requiring a railroad to
choose between using FRA authority or
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
37909
company authority for reasonable cause
testing. A railroad that chooses to use
FRA authority must announce its choice
to its employees and must use that FRA
authority exclusively, by (1) providing
notice of its selection of FRA authority
in its educational materials; (2)
specifying that FRA testing is
authorized only after ‘‘train accidents’’
and ‘‘train incidents,’’ as defined in
§ 219.5; and (3) adding new rule
violations or other errors to § 219.403 as
bases to test. Once a railroad has
announced that it will be using FRA
authority exclusively for reasonable
cause testing, the railroad is prohibited
from conducting reasonable cause tests
under its own authority after an event
listed in § 219.403. The railroad may
always, however, use its own authority
to test for events that are outside of the
FRA criteria for reasonable cause testing
listed in this subpart.
Section 219.403—Requirements for
Reasonable Cause Testing
This section authorizes FRA
reasonable cause testing after ‘‘train
accidents’’ and ‘‘train incidents’’ as
defined in § 219.5, but not after all part
225 reportable ‘‘accidents/incidents.’’
As amended, railroads are authorized to
conduct FRA reasonable cause testing
for additional rule violations or other
errors that reflect the expansion of part
219 to MOW workers, relate to signal
systems and highway-rail grade crossing
warning systems, and reflect recent
amendments to 49 CFR part 218,
Railroad Operating Practices.
Paragraph (a)
Section 219.301(b)(2) previously
authorized reasonable cause testing
following ‘‘an accident or incident
reportable under part 225’’ when ‘‘a
supervisory employee of the railroad
has a reasonable belief, based on
specific, articulable facts, that the
employee’s acts or omissions
contributed to the occurrence or severity
of the accident or incident.’’ In this rule,
FRA is clarifying that the terms
‘‘accident/incident’’ and ‘‘accident or
incident reportable under part 225’’ in
§ 219.301(b)(2) do not authorize FRA
reasonable cause testing after all part
225 reportable accidents/incidents.
As defined in § 225.5, the term
‘‘accident/incident’’ includes employee
injuries and illnesses that conform with
OSHA’s recordkeeping/reporting
requirements, but do not otherwise fall
within FRA’s railroad safety
jurisdiction. See Accident Reporting
Guide at 1–2 (‘‘FRA’s accident/incident
reporting regulations that concern
railroad occupational casualties should
be maintained, to the extent practicable,
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37910
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
in general conformity with OSHA’s
recordkeeping and reporting
regulations’’).
In its audits, FRA has found
numerous instances where this
confusion in terms has resulted in a
railroad deciding to conduct an FRA
reasonable cause test after every
reportable injury, even if that injury was
unconnected with the movement of ontrack equipment (e.g., a slip, trip, or fall
that was not related to the movement of
on-track equipment where the railroad
had no basis to believe that the
employee’s act or omission contributed
to the injury (which is also a violation
of existing § 219.301(b)(2)).
Furthermore, the § 225.5 definition of
‘‘accident/incident’’ includes
occupational illnesses, such as carpal
tunnel syndrome, carbon monoxide
poisoning, noise-induced hearing loss,
and dust diseases of the lungs, as well
as circumstances such as a suicide
attempt made by an on-duty employee,
that do not authorize FRA reasonable
cause testing. See Accident Reporting
Guide at 33, and at Appendix E–2
through E–5.
To correct this confusion, FRA is
specifying in § 219.403(a) that
reasonable cause testing is authorized
following ‘‘train accidents’’ and ‘‘train
incidents,’’ as defined by § 219.5, when
a responsible railroad supervisor has a
reasonable belief, based on specific,
articulable facts, that the individual
employee’s acts or omissions
contributed to the occurrence or severity
of the train accident or train incident.
By using the terms ‘‘train accident’’ and
‘‘train incident,’’ FRA is attempting to
limit the circumstances under which
FRA reasonable cause testing is
authorized to a subset of part 225
reportable accident/incidents. (A
railroad may, of course, perform a
reasonable cause test under its own
authority for an accident/incident that
does not qualify as a train accident or
train incident.)
For consistency with the remainder of
this subpart, FRA is also substituting the
term ‘‘responsible railroad supervisor’’
for ‘‘supervisory employee.’’
Paragraph (b)
Paragraph (b) contains a list of rule
violations and other errors that are
grounds for FRA reasonable cause
testing whenever a regulated employee
is directly involved. The rule violations
and other errors previously in
§ 219.301(b)(3) can now be found in
paragraphs (b)(1)–(4), (b)(6)–(8), and
(b)(10) of this section, without any
substantive amendments. Paragraphs
(b)(5), (b)(9), (b)(11)–(12), and (b)(13)–
(18) contain additional rule violations
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
and other errors that are new grounds
for FRA reasonable cause testing, as
discussed below.
• Additional Rule Violations or Other
Errors Related to Railroad Operating
Practices
In paragraphs (b)(5) and (9), FRA is
adding two new categories to the rule
violations or other errors that are
grounds for reasonable cause testing.
These additional categories reflect
recent amendments to 49 CFR part
218—Railroad Operating Practices.
In 2008, FRA amended part 218 to
require railroads to adopt and comply
with operating rules regarding shoving
and pushing movements and the
operation of switches. Many of these
operating rule requirements for switches
already provided bases for FRA
reasonable cause testing, such as
‘‘[a]lignment of a switch in violation of
a railroad rule, failure to align a switch
as required for movement, operation of
a switch under a train, or unauthorized
running through a switch’’ and
‘‘[e]ntering a crossover before both
switches are lined for movement or
restoring either switch to normal
position before the crossover movement
is completed.’’ § 219.301(b)(3)(iv) and
(vii). Nevertheless, in paragraph (b)(5),
FRA is authorizing reasonable cause
testing if a regulated employee fails to
restore and secure a main track switch
when required.
Although § 218.99 requires a railroad
to adopt specific operating rules
governing shoving and pushing
movements, FRA is authorizing
reasonable cause testing only for
§ 218.99 violations that can pose
significant safety concerns, as discussed
below. For instance, a railroad is
authorized to conduct FRA reasonable
cause testing on a regulated employee
who fails to provide point protection in
accordance with § 218.99(b)(3), but is
not authorized to do so if a regulated
employee fails to conduct a job briefing.
• Additional Rule Violations or Other
Errors Related to MOW Employees
Paragraphs (b)(13)–(17) authorize FRA
reasonable cause testing for additional
rules violations and errors related to the
performance of MOW activities:
Paragraph (b)(13) authorizes testing for
the failure of a machine operator that
results in a collision between a roadway
maintenance machine and/or other ontrack equipment or a regulated
employee; paragraph (b)(14) authorizes
testing for the failure of a roadway
worker-in-charge to notify all affected
employees when releasing working
limits; paragraph (b)(15) authorizes
testing for the failure of a flagman or
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
watchman/lookout to notify employees
of an approaching train or other on-track
equipment; paragraph (b)(16) authorizes
testing for the failure to ascertain ontrack safety before fouling a track; and
paragraph (b)(17) authorizes testing for
the improper use of individual train
detection (ITD) in a manual interlocking
or control point.
• Additional Rule Violations or Other
Errors Related to Covered Service
As proposed, FRA is authorizing
reasonable cause testing for three
additional rule violations or other errors
primarily addressing the actions of
covered employees.
First, paragraph (b)(11) authorizes a
railroad to conduct FRA reasonable
cause testing if a regulated employee
has interfered with the normal
functioning of any grade crossing signal
system or any signal or train control
device without first taking measures to
provide for the safety of highway traffic
or train operations which depend on the
normal functioning of such a device
(e.g., by temporarily installing a jumper
cable and failing to remove it after
finishing repairs or testing). This
includes the types of unlawful
interference described in § 234.209
(grade crossing systems) and § 236.4
(signals).
Second, paragraph (b)(12) authorizes a
railroad to conduct FRA reasonable
cause testing if a regulated employee
has failed to perform required stop-andflag duties after a malfunction of a grade
crossing signal system.
Third, paragraph (b)(18) authorizes a
railroad to conduct FRA reasonable
cause testing on a regulated employee
whose failure to apply three point
protection (by fully applying the
locomotive and train brakes, centering
the reverser, and placing the generator
field switch in the off position) results
in a reportable injury to a regulated
employee.
A contracting company that performs
regulated service for a railroad is
authorized, but not required, to conduct
FRA reasonable cause tests on its
regulated employees. Conversely, a
railroad is authorized to conduct FRA
reasonable cause testing on its
contractors when they are performing
regulated service on the railroad’s
behalf.
Section 219.405—Documentation
Requirements
Although reasonable cause testing
remains discretionary, a railroad must
create and maintain written
documentation of the basis for a
reasonable cause test if that test is
conducted under FRA authority.
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Accordingly, the railroad supervisor
who made the determination that
reasonable cause exists must promptly
document the observations or facts (e.g.,
the amount of property damage, the rule
that was violated, the role of the
employee) that were the basis for this
determination, although the
documentation does not have to be
completed before the FRA reasonable
cause testing has been conducted.
Section 219.407—Prompt Specimen
Collection; Time Limitations
This section clarifies that the eighthour time period for conducting a
reasonable cause test runs from the time
a railroad supervisor is notified of the
occurrence of the train accident, train
incident, or rule violation that is the
basis for the test.
Section 219.409—Limitations on
Authority
Paragraph (a)
This paragraph contains an amended
version of language that was previously
in § 219.301(e), As amended, this
paragraph states that: (1) If an event
qualifies for mandatory PAT testing, a
railroad is prohibited from conducting
FRA reasonable cause tests in lieu of, or
in addition to, the required PAT tests.
Second, FRA is removing the word
‘‘compulsory,’’ which misleadingly
implies that FRA reasonable cause
testing is required, when it is optional
but authorized in certain situations.
Third, FRA is removing the second
sentence of § 219.301(e), which, in part,
stated that ‘‘breath test authority is
authorized in any case where breath test
results can be obtained in a timely
manner at the scene of an accident and
conduct of such tests does not
materially impede the collection of
specimens under Subpart C of this
part.’’ FRA believes this sentence is
confusing because FRA is proposing, in
§ 219.203(c), to allow only PAT breath
alcohol testing, although such testing
should be recorded on DOT’s alcohol
custody and control form.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Paragraph (b)
For reasons similar to those discussed
in § 219.211(b), paragraph (b) of this
section prohibits a railroad from holding
a regulated employee out of service
pending the results of an FRA
reasonable cause test. A railroad may,
however, hold an employee out of
service under its own authority.
Paragraph (c)
Paragraph (c) requires a supervisor to
make a separate reasonable cause
determination for each individual in a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
train crew, rather than a collective
decision to test the crew as a whole.
Subpart F—Pre-Employment Tests
Section 219.501—Pre-Employment Drug
Testing
Paragraph (a)
A regulated railroad employee must
have a negative Federal pre-employment
drug test result for each railroad for
which the employee performs regulated
service. This requirement does not
apply to contractor employees who
perform regulated service for the
railroad.
Paragraph (b)
As proposed, FRA is moving language
previously in this paragraph to
paragraph (e), where it will be discussed
below.
Paragraph (b) now addresses the preemployment drug testing requirements
for contractor employees. In contrast to
the pre-employment drug testing
requirements for regulated employees
discussed in paragraph (a) above, FRA
is not requiring a contractor employee
who performs regulated service for
multiple railroads to have a negative
Federal pre-employment drug test result
for each railroad. Instead, each railroad
only has to verify and document that the
contractor employee has a negative
Federal pre-employment drug test result
on file with the contractor who is his or
her direct employer. However, a
contractor employee is required to have
a new Federal pre-employment drug test
if he or she switches direct employers
by working for a different contractor
who provides regulated service to
railroads.
Paragraph (c)
A railroad is not required to conduct
an FRA pre-employment drug test on an
applicant or first-time transfer to
regulated service if the railroad has
already conducted a pre-employment
drug test with a negative test result on
the applicant or first-time transfer under
the authority of another DOT agency. In
most cases, this agency will be FMCSA,
because railroads often require signal
maintainers and MOW employees to
hold a CDL as a condition of their
employment, and a negative FMCSA
pre-employment drug test result is one
of the prerequisites to obtaining a CDL.
See 49 CFR 382.301. This amendment
increases a railroad’s hiring flexibility
by allowing the railroad to transfer a
CDL holder to first-time regulated
service without having to conduct an
FRA pre-employment drug test or
having to wait for a negative test result
(a railroad could, however, choose to
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
37911
perform a new pre-employment drug
test under its own authority). Since
many MOW employees already hold
CDLs because their jobs require the
operation of railroad commercial motor
vehicles, this limited exception will
substantially lessen the number of preemployment drug tests railroads will
have to perform after the effective date
of this final rule.
This exception applies, however, only
when an applicant or first-time
transfer’s negative DOT pre-employment
drug test result is the result of a test
conducted by the railroad itself. In other
words, a CDL holder who performs
regulated service for multiple railroads
must have a separate negative preemployment drug test result for each
railroad. For example, a CDL holder
who already has a negative DOT preemployment drug test for Railroad A
must still have a negative FRA preemployment drug test result for Railroad
B before he or she can begin performing
regulated service for Railroad B.
Paragraph (d)
As proposed, new paragraph (d)
specifies that an applicant must
withdraw his or her application before
the drug testing process begins if the
applicant wants to decline a preemployment drug test and have no
record kept of that declination.
Paragraph (e)
In new paragraph (e), FRA exempts
from pre-employment drug testing: (1)
An employee who began performing
MOW activities for a railroad before the
effective date of this final rule; and (2)
an employee who began performing
regulated service for a small railroad (as
defined in § 219.3(c)) before the
effective date of this final rule. Both
exemptions apply only so long as the
employee continues to work for the
same railroad that he or she was
working for before the effective date of
the final rule.
Section 219.502—Pre-Employment
Alcohol Testing
This section addresses optional preemployment alcohol testing.
Paragraph (a)(5)
Paragraph (a)(5) prohibits a railroad
from permitting a regulated employee
with an alcohol concentration of 0.04 or
greater from performing regulated
service until the employee has
completed the return-to-duty process in
§ 219.104(d).
Paragraph (b)
Paragraph (b) of this section
(addressing pre-employment alcohol
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37912
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
testing) previously contained language
identical to § 219.501(b) (addressing
pre-employment drug testing), which
provides that, as used in subpart H, the
term covered employee includes an
applicant for pre-employment testing
only. It also provided that no record
may be maintained if an applicant
declines to be tested and withdraws his
or her application for employment. As
discussed above in § 219.501(b), FRA
has amended the language in
§ 219.502(b) to clarify that an individual
must decline to participate in a preemployment alcohol test by
withdrawing his or her application
before the testing process begins. As
defined by DOT in § 40.243(a), the
testing process begins when an
individually wrapped or sealed
mouthpiece is selected by the collector
or the employee.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Section 219.503—Notification; Records
The first and second sentences of this
section require railroads to provide
medical review of pre-employment drug
tests and to ‘‘notify’’ an applicant of the
‘‘results of the drug and alcohol test’’ as
provided for by subpart H. FRA is
amending both of these sentences to
clarify that subpart H adopts the
requirements found in part 40. FRA is
also amending the second sentence to
clarify that a railroad must provide
written notice to an applicant who has
had any type of non-negative FRA test
result (i.e., not just a positive, but also
an adulteration, substitution, or refusal).
A railroad is not required, however, to
provide written notification to an
applicant who has had a negative FRA
pre-employment alcohol or drug test
result.
FRA is also amending the third
sentence of this section to clarify that a
railroad must maintain a record of each
application it denies because of the
applicant’s non-negative FRA preemployment test. A railroad must
maintain a record for each individual
who has had a non-negative test result
on a FRA pre-employment test, even if
the railroad denied the individual’s
application for employment, because an
individual who has had such a result
must comply with the return-to-service
and follow-up testing requirements of
part 40 before he or she can begin
performing DOT safety-sensitive
functions for any employer regulated by
a DOT agency. A railroad does not have
to maintain a record, however, if an
applicant withdraws his or her
application to perform regulated service
before the testing process begins.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
Section 219.505—Non-Negative Tests
and Refusals
Subpart I—Annual Report
Previously, this section prohibited an
individual who ‘‘refuses’’ a preemployment test from performing
covered service based upon the
application and examination with
respect to which such refusal was made.
As proposed, FRA has amended this
section to specifically prohibit an
individual who has refused or who had
a non-negative (i.e., a positive,
adulterated, or substituted test result)
pre-employment test result from
performing DOT safety-sensitive
functions for any DOT-regulated
employer until the individual has
completed the Federal return-to-duty
process in § 219.104(d). As amended,
this section conforms with § 40.25(e),
which prohibits an employer who has
information that an individual has
violated a DOT agency drug or alcohol
regulation from using that individual to
perform DOT safety-sensitive functions
until the employer receives information
that the individual has complied with
the return-to-duty requirements of part
40 or any DOT agency.
FRA received no comments on its
minor editorial changes to this section,
which are adopted as proposed.
Subpart G—Random Alcohol and Drug
Testing Programs
To achieve deterrence, a random
testing program must ensure that each
covered employee (including volunteers
and probationary employees of a
railroad or a contractor to a railroad),
believes that he or she is subject to
random testing without advance notice
each time the employee is on duty and
subject to performing covered service.
FRA received no objections to its
proposal to subject an employee who
performs MOW activities to the same
random testing requirements as one who
performs covered service. Accordingly,
each railroad must submit for FRA
approval a random testing plan that
ensures each regulated employee
believes he or she is subject to random
testing without advance warning each
time the employee is on-duty and
subject to performing regulated service.
As proposed, FRA is revising and
expanding subpart G,-to clarify and
consolidate requirements and toincorporate longstanding published
FRA guidance. FRA received no
comment on the majority of these
changes, which are adopted as proposed
without additional discussion.
Subpart H—Drug and Alcohol Testing
Procedures
FRA received no comments on its
minor editorial changes to this section,
which are adopted as proposed.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
Section 219.800—Annual Reports
Subpart J—Recordkeeping
Requirements
Section 219.901—Retention of Alcohol
and Drug Testing Records
FRA received no comments on its
proposals to ease recordkeeping burdens
by consolidating requirements,
removing others, and allowing still
others to be maintained electronically.
Accordingly, FRA is adopting these
proposals without further discussion,
except for proposed paragraph (c)(4)(iv),
which contained an incorrect reference
to prescription drug training records
under § 219.103 and FRA has not
adopted.
Subpart K—Referral Programs
For a variety of reasons, commenters
found FRA’s proposal to replace its selfreferral, co-worker report, and
alternative policy requirements with
peer support program requirements, to
be both confusing and ill-advised.
NCRMA and SMART (from this point
forward collectively referred to as
‘‘Labor,’’ unless a comment was
submitted by only one labor
organization), in particular, raised
objections and called for clarifications.
As Labor noted, the concept of a
voluntary peer referral program arose
from ‘‘Operation Redblock,’’ a private
rail industry initiative to address
alcohol abuse. Labor expressed deep
misgivings, both that FRA’s proposed
peer support programs could harm these
existing railroad programs, and that
FRA’s proposal to audit each program
would invade individual privacy and
undermine employee trust in the
program. Labor also criticized FRA’s
proposal to allow an EAP counselor to
function as an alternative to a trained
drug and alcohol counselor, because an
EAP counselor rarely has specific
expertise in abuse and addiction issues.
(Typically, an EAP program addresses a
broad range of issues, such as marital or
financial problems.) Similarly, Labor
objected to using peer counselors,
noting that a peer is usually a volunteer
who provides empathy and advice
based on his or her own drug and
alcohol problems, without a counseling
or medical degree.
The Associations suggested that FRA
use the term ‘‘peer prevention’’ instead
of ‘‘peer support’’ to emphasize that
these programs should be proactive in
nature. The Associations also warned
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
that FRA should audit and release
aggregate program data only, because an
employee could be discouraged from
self-referring if the employee knew that
his or her individual data would be
subject to FRA examination. Like Labor,
the Associations noted that a peer
support group is usually composed of
selected peers and volunteers rather
than medical professionals; the
Associations therefore supported
allowing an employee who self-refers to
have the option of receiving counseling
and treatment from a Drug Abuse
Counselor (DAC). Overall, the
Associations found FRA’s proposed
subpart K flawed and redundant of the
voluntary referral provisions already in
§ 219.403.
After consideration, FRA agrees that
its proposal to mandate the
establishment of peer support programs
was unnecessary, since privately run
railroad programs and FRA’s own
subpart E policies have both proven
effective in identifying and helping
employees with drug and alcohol abuse
issues. FRA also agrees that its proposed
peer support programs could interfere
with, or possibly even be detrimental to,
existing railroad self-referral programs.
Therefore, instead of requiring the
adoption of peer prevention programs,
FRA is revising and moving its
voluntary referral, co-worker report, and
alternative policy requirements from
subpart E (which has been revised to
address reasonable cause testing) to new
subpart K.
With the exception of its proposal for
non-peer referral programs, which FRA
is authorizing but not requiring under
this rule, FRA is not adopting its
proposal to require peer support
programs. To correspond with this
decision, FRA is retitling this subpart
‘‘Referral Programs’’ instead of the
proposed ‘‘Peer Support Programs.’’ As
explained in the NPRM, FRA believes
subpart E’s previous title ‘‘Identification
of Troubled Employees,’’ to be outdated
since the primary purpose of that
subpart had always been to evaluate and
treat, not merely identify, employees
who have substance abuse issues. FRA
is also, as proposed, substituting the
more commonly used term ‘‘program’’
for ‘‘policy.’’
In addition, FRA is adopting the
Associations’ recommendation to
simplify this rule by requiring all the
evaluation, counseling, treatment, and
recommendation required by this part to
be performed by a DAC. As defined in
49 CFR 242.7, a DAC meets all the
credentialing and qualifying
requirements of a Substance Abuse
Professional (SAP). Title 49 CFR 40.3
defines an SAP A SAP as an individual
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
who evaluates an employee who has
violated a DOT drug and alcohol
regulation and makes recommendations
concerning education, treatment,
follow-up testing, and aftercare. By
definition, therefore, a SAP cannot
perform a role in a voluntary referral
program. In contrast, a DAC can treat
and evaluate an employee enrolled in a
voluntary referral program, since the
DAC’s involvement is not triggered by
an employee’s drug or alcohol violation.
With this caveat, a DAC serves the same
function in part this part as a SAP does
in part 40.
As mentioned above, FRA is adding
an option for a ‘‘non-peer referral’’
program, which authorizes, but does not
require, a railroad to accept referrals
from family members, supervisors, labor
representatives, and other individuals
who are not co-workers but who have
knowledge of an employee’s drug abuse
problems. FRA received no objections to
its proposal of this additional referral
program. To accommodate this third
program, FRA is retitling its required
‘‘co-worker report’’ program as a ‘‘coworker referral’’ program so that
henceforth these three programs—
voluntary, co-worker, and non-peer—
will collectively be referred to as
‘‘referral programs.’’
With the addition of the option for a
non-peer program, FRA is reprinting
requirements formerly found in subpart
E, in a format that breaks these
requirements down to make them easier
to understand and implement. Both
partially excepted small railroads and
contractors are excluded from subpart
K. Class III railroads that do not qualify
for the small railroad exception must
comply, however.
Section 219.1001—Requirements for
Referral Programs
Paragraph (b)
This paragraph generally outlines the
purposes of mandatory voluntary
referral and co-worker referral programs.
The descriptions of these programs are
reworded from those previously in
subpart E, and no substantive changes
are intended.
Paragraph (c)
This paragraph generally outlines the
purposes of optional non-peer referral
and alternative programs. The
description of an alternate program is
reworded from the one previously in
subpart E, and no substantive change is
intended.
Paragraph (c)(1)
Although FRA is not otherwise
adopting its proposal to require ‘‘peer
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
37913
support groups,’’ FRA is authorizing a
railroad to establish a ‘‘non-peer
referral’’ program if it chooses to do so.
A ‘‘non-peer’’ is an individual who is
not considered to be an employee’s coworker, such as a trained supervisor,
representative of an employee’s
collective bargaining organization, or
family member.
Paragraphs (d)(1), (2), and (5)
These paragraphs restate general
conditions for referral programs
previously found in subpart E. No
substantive changes are intended.
Paragraphs (d)(3)–(4)
These paragraphs prohibit referral
programs from interfering with the
return-to-duty requirements in subpart
B and the reasonable suspicion testing
requirements in subpart D.
Section 219.1003—Referral Program
Conditions
With the exception of the paragraphs
discussed below, the required
allowances, conditions, and procedures
in this section were previously
contained in subpart E.
Paragraph (g)
As proposed, FRA is removing its
previous minimum of 45 days leave of
absence to allow the DAC to determine
the period of time an employee needs.
Paragraph (h)(3)
Formerly, only co-worker referrals
allowed railroads to condition an
employee’s return to regulated service
upon successful completion of a returnto-service medical evaluation. As
proposed, a railroad may impose this
condition on self-referrals and non-peer
referrals as well.
Paragraph (h)(4)
As proposed, a railroad must return
an employee to regulated service within
five working days of a DAC’s
recommendation that the employee is fit
to return.
Paragraph (i)
As proposed, this paragraph prohibits
a person or entity from changing a
DAC’s evaluation of an employee or
recommendation for assistance. Only
the DAC who made the initial
evaluation may modify that evaluation
and any follow-up recommendations
based upon new or additional
information.
Paragraph (j)
As proposed, the confidentiality
conditions in this paragraph, which had
previously applied only to candidates
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37914
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
for locomotive certification and
locomotive engineers, have been
expanded to cover candidates for
conductor certification and conductors.
Similarly, these requirements no longer
apply only to voluntary referrals; coworker and non-peer referrals are also
covered.
Paragraph (k)
As proposed, a regulated employee
who enters a co-worker or non-peer
referral for a verified violation of
§ 219.101 or § 219.102 must contact a
DAC within a reasonable period of time,
as specified by the railroad’s programs.
If a regulated employee does not contact
a DAC within this time period, the
railroad may investigate the employee’s
cooperation and compliance with the
referral program.
Paragraph (l)
As proposed, paragraph (l) requires a
DAC to complete a regulated employee’s
evaluation within 10 working days of
the employee’s entering a referral
program and contacting the DAC. If
more than one evaluation is required,
the DAC must complete these
evaluations within 20 working days.
These time frames, which had
previously applied only to co-worker
referrals, now apply to voluntary and
non-peer referrals as well.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Paragraph (m)
As proposed, a referral program may
not require follow-up treatment, care, or
testing that exceeds 24 months beyond
the regulated employee’s removal from
service, unless the regulated employee
had committed a substantiated part 219
violation.
Section 219.1005—Optional Provisions
This section describes provisions that
a railroad is authorized, but not required
to, include in its referral program. The
inclusion of any of these provisions may
be conditioned on the agreement of an
affected labor organization.
Paragraph (a) permits a referral
program to waive confidentiality if a
regulated employee refuses to cooperate
in a course of education, counseling, or
treatment recommended by a DAC or if
the railroad determines later, after
investigation, that a regulated employee
was involved in an alcohol or drugrelated disciplinary offense growing out
of subsequent conduct. This text was
previously found in subpart E for
voluntary referrals.
Paragraph (a) specifies that nothing in
subpart K prevents a railroad or labor
organization from adopting, publishing,
and implementing referral program
policies that offer more favorable
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
conditions to regulated employees with
substance abuse problems, consistent
with the railroad’s responsibility to
prevent violations of §§ 219.101 and
219.102. This language was previously
found in subpart E.
Paragraph (b) requires an alternate
program to have the concurrence of the
recognized representatives of the
regulated employees as shown by a
collective bargaining agreement or other
document describing the class or craft of
employees to which the alternate
program applies. This agreement must
expressly reference subpart K and the
intention of the railroad and the
employee representatives that the
alternate program applies in lieu of the
programs required by subpart K. This
language is similar to that previously
found in subpart E.
Paragraph (c) requires a railroad to
submit a copy of the agreement or other
document described in paragraph (b),
along with a copy of the alternate
program described in paragraph (a), to
the FRA Drug and Alcohol Program
Manager for approval. FRA will review
the program to see if it meets the general
standards and intent of § 219.1003. If an
alternate policy is amended or revoked,
the railroad must notify FRA at least 30
days before the amendment or
revocation’s effective date. This last
requirement was previously in subpart
E.
Paragraph (d) specifies that § 219.1007
does not excuse a railroad from the
requirement to adopt, publish, and
implement § 219.1003 programs for any
group of regulated employees not
covered by an approved alternate
program. A virtually identical provision
was previously located in subpart E.
Paragraph (e) references § 219.105(c),
which specifies that FRA has the
authority to audit any railroad alcohol
and/or drug use education, prevention,
identification, and rehabilitation
program (including, but not limited to,
alternate referral programs), to ensure
that the program is not designed or
implemented to circumvent or
otherwise undermine Federal
requirements.
Appendix A
Appendix A to this part contains a
schedule of civil penalties for use in
enforcing this part’s requirements. FRA
has revised the penalty schedule to
correspond to the restructuring of and
addition of new sections to this part.
Because such penalty schedules are
statements of agency policy, notice and
comment are not required before their
issuance. See 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A).
Nonetheless, FRA has revised the
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
penalty schedule consistent with the
previous, public schedule.
VII. Regulatory Impact and Notices
A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
and DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures
This final rule has been evaluated in
accordance with existing policies and
procedures and determined to be nonsignificant, under both Executive Orders
12866, and 13563, and DOT policies
and procedures. See 44 FR 11034, Feb.
26, 1979. FRA has prepared and placed
in the docket (No. FRA–2009–0039) a
regulatory impact analysis (RIA)
addressing the economic impact of this
final rule. Document inspection and
copying facilities are available at the
DOT Central Docket Management
Facility located in Room W12–140 on
the Ground level of the West Building,
1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC 20590. Docket material
is also available for inspection
electronically through the Federal
eRulemaking Portal at https://
www.regulations.gov. As part of the RIA,
FRA has assessed quantitative
measurements of the cost and benefit
streams expected to result from
implementation of this final rule.
Overall, the final rule will result in
safety benefits and potential business
benefits for the railroad industry. It will
also, however, generate an additional
burden on railroads and railroad
contractors, mainly due to the expenses
associated with increased drug and
alcohol testing and program
administration, particularly regarding
MOW employees.
The costs will primarily be derived
from implementation of the statutory
mandate to expand the scope of part 219
to cover MOW employees. The benefits
will primarily accrue from the expected
injury, fatality, and property damage
avoidance resulting from the expansion
of part 219 to cover MOW employees, as
well as the PAT testing threshold
increase.
Table 1 summarizes the quantified
costs and benefits expected to accrue
from implementation of the final rule
over a 20-year period. It presents costs
associated with the various types of
drug and alcohol testing in the final rule
and details the statutory costs (those
required by the RSIA mandate to
expand part 219 to MOW employees),
discretionary costs (those that are due to
the non-RSIA requirements), and the
total of the two types of costs. Table 1
also presents the quantified benefits
expected to accrue over a 20-year period
and details the statutory benefits (those
that result from implementation of the
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
RSIA mandate to expand part 219 to
MOW employees) and the discretionary
benefits (those that are due to the nonRSIA requirements). The benefits
include not only injury, fatality, and
property damage avoidance (accident
reduction benefits), but also the savings,
or benefit, that will accrue from fewer
PAT tests being conducted due to FRA’s
increasing the property damage
threshold for major train accidents.
For the 20-year period analyzed, the
estimated quantified cost that will be
imposed on industry totals
approximately $24.3 million
(undiscounted), with discounted costs
totaling $14.2 million (Present Value
37915
(PV), 7 percent) and $18.9 million (PV,
3 percent). The estimated quantified
benefits for this 20-year period total
approximately $115.8 million
(undiscounted), with discounted
benefits totally $57.4 million (PV, 7
percent) and $83.6 million (PV, 3
percent).
Statutory
Discretionary
Total
PAT Testing—Adding MOW ............................................................................................
PAT Testing—Impact Def + Xing ....................................................................................
Reasonable Suspicion Testing ........................................................................................
Pre-Employment Testing—Adding MOW ........................................................................
Pre-Employment Testing—Sm, RR .................................................................................
Random Testing ..............................................................................................................
Annual Reporting .............................................................................................................
Recordkeeping Requirement ...........................................................................................
$52,000
............................
842,398
673,897
............................
20,863,074
160,911
1,397,840
............................
$241,974
............................
............................
29,904
............................
............................
............................
$52,000
241,974
842,398
673,897
29,904
20,863,074
160,911
1,397,840
Costs Subtotal ..........................................................................................................
23,990,120
271,878
24,261,998
Accident Reduction ..........................................................................................................
PAT Testing Threshold Reduction ..................................................................................
115,369,281
............................
............................
388,295
115,369,281
388,295
Benefits Subtotal ......................................................................................................
115,369,281
388,295
115,757,576
Net Benefits .......................................................................................................
91,379,161
116,417
91,495,578
Costs (20 year)
Benefits (20 year)
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Overall, the RIA demonstrates that the
costs, both statutory and discretionary,
associated with implementing the final
rule are expected to be outweighed by
the benefits resulting from reduced
injuries, fatalities, and property damage
attributable to drug and alcohol misuse
by regulated employees. FRA has also
found that the costs will be outweighed
by injury and fatality mitigation alone,
and benefits will further accrue due to
reduced property damage. Specifically,
the statutory requirements incur a
discounted 20-year cost of $14.1 million
(PV, 7 percent) and $18.6 million (PV,
3 percent). The discretionary portion of
the costs to incur over the next 20-years
is $143,665 (PV, 7 percent) and
$202,023 (PV, 3 percent), with
discounted 20-year benefits of $205,574
(PV, 7 percent) and $288,776 (PV, 3
percent).
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act and
Executive Order 13272; Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Assessment
FRA developed the final rule in
accordance with Executive Order 13272
(‘‘Proper Consideration of Small Entities
in Agency Rulemaking’’) and DOT’s
procedures and policies to promote
compliance with the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) to
ensure potential impacts of rules on
small entities are properly considered.
Furthermore, FRA invited all interested
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
parties to submit data and information
regarding the Initial Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (IRFA) and did
receive two comments about it during
the public comment period.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act
requires an agency to review regulations
to assess their impact on small entities.
An agency must conduct a regulatory
flexibility analysis unless it determines
and certifies that a rule is not expected
to have a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small
entities.
The final rule will apply to all
employees of railroad carriers,
contractors, or subcontractors to railroad
carriers who perform maintenance-ofway activities. Based on information
available, FRA estimates that less than
14 percent of the total railroad costs
associated with implementing the final
rule will be borne by small entities. This
percentage is based directly upon the
percentage of affected employees
estimated to be working for small
entities. Small entities were exempt
from certain requirements of the prior
rule, continue to be exempt from certain
requirements of this final rule, and
otherwise bear proportional burden for
the requirements based upon the
number of regulated employees each
entity employs. Small entities will not
incur greater costs per employee than
the larger entities.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
FRA generally uses conservative
assumptions in its costing of rules;
based on those assumptions, FRA
estimates that the cost for the final rule
will be approximately $24 million for
the next 20 years for the railroad
industry. There are 695 railroads that
are considered small for purposes of this
analysis, and together they comprise
approximately 93 percent of the
railroads impacted directly by this final
regulation. The 14 percent of the burden
will be spread amongst the 695 entities,
based proportionally upon the number
of employees each has. Thus, although
a substantial number of small entities in
this sector will likely be impacted, the
economic impact on them will likely be
insignificant. This RFA is not intended
to be a stand-alone document. To get a
better understanding of the total costs
for the railroad industry (which form
the basis for the estimates in this RFA),
or more cost detail on any specific
requirement, please see the RIA that
FRA has placed in the docket for this
rulemaking.
1. Description of Regulated Entities
The ‘‘universe’’ of the entities
considered in an RFA generally
includes only those small entities that
can reasonably expect to be directly
regulated by this final action. The types
of small entities potentially affected by
this final rule are: (1) Small railroads;
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
37916
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(2) small contractors that engage in
MOW operations; and (3) small
contractors that provide HOS services
(such as dispatching, signal, and train
and engine services).
‘‘Small entity’’ is defined in 5 U.S.C.
601(3) as having the same meaning as
‘‘small business concern’’ under Section
3 of the Small Business Act. This
includes any small business concern
that is independently owned and
operated, and is not dominant in its
field of operation. Section 601(4)
likewise includes within the definition
of ‘‘small entities’’ not-for-profit
enterprises that are independently
owned and operated, and are not
dominant in their field of operation. The
U.S. Small Business Administration
(SBA) stipulates in its size standards
that the largest a railroad business firm
that is ‘‘for profit’’ may be and still be
classified as a ‘‘small entity’’ is 1,500
employees for ‘‘Line Haul Operating
Railroads’’ and 500 employees for
‘‘Switching and Terminal
Establishments.’’ Additionally, 5 U.S.C.
601(5) defines as ‘‘small entities’’
governments of cities, counties, towns,
townships, villages, school districts, or
special districts with populations less
than 50,000.
Federal agencies may adopt their own
size standards for small entities in
consultation with SBA and in
conjunction with public comment.
Pursuant to that authority, FRA has
published a final statement of agency
policy that formally establishes ‘‘small
entities’’ or ‘‘small businesses’’ as being
railroads, contractors, and hazardous
materials shippers that meet the revenue
requirements of a Class III railroad as set
forth in 49 CFR 1201.1–1, which is $20
million or less in inflation-adjusted
annual revenues, and commuter
railroads or small governmental
jurisdictions that serve populations of
50,000 or less. (See 68 FR 24891; May
9, 2003, codified at appendix C to 49
CFR part 209.) The $20 million limit is
based on the STB’s revenue threshold
for a Class III railroad. Railroad revenue
is adjusted for inflation by applying a
revenue deflator formula in accordance
with 49 CFR 1201.1–1. FRA is using this
definition for this rulemaking.
An estimated 1,095 entities will be
affected by the rule. FRA estimates that
there are approximately 400 MOW
contractor companies and 695 small
railroads on the general system. FRA
estimates that 86 percent of employees
that will be regulated under this rule
work for these 74 railroads and
contractors. Most railroads must comply
with all provisions of part 219.
However, as previously indicated, FRA
has a ‘‘small railroad’’ definition
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
associated with part 219 that limits
compliance requirements for railroads
with 15 HOS employees or less and no
joint operations to reduce burden on the
smallest of railroads.
There are approximately 695 small
railroads (as defined by revenue size).
Class II and Class III railroads do not
report to the STB, and although the
number of Class II railroads is known,
the precise number of Class III railroads
is difficult to ascertain due to
conflicting definitions, conglomerates,
and even seasonal operations.
Potentially, all small railroads could be
impacted by this final regulation. Part
219 has a small railroad exception for
all railroads with 15 or fewer covered
employees, except when these railroads
have joint operations with another
railroad, therefore increasing risk. Thus
a railroad with such characteristics shall
be called a ‘‘partially excepted small
railroad’’ in this analysis, and is a
subsection of the ‘‘small entities’’ as
defined by the STB and FRA, addressed
above. Currently, there are 288 partially
excepted small railroads and, as FRA is
not amending to the substantive criteria
of classification, there should be no
change in the number of partially
excepted small railroads associated with
the final rule.
All commuter railroad operations in
the United States are part of larger
governmental entities whose
jurisdictions exceed 50,000 in
population.
As mentioned, all railroads must
comply with all or limited subparts of
part 219. For partially excepted small
railroads, per FRA’s definition, the
significant burden involves the costs of
adding MOW employees to the existing
testing programs, and adding reasonable
suspicion and pre-employment drug
testing (which they have not needed to
comply with).
A significant portion of the MOW
industry consists of contractors. FRA
has determined that risk lies as heavily
with contractors as with railroad
employees, so contractors and
subcontractors will be subject to the
same provisions of part 219 as the
railroads for which they do contract
work. Whether contractors must comply
with all or part of the provisions of part
219 will depend on the size of the
largest railroad (assumed to have the
largest risk) for which the contractor
works.
FRA discussed with industry
representatives how to ascertain the
number of contractors that will be
involved with this rulemaking. FRA is
aware that some railroads hire
contractors to conduct some or all of the
MOW worker functions on their
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
railroads. Generally, the costs for the
burdens associated with this rulemaking
will get passed on from the contractor
to the pertinent railroad. FRA has
determined that there are approximately
400 MOW-related contractor companies
who will be covered by the final rule.
Of those, 370 are considered to be a
‘‘small entity.’’ FRA has sought
estimates of the number of contractors
that may be fully compliant and how
many may be partially excepted,
depending on the size of the largest
railroad for which they work.
FRA expects that some HOS small
contractors will be impacted based upon
the compliance requirements for part
219 small railroads to now include
reasonable suspicion testing and preemployment drug testing. This burden
is estimated to be minimal, as
reasonable suspicion tests occur
extremely infrequently on small
railroads (average less than one time per
year for all small railroads), and preemployment drug tests, the least costly
of all tests, will only be required for new
employees.
No other small businesses (nonrailroad related) are expected to be
negatively impacted significantly by this
rulemaking. Conversely, this final
regulation will bring business to
consortiums, collectors, testing labs, and
other companies involved in the drug
and alcohol program business.
Expanding the program to cover
MOW employees will only have a small
effect in terms of testing burden for
railroads, based upon the cost of preemployment drug testing for new
employees and the testing of MOW
employees. FRA estimates that 90
percent of small railroads already
conduct pre-employment drug testing
under their own company authority.
Many of these contractors have
employees with commercial drivers’
licenses (CDLs), and therefore fall under
the drug and alcohol program
requirements of the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA).
Therefore, an estimated 40 percent of
MOW contracted employees already
participate in a DOT drug and alcohol
testing program. Furthermore, FRA
estimates that as many as 50–75 percent
of all MOW contractor companies have
some form of a drug and alcohol testing
program, and that around 25 percent of
these companies currently complete
random testing (the most burdensome
type of testing).
Consortia are companies that provide
testing, random selection, collection,
policy development, and training
services to help employers stay
compliant. Consortia alleviate much of
the administrative burden of a testing
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
program and negotiate volume
discounts on behalf of their clients. It is
likely that all part 219 small railroads
already have a compliant testing
program for employees that have been
covered under the regulation. It should
also be noted that approximately 125 of
the small railroads that will be impacted
are subsidiaries of large short line
holding companies with resources
comparable to larger railroads.
Additionally, many small railroads are
members of ASLRRA, which was
consulted throughout the development
of this regulation. ASLRRA has helped
create a consortium for its members in
the past, and FRA will work to ensure
that small entities, as well as large, have
the ability to adhere to the regulation as
easily as possible. The consortium
market will be affected in a positive
manner due to new business from this
rulemaking; this is a secondary benefit
not discussed in this RFA.
Significant Economic Impact Criteria
Previously, FRA sampled small
railroads and found that revenue
averaged approximately $4.7 million
(not discounted) in 2006. One percent of
that average annual revenue per small
railroad is $47,000. FRA realizes that
some railroads will have lower revenue
than $4.7 million. However, FRA
estimates that small railroads will not
have any additional expenses over the
next ten years to comply with the new
requirements in this final regulation.
Based on this, FRA concludes that the
expected burden of this final rule will
not have a significant impact on the
competitive position of small entities, or
on the small entity segment of the
railroad industry as a whole.
Substantial Number Criteria
This final rule will likely burden all
small railroads that are not exempt from
its scope or application (see 49 CFR
219.3). Thus, as noted above this final
rule will impact a substantial number of
small railroads.
2. Certification
Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), FRA certifies that
this final rule will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities. FRA invited
all interested parties to submit data and
37917
information regarding the potential
economic impact that will result from
adoption of the proposals in the NPRM.
FRA did receive comments concerning
the initial regulatory flexibility analysis
in the public comment process. The
final rule addresses these concerns by
continuing FRA’s longstanding
approach of counting only a railroad’s
covered employees for purposes of
determining whether the railroad
qualifies for the small railroad exception
(the railroad also cannot participate in
any joint operations) because FRA
believes this is the best measure of the
risks posed by the railroad’s operations.
FRA received no objections to this
proposal and adopted in its final rule.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
FRA is submitting the information
collection requirements in this final rule
for review and approval to the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995,
44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq. The sections that
contain the new and current
information collection requirements and
the estimated time to fulfill each
requirement are as follows:
Respondent universe
Total annual responses
Average time per
response
219.4—Petition for Recognition of a Foreign
Railroad’s Workplace Testing Program.
219.7—Waivers ...................................................
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
CFR Section
2 Railroads ...................
2 petitions .....................
40 hours .......................
80
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
4 waivers ......................
2 hours .........................
8
525 agreements ...........
30 minutes ...................
263
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
2 requests/documents ..
1 hour ...........................
2
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
10 documents ..............
2 hours .........................
20
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
142,000 employees ......
30 consent forms .........
2 minutes .....................
1
9,508 notices ................
5 seconds .....................
13
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
722 modified Programs
1 hour ...........................
722
5 railroads ....................
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
5 programs ...................
2,462 trained supervisors.
5 documents ................
3 hours .........................
3 hours .........................
15
7,386
30 minutes ...................
3
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
1,098 revised educational documents.
1 hour ...........................
1,098
142,000 employees ......
142,000 copies of documents.
2 minutes .....................
4,733
219.9—Joint Operating Agreement between
Railroads Assigning Responsibility for Compliance with this Part Amongst Themselves
(Revised Requirement).
—Request to railroad for documents by employee engaged in joint operation and
subject to adverse action after being required to participate in breath/body fluid
testing under subpart C, D, or E of part
219 (Revised Requirement).
—Document by railroad/contractor delineating responsibility for Compliance with
this part (Revised Requirement).
219.11—Employee consent to participate in
body fluid testing under subpart C.
—Notification to employees for testing (New
Requirement).
—RR Alcohol & Drug Program that provides
training to supervisors and information on
criteria for post-accident toxicological testing contained in part 219, subpart C, and
appendix C (Revised Requirement).
—Alcohol and Drug Programs —New RRs
—Training of Supervisory Employees in
signs/symptoms of alcohol/drug influence.
219.12—RR Documentation on need to place
employee on duty for follow-up tests (New
Requirement).
219.23—Educational materials concerning the
effects of alcohol/drug misuse on individual
employees.
—Copies of educational materials to employees.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Total annual
burden hours
37918
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
CFR Section
Respondent universe
Total annual responses
Average time per
response
Total annual
burden hours
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
219.104—Removal of employee from regulated
service (Rev. Requirement) Verbal Notice +
Follow-up Written Letter.
—Request for Hearing by Employee who
Denies Test Result or other Information is
Valid Evidence of part 219 Violation.
—Applicants Declining Pre-Employment
Testing and Withdrawing Employment Application– Communications (Revised Requirement).
219.105—Revised Requirements RR Duty to
prevent violation—Documents provided to
FRA after agency request regarding RR’s Alcohol and/or Drug Use Education/Prevention/
Etc.
—RR Supervisor Rule G observations and
records of regulated employees.
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
500 notices + 500 letters.
30 seconds + 2 minutes
21
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
50 requests + 50 hearings.
2 minutes + ..................
4 hours .........................
202
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
60 notices/communications.
2 minutes .....................
2
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
2 documents ................
5 minutes .....................
.17
722 railroads/400 MOW
contractors.
2 seconds + 2 seconds
310
219.201(c)—Report by RR concerning decision
by person other than RR representative about
whether an accident/incident qualifies for testing.
219.203/207—Major train accidents—Post Accident Toxicological Testing Forms
—Completion of FRA F 6180.73 ..................
—Determination by RR representative to
test non-crew member regulated employees based on specific information (New
Requirement).
—Determination by RR representative to
exclude surviving crewmember from testing (New Requirement).
—Verbal notification and subsequent written
report of failure to collect urine/blood
specimens within four hours (New Requirement).
—RR determination after accident to make
crew available for toxicological testing
(New Requirement).
—RR call for train relief crew (New Requirement).
—Recall of employees for testing and Narrative Report Completion (New Requirement).
—RR Reference to part 219 requirements
and FRA’s post-accident toxicological kit
in seeking to obtain facility cooperation
(New Requirement).
—RR Notification to National Response
Center of injured employee unconscious
or otherwise unable to give testing consent.
219.205—Specimen Handling/Collection—Completion of Form FRA F 6180.74 by train crew
members after accident.
—RR representative request to medical facility representative to complete remaining
information on FRA F 6180.74.
—RR representative completion of Form
FRA F 6180.73.
—Request to FRA Alcohol and Drug Program Manager for order form for Standard Shipping Kits (new requirement).
—Request to National Response Center
(NRC) for Post-Mortem Shipping Kit (New
Requirement).
—RR Request to Medical Facility to Transfer Sealed Toxicology Kit.
—Documentation of chain of custody of
sealed toxicology kit from medical facility
to lab delivery.
—RR/Medical Facility Record of Kit Error
(New Requirement).
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
280,000 Rule G observations + 280,000
records.
2 reports .......................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
30 minutes ...................
1
142,000 employees ......
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
240 forms .....................
80 decisions/determinations.
10 minutes ...................
15 minutes ...................
40
20
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
50 decisions/determinations.
5 minutes .....................
4
722 railroads +
400MOW contractors.
80 notifications + 80 reports.
2 minutes + 30 minutes
43
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
25 decisions/determinations.
10 minutes ...................
4
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
25 calls .........................
5 minutes .....................
2
4 calls + 4 reports ........
2 minutes + 30 minutes
2
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
80 references ...............
15 minutes ...................
20
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
2 phone calls ................
10 minutes ...................
.33
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
240 forms .....................
15 minutes ...................
60
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
80 ph. requests ............
2 minutes .....................
3
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
80 forms .......................
10 minutes ...................
13
5 requests ....................
2 minutes .....................
.17
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
1 request ......................
2 minutes .....................
.03333
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
40 ph. requests ............
2 minutes .....................
1
40 documents ..............
2 minutes .....................
1
722 RRs + 400 contr. ..
20 written records ........
2 minutes .....................
1
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Total annual responses
Average time per
response
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
40 phone reports ..........
2 minutes .....................
1
40 records ....................
30 minutes ...................
20
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
10 reports .....................
15 minutes ...................
3
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
10 reports .....................
15 minutes ...................
3
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
50 phone communications.
2 minutes .....................
2
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
30 documents ..............
5 minutes .....................
3
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
30 records ....................
2 minutes .....................
1
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
50 notifications .............
15 minutes ...................
13
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
50 documents ..............
15 minutes ...................
13
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
20 documents ..............
15 minutes ...................
5
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
15 records ....................
15 minutes ...................
4
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
5 railroads ....................
1,200 tests + 1,200
documents.
5 plans .........................
15 minutes + 5 minutes
400
1 hour ...........................
5
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
20 amendments ...........
1 hour ...........................
20
21 resubmitted plans ...
15 minutes ...................
5
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
50 amendments ...........
10 minutes ...................
8
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
20 random testing
plans.
200 plans .....................
15 minutes ...................
5
1 hour ...........................
200
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
50 requests ..................
15 minutes ...................
13
722 MOW contractors ..
50 plans .......................
1 hour ...........................
50
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
15 plans .......................
10 minutes ...................
3
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
15 addenda ..................
10 minutes ...................
3
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
25,000 determinations
+ 25,000 evaluations.
30 seconds + 30 seconds.
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
13,176 pool updates ....
5 minutes .....................
1,098
96 documents ..............
5 minutes .....................
8
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
CFR Section
Respondent universe
219.209(a)—Notification to NRC and FRA of Accident/Incident where Samples were Obtained.
219.209(c)—Record of Part 219 Test not Administered within 4 Hours Following Accident/Incident.
219.211(b)—Results of post-accident toxicological testing to RR MRO and RR Employee.
(c)—MRO Report to FRA of positive test for
alcohol/drugs of surviving employee.
219.303—Reasonable Suspicion Observations
(Drug Test)
—Communication between On-Site and OffSite Supervisors regarding Reasonable
Suspicion Observation.
—RR Written Documentation of Observed
Signs/Symptoms for Reasonable Suspicion Determination.
219.305—RR Written Record Stating Reasons
Test was Not Promptly Administered (New
Requirement).
219.401—Notification to Employee regarding
Reasonable Cause Testing (New Requirement).
219.405—RR Documentation Describing Basis
of Reasonable Cause Testing (New Requirements).
—RR Documentation of Rule/Part 225 Violation for Each Reasonable Cause Test
(New Requirement).
219.407—Prompt specimen collection time limitation exceeded—Record (Revised Requirement).
219.501—RR Documentation of Negative PreEmployment Drug Tests (New Requirement).
219.605—Submission of random testing plan
(Revised Requirement): Existing RRs.
—New Railroads submission of random
testing plans (Revised Requirement).
—Amendments to Currently-Approved FRA
Random Testing Plan (Revised Requirement).
—Resubmitted random testing plans after
notice of FRA disapproval (New Requirement).
—Non-Substantive Amendment to an Approved Plan (New Requirement).
—New/Combined/Amended Random Testing Plans Incorporating New Categories
of Regulated Employees (New Requirement).
219.607—RR Requests to Contractor or Service
Agent to Submit Part 219 Compliant Random
Testing Plan on Its Behalf (New Requirement).
—Contractor Random Testing Plan (New
Requirement).
219.609—Inclusion of Regulated Service Contractor Employees/Volunteers in RR Random
Testing Plan (New Requirement).
—Addenda to RR Random Testing Plan
Describing Method Used to Test Contractor/Volunteer Employees in Non-Random Testing Plan (New Requirement).
219.611—Random Alcohol and Drug Test Pools:
Good Faith Determinations and Evaluations of
Employee Likelihood of Performing Regulated
Service (New Requirement).
—Random Testing Pool Updates (New Requirement).
—Documents on RR Multiple Random Testing Pools (New Requirement).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
37919
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Total annual
burden hours
417
37920
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Total annual responses
Average time per
response
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
2,196 IDs ......................
2 minutes .....................
73
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
10 records/e explanations.
13,176 snapshots/
records.
2 minutes .....................
.33
2 minutes .....................
1,098
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
2,000 documents .........
.5 minute ......................
17
5 documents ................
1 hour ...........................
5
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
88 reports .....................
5 minutes .....................
7
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
40,000 records .............
1 minute .......................
667
16,960 records .............
5 minutes .....................
1,413
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
5 railroads ....................
40 programs .................
3 hours .........................
120
5 programs ...................
3 hours .........................
15
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
602 reports ...................
5 minutes .....................
50
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
40 designations/R RR
expectations.
602 self-referrals ..........
20 minutes ...................
13
10 seconds ...................
2
602 treatment referrals/
evaluations.
30 minutes ...................
301
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
3 removal confirmations
4 hours .........................
12
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
3 waivers + 3 DAC contacts.
3 hours + 20 minutes ...
10
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
602 evaluations ............
2 hours .........................
1,204
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
602 mentions/recommendation.
602 notices ...................
1 hour ...........................
602
10 minutes ...................
100
60 modified evaluations
10 minutes ...................
10
10 referral programs ....
20 hours .......................
200
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
10 documents ..............
1 hour ...........................
10
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
1 notice/amended peer
referral program.
1 hour ...........................
1
722 railroads + 400
MOW contractors.
10 completed forms .....
20 minutes ...................
3
CFR Section
Respondent universe
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
219.613—RR Identification of Total Number of
Eligible Employees for Random Testing (New
Requirement).
—RR Records/Explanation of Discarded Selection Draws (New Requirement).
—Electronic or Hard Copy of RR Snapshot
of Each Random Testing Pool (New Requirement).
219.615—Incomplete Random Testing Collections—Documentation (New Requirement).
219.617—Employee Exclusion from Random alcohol/drug testing after providing verifiable
evidence from credible outside professional
(Revised Requirement).
219.619—Report by MRO of Verified Positive
Test or by Breath Alcohol Technician of
Breath Alcohol Specimen of 0.04 or Greater
(New Requirement).
219.623—Random Testing Records (New Requirement).
219.901—RR Alcohol and Drug Misuse Prevention Records for MOW Employees Kept by
FRA—Two Year Maintenance (Revised Requirement).
219.1001—RR Change of Service Provider or
Policy for Referral Program.
—New Railroads Adoption of Referral Program.
—Co-worker Report that Employee is Unsafe to work with/in Violation of Part 219
or Railroad’s Drug/Alcohol Rules.
219.1003—RR Designation of DAC and expectations when self-referral is allowed.
—RR Employee Self-Referral ......................
—Referral for treatment/evaluation of regulated employee by co-worker as unsafe to
work with or in violation of part 219 or RR
alcohol/drug rules.
—After non-per referral, removal of employee from service and confirmation by
RR representative that employee is unsafe to work with or in violation of part
219 or RR drug/alcohol rule (New Requirement).
—Regulated employee waiver of investigation on RR rule charge and contact of
DAC within reasonable time period (New
Requirement).
—Employee evaluation by qualified DAC
after self-referral, co-worker referral, or
non-peer referral.
—DAC recommendation of leave of absence for regulated employee.
—DAC Notification to RR that employee is
fit to return to regulated service.
—DAC modification of initial evaluation of
regulated employee.
219.1005—Referral Programs with Labor Organization Approvals that Include Optional Provisions (New Requirement).
219.1007—Filing of Documents/Records with
FRA of Labor Concurrences for Alternate Referral Programs (New Requirement).
—Notice to FRA of Amendment or Revocation of FRA Approved Referral Program
(New Requirement).
Appendix C—Completion of Form FRA F
6180.75 after rail accident/incident resulting in
fatality.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Total annual
burden hours
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
All estimates include the time for
reviewing instructions; searching
existing data sources; gathering or
maintaining the needed data; and
reviewing the information. For
information or a copy of the paperwork
package submitted to OMB, contact Mr.
Robert Brogan, FRA Office of Railroad
Safety, Information Collection Clearance
Officer, at 202–493–6292, or Ms. Kim
Toone, FRA Office of Information
Technology, Information Clearance
Officer, at 202–493–6132.
Organizations and individuals
desiring to submit comments on the
collection of information requirements
should send them directly to the Office
of Management and Budget, Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
Washington, DC 20503, Attention: FRA
Desk Officer. Comments may also be
sent via email to the Office of
Management and Budget at the
following address: oira_submissions@
omb.eop.gov.
OMB is required to make a decision
concerning the collection of information
requirements contained in this final rule
between 30 and 60 days after
publication of this document in the
Federal Register. Therefore, a comment
to OMB is best assured of having its full
effect if OMB receives it within 30 days
of publication.
FRA cannot impose a penalty on
persons for violating information
collection requirements which do not
display a current OMB control number,
if required. FRA intends to obtain
current OMB control numbers for any
new information collection
requirements resulting from this
rulemaking action before the effective
date of the final rule. The OMB control
number, when assigned, will be
announced by separate notice in the
Federal Register.
D. Federalism Implications
Executive Order 13132, ‘‘Federalism’’
(64 FR 43255, Aug. 4, 1999), requires
FRA to develop an accountable process
to ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input
by State and local officials in the
development of regulatory policies that
have federalism implications.’’ ‘‘Policies
that have federalism implications’’ are
defined in the Executive Order to
include regulations that have
‘‘substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national
government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various
levels of government.’’ Under Executive
Order 13132, the agency may not issue
a regulation with federalism
implications that imposes substantial
direct compliance costs and that is not
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
required by statute, unless the Federal
government provides the funds
necessary to pay the direct compliance
costs incurred by State and local
governments, or the agency consults
with State and local government
officials early in the process of
developing the regulation. Where a
regulation has federalism implications
and preempts State law, the agency
seeks to consult with State and local
officials in the process of developing the
regulation.
This final rule has been analyzed in
accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order
13132. FRA has determined that the rule
will not have substantial direct effects
on the States, on the relationship
between the national government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. In
addition, FRA has determined that this
rule will not impose substantial direct
compliance costs on State and local
governments. Therefore, the
consultation and funding requirements
of Executive Order 13132 do not apply.
This rule complies with a statutory
mandate and will not have a substantial
effect on the States, on the relationship
between the Federal government and
the States, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government. In
addition, this rule will not have any
federalism implications that impose
substantial direct compliance costs on
State and local governments.
However, FRA notes that this part
could have preemptive effect by the
operation of law under a provision of
the former Federal Railroad Safety Act
of 1970, repealed and codified at 49
U.S.C. 20106 (Sec. 20106). Sec. 20106
provides that States may not adopt or
continue in effect any law, regulation, or
order related to railroad safety or
security that covers the subject matter of
a regulation prescribed or order issued
by the Secretary of Transportation (with
respect to railroad safety matters) or the
Secretary of Homeland Security (with
respect to railroad security matters),
except when the State law, regulation,
or order qualifies under the ‘‘essentially
local safety or security hazard’’
exception to Sec. 20106.
In sum, FRA has analyzed this rule in
accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order
13132. As explained above, FRA has
determined that this rule has no
federalism implications, other than the
possible preemption of State laws under
49 U.S.C. 20106 and 20119.
Accordingly, FRA has determined that
preparation of a federalism summary
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
37921
impact statement for this rule is not
required.
E. Environmental Impact
FRA has evaluated this final rule in
accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42
U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), other
environmental statutes, related
regulatory requirements, and its
‘‘Procedures for Considering
Environmental Impacts’’ (FRA’s
Procedures) (64 FR 28545, May 26,
1999). FRA has determined that this
final rule is categorically excluded from
detailed environmental review pursuant
to section 4(c)(20) of FRA’s NEPA
Procedures, ‘‘Promulgation of railroad
safety rules and policy statements that
do not result in significantly increased
emissions of air or water pollutants or
noise or increased traffic congestion in
any mode of transportation.’’ See 64 FR
28547, May 26, 1999. Categorical
exclusions (CEs) are actions identified
in an agency’s NEPA implementing
procedures that do not normally have a
significant impact on the environment
and therefore do not require either an
environmental assessment (EA) or
environmental impact statement (EIS).
See 40 CFR 1508.4.
In analyzing the applicability of a CE,
the agency must also consider whether
extraordinary circumstances are present
that would warrant a more detailed
environmental review through the
preparation of an EA or EIS. Id. In
accordance with section 4(c) and (e) of
FRA’s Procedures, the agency has
further concluded that no extraordinary
circumstances exist with respect to this
regulation that might trigger the need for
a more detailed environmental review.
The purpose of this rulemaking is to
expand the scope of FRA’s drug and
alcohol regulations to cover MOW
workers as per Congress’ mandate in the
RSIA. Specifically, the rule adopts part
214’s definition of ‘‘Roadway Worker’’
to define ‘‘MOW employee’’ under part
214, contains a revised version of the
troubled employee identification
requirements, and updates and
restructures the rule to make it more
user-friendly. FRA does not anticipate
any environmental impacts from this or
any other requirement of the final rule.
FRA also finds that there are no
extraordinary circumstances present in
connection with this final rule.
F. Executive Order 12898
(Environmental Justice)
Executive Order 12898, Federal
Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and
Low-Income Populations, and DOT
Order 5610.2(a) (91 FR 27534, May 10,
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37922
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
2012) require DOT agencies to achieve
environmental justice as part of their
mission by identifying and addressing,
as appropriate, disproportionately high
and adverse human health or
environmental effects, including
interrelated social and economic effects,
of their programs, policies, and
activities on minority populations and
low-income populations. The DOT
Order instructs DOT agencies to address
compliance with Executive Order 12898
and requirements within the DOT Order
in rulemaking activities, as appropriate.
FRA has evaluated this final rule under
Executive Order 12898 and the DOT
Order and determined it will not cause
disproportionately high and adverse
human health and environmental effects
on minority populations or low-income
populations.
G. Executive Order 13175 (Tribal
Consultation)
FRA has evaluated this final rule in
accordance with the principles and
criteria contained in Executive Order
13175, Consultation and Coordination
with Indian Tribal Governments, dated
November 6, 2000. The final rule would
not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, would not
impose substantial direct compliance
costs on Indian tribal governments, and
would not preempt tribal laws.
Therefore, the funding and consultation
requirements of Executive Order 13175
do not apply, and a tribal summary
impact statement is not required.
private sector (other than to the extent
that such regulations incorporate
requirements specifically set forth in
law).’’ Section 202 of the Act (2 U.S.C.
1532) further requires that ‘‘before
promulgating any general notice of
proposed rulemaking that is likely to
result in the promulgation of any rule
that includes any Federal mandate that
may result in expenditure by State,
local, and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of
$100,000,000 or more (adjusted
annually for inflation) in any one year,
and before promulgating any final rule
for which a general notice of proposed
rulemaking was published, the agency
shall prepare a written statement’’
detailing the effect on State, local, and
tribal governments and the private
sector. This rule will not result in the
expenditure of more than $100,000,000
(as adjusted annually for inflation) by
the public sector in any one year, and
thus preparation of such a statement is
not required.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
H. International Trade Impact
Assessment
The Trade Agreement Act of 1979
prohibits Federal agencies from
engaging in any standards or related
activities that create unnecessary
obstacles to foreign commerce of the
United States. Legitimate domestic
objectives, such as safety, are not
considered unnecessary obstacles. The
statute also requires consideration of
international standards and where
appropriate, that they be the basis for
U.S. standards.
This rulemaking is purely domestic in
nature and is not expected to affect
trade opportunities for U.S. firms doing
business overseas or for foreign firms
doing business in the United States.
J. Energy Impact
Executive Order 13211 requires
Federal agencies to prepare a Statement
of Energy Effects for any ‘‘significant
energy action.’’ 66 FR 28355 (May 22,
2001). Under the Executive Order, a
‘‘significant energy action’’ is defined as
any action by an agency (normally
published in the Federal Register) that
promulgates or is expected to lead to the
promulgation of a final rule or
regulation, including notices of inquiry,
advance notices of proposed
rulemaking, and notices of proposed
rulemaking, that: (1)(i) Is a significant
regulatory action under Executive Order
12866 or any successor order; and (ii) is
likely to have a significant adverse effect
on the supply, distribution, or use of
energy; or (2) is designated by the
Administrator of the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs as a
significant energy action. FRA has
evaluated this rule in accordance with
Executive Order 13211, and determined
that it will not have a significant
adverse effect on the supply,
distribution, or use of energy.
Consequently, FRA has determined that
this regulatory action is not a
‘‘significant energy action’’ within the
meaning of Executive Order 13211.
I. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995
Pursuant to Section 201 of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104–4, 2 U.S.C. 1531), each
Federal agency ‘‘shall, unless otherwise
prohibited by law, assess the effects of
Federal regulatory actions on State,
local, and tribal governments, and the
K. Privacy Act Information
Anyone is able to search the
electronic form of any written
communications and comments
received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the
comment (or signing the document, if
submitted on behalf of an association,
business, labor union, etc.). See https://
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
www.regulations.gov/#!privacyNotice
for the privacy notice of regulations.gov
or interested parties may review DOT’s
complete Privacy Act Statement in the
Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477). In accordance with
5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits comments
from the public to better inform its
rulemaking process. DOT posts these
comments, without edit, including any
personal information the commenter
provides, to www.regulations.gov, as
described in the system of records
notice (DOT/ALL–14 FDMS), which can
be reviewed at www.dot.gov/privacy.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 219
Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse, Drug
testing, Penalties, Railroad safety,
Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Safety, Transportation.
The Rule
For the reasons stated above, FRA
amends part 219 as follows:
PART 219—CONTROL OF ALCOHOL
AND DRUG USE
1. The authority citation for part 219
is revised to read as follows:
■
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20103, 20107, 20140,
21301, 21304, 21311; 28 U.S.C. 2461, note;
Sec. 412, Div. A, Pub. L. 110–432, 122 Stat.
4889 (49 U.S.C. 20140, note); and 49 CFR
1.89.
Subpart A—General
■
2. Revise § 219.1(a) to read as follows:
§ 219.1
Purpose and scope.
(a) The purpose of this part is to
prevent accidents and casualties in
railroad operations that result from
impairment of employees by alcohol or
drugs.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 3. Revise § 219.3 to read as follows:
§ 219.3
Application.
(a) General. This part applies to all
railroads and contractors, except as
provided in paragraphs (b), (c), and (d)
of this section, and except for:
(1) Railroads that operate only on
track inside an installation that is not
part of the general railroad system of
transportation (i.e., plant railroads, as
defined in § 219.5);
(2) Tourist, scenic, historic, or
excursion operations that are not part of
the general railroad system of
transportation, as defined in § 219.5; or
(3) Rapid transit operations in an
urban area that are not connected to the
general railroad system of
transportation.
(b) Annual report requirements. (1)
Subpart I of this part does not apply to
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
any domestic or foreign railroad that has
fewer than 400,000 total annual
employee work hours, including hours
worked by all employees of the railroad,
regardless of occupation, not only while
in the United States, but also while
outside the United States.
(2) Subpart I of this part does not
apply to any contractor that performs
regulated service exclusively for
railroads with fewer than 400,000 total
annual employee work hours, including
hours worked by all employees of the
railroad, regardless of occupation, not
only while in the United States, but also
while outside the United States.
(3) When a contractor performs
regulated service for at least one railroad
with fewer than 400,000 total annual
employee hours, including hours
worked by all employees of the railroad,
regardless of occupation, not only while
in the United States, but also while
outside the United States, subpart I of
this part applies as follows:
(i) A railroad with more than 400,000
total annual employee work hours must
comply with subpart I regarding any
contractor employees it integrates into
its own alcohol and drug testing
program under this part; and
(ii) If a contractor establishes its own
independent alcohol and drug testing
program that meets the requirements of
this part and is acceptable to the
railroad, the contractor must comply
with subpart I if it has 200 or more
regulated employees.
(c) Small railroad exception. (1)
Subparts E and G of this part do not
apply to small railroads, and a small
railroad may not perform the Federal
alcohol and drug testing authorized by
these subparts. For purposes of this part,
a small railroad means a railroad that:
(i) Has a total of 15 or fewer
employees who are covered by the
hours of service laws at 49 U.S.C. 21103,
21104, or 21105, or who would be
subject to the hours of service laws at 49
U.S.C. 21103, 21104, or 21105 if their
services were performed in the United
States; and
(ii) Does not have joint operations, as
defined in § 219.5, with another railroad
that operates in the United States,
except as necessary for purposes of
interchange.
(2) An employee performing only
MOW activities, as defined in § 219.5,
does not count towards a railroad’s total
number of covered employees for the
purpose of determining whether it
qualifies for the small railroad
exception.
(3) A contractor performing MOW
activities exclusively for small railroads
also qualifies for the small railroad
exception (i.e., is excepted from the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
requirements of subparts E and G of this
part). A contractor is not excepted if it
performs MOW activities for at least one
or more railroads that does not qualify
for the small railroad exception under
this section.
(4) If a contractor is subject to all of
part 219 of this chapter because it
performs regulated service for multiple
railroads, not all of which qualify for the
small railroad exception, the
responsibility for ensuring that the
contractor complies with subparts E and
G of this part is shared between the
contractor and any railroad using the
contractor that does not qualify for the
small railroad exception.
(d) Foreign railroad. (1) This part does
not apply to the operations of a foreign
railroad that take place outside the
United States. A foreign railroad is
required to conduct post-accident
toxicological testing or reasonable
suspicion testing only for operations
that occur within the United States.
(2) Subparts F, G, and K of this part
do not apply to an employee of a foreign
railroad whose primary reporting point
is outside the United States if that
employee is:
(i) Performing train or dispatching
service on that portion of a rail line in
the United States extending up to 10
route miles from the point that the line
crosses into the United States from
Canada or Mexico; or
(ii) Performing signal service in the
United States.
■ 4. In § 219.4, revise paragraphs (a)(1),
(b)(1), and (b)(2) to read as follows:
§ 219.4 Recognition of a foreign railroad’s
workplace testing program.
(a) * * *
(1) To be so considered, the petition
must document that the foreign
railroad’s workplace testing program
contains equivalents to subparts B, F, G,
and K of this part:
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * *
(1) Upon FRA’s recognition of a
foreign railroad’s workplace alcohol and
drug use program as compatible with
the return-to-service requirements in
subpart B of this part and the
requirements of subparts F, G, and K of
this part, the foreign railroad must
comply with either the specified
provisions of § 219.4 or with the
standards of its recognized program, and
any imposed conditions, with respect to
its employees whose primary reporting
point is outside the United States and
who perform train or dispatching
service in the United States. The foreign
railroad must also, with respect to its
final applicants for, or its employees
seeking to transfer for the first time to,
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
37923
duties involving such train or
dispatching service in the United States,
comply with either subpart F of this part
or the standards of its recognized
program.
(2) The foreign railroad must comply
with subparts A (general), B
(prohibitions, other than the return-toservice provisions in paragraph (d) of
this section), C (post-accident
toxicological testing), D (reasonable
suspicion testing), I (annual report
requirements), and J (recordkeeping
requirements) of this part. Drug or
alcohol testing required by these
subparts (except for post-accident
toxicological testing required by subpart
C) must be conducted in compliance
with all applicable provisions of the
DOT Procedures for Workplace Drug
and Alcohol Testing Programs (part 40
of this title).
*
*
*
*
*
■ 5. Section 219.5 is amended by:
■ a. Revising the introductory text;
■ b. Adding new definitions of
‘‘Administrator’’, ‘‘Associate
Administrator’’, ‘‘category of regulated
employee’’, and ‘‘contractor’’ in
alphabetical order;
■ c. Revising the definitions of ‘‘covered
employee’’ and ‘‘covered service’’;
■ d. Adding new definitions of ‘‘DOT,
The Department, or DOT agency’’,
‘‘DOT-regulated employee’’, ‘‘DOT
safety-sensitive duties or DOT safetysensitive functions’’, ‘‘Drug and Alcohol
Counselor or DAC,’’ ‘‘employee’’,
‘‘evacuation’’, ‘‘flagman or flagger’’ and
‘‘fouling a track’’ in alphabetical order;
■ e. Revising the definition of ‘‘FRA
representative’’;
■ f. Removing the definition of ‘‘general
railroad system of transportation’’;
■ g. Adding new definitions of
‘‘highway-rail grade crossing’’ and
‘‘highway-rail grade crossing accident/
incident’’ in alphabetical order;
■ h. Revising the definition of ‘‘impact
accident’’;
■ i. Adding new definitions of ‘‘joint
operations’’ and ‘‘maintenance-of-way
employee or MOW employee’’ in
alphabetical order;
■ j. Revising the definition of ‘‘medical
facility’’;
■ k. Adding new definitions of ‘‘nonpeer’’, ‘‘on-track or fouling equipment’’,
‘‘other impact accident’’, ‘‘person’’, and
‘‘plant railroad’’ in alphabetical order;
■ l. Revising the definition of ‘‘railroad
property damage or damage to railroad
property’’;
■ m. Adding new definitions of ‘‘raking
collision’’, ‘‘regulated employee’’,
‘‘regulated service’’, ‘‘responsible
railroad supervisor’’, ‘‘side collision’’,
and ‘‘tourist, scenic, historic, or
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37924
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
excursion operations that are not part of
the general railroad system of
transportation’’ in alphabetical order;
■ n. Removing the definition of ‘‘train’’;
■ o. Revising the definitions of ‘‘train
accident’’ and ‘‘train incident’’; and
■ p. Adding a new definition of
‘‘watchman/lookout’’ in alphabetical
order.
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 219.5
Definitions.
As used in this part only—
*
*
*
*
*
Administrator means the
Administrator of the Federal Railroad
Administration or the Administrator’s
delegate.
Associate Administrator means the
Associate Administrator for Railroad
Safety, Federal Railroad Administration,
or the Associate Administrator’s
delegate.
Category of regulated employee means
a broad class of either covered service
or maintenance-of-way employees (as
defined in this section). For the purpose
of determining random testing rates
under § 219.625, if an individual
performs both covered service and
maintenance-of-way activities, he or she
belongs in the category of regulated
employee that corresponds with the
type of regulated service comprising
more than 50 percent of his or her
regulated service.
*
*
*
*
*
Contractor means a contractor or
subcontractor performing functions for a
railroad.
*
*
*
*
*
Covered employee means an
employee (as defined in this section to
include an employee, volunteer, or
probationary employee performing
activities for a railroad or a contractor to
a railroad) who is performing covered
service under the hours of service laws
at 49 U.S.C. 21101, 21104, or 21105 or
who is subject to performing such
covered service, regardless of whether
the person has performed or is currently
performing covered service. (An
employee is not a ‘‘covered employee’’
under this definition exclusively
because he or she is an employee for
purposes of 49 U.S.C. 21106.) For the
purposes of pre-employment testing
only, the term ‘‘covered employee’’
includes a person applying to perform
covered service in the United States.
Covered service means service in the
United States as a train employee, a
dispatching service employee, or a
signal employee, as those terms are
defined at 49 U.S.C. 21101, but does not
include any period the employee is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
relieved of all responsibilities and is
free to come and go without restriction.
*
*
*
*
*
DOT, The Department, or DOT agency
means all DOT agencies, including, but
not limited to, the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), the Federal
Railroad Administration (FRA), the
Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration (FMCSA), the Federal
Transit Administration (FTA), the
National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), the Pipeline
and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA), the United
States Coast Guard (USCG) (for purposes
of part 40 coverage only), and the Office
of the Secretary (OST). These terms
include any designee of a DOT agency.
DOT-regulated employee means any
person who is designated in a DOT
agency regulation as subject to drug
testing and/or alcohol testing. The term
includes individuals currently
performing DOT safety-sensitive
functions designated in DOT agency
regulations and applicants for
employment subject to pre-employment
testing. For purposes of drug testing
conducted under the provisions of 49
CFR part 40, the term employee has the
same meaning as the term ‘‘donor’’ as
found on the Custody and Control Form
and related guidance materials
produced by the Department of Health
and Human Services.
DOT safety-sensitive duties or DOTsafety sensitive functions means
functions or duties designated by a DOT
agency, the performance of which
makes an individual subject to the drug
testing and/or alcohol testing
requirements of that DOT agency. For
purposes of this part, regulated service
has been designated by FRA as a DOT
safety-sensitive duty or function.
*
*
*
*
*
Drug and Alcohol Counselor or DAC
means a person who meets the
credentialing and qualification
requirements described in § 242.7 of this
chapter.
Employee means any individual
(including a volunteer or a probationary
employee) performing activities for a
railroad or a contractor to a railroad.
Evacuation means the mandatory or
voluntary relocation of at least one
person who is not a railroad employee
for the purpose of avoiding exposure to
a hazardous material release. It does not
include the closure of public
transportation roadways for the purpose
of containing a hazardous material
release, unless the closure is
accompanied by an evacuation order.
Flagman or Flagger means any person
designated by the railroad to direct or
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
restrict the movement of trains past a
point on a track to provide on-track
safety for maintenance-of-way
employees, while engaged solely in
performing that function.
*
*
*
*
*
Fouling a track means the placement
of an individual or an item of
equipment in such proximity to a track
that the individual or equipment could
be struck by a moving train or on-track
equipment, or in any case is within four
feet of the field side of the near running
rail.
*
*
*
*
*
FRA representative means the
Associate Administrator for Railroad
Safety of FRA and staff, the Associate
Administrator’s delegate (including a
qualified State inspector acting under
part 212 of this chapter), the Chief
Counsel of FRA, the Chief Counsel’s
delegate, or FRA’s Drug and Alcohol
Program oversight contractor.
*
*
*
*
*
Highway-rail grade crossing means:
(1) A location where a public
highway, road, or street, or a private
roadway, including associated
sidewalks, crosses one or more railroad
tracks at grade; or
(2) A location where a pathway
explicitly authorized by a public
authority or a railroad carrier that is
dedicated for the use of non-vehicular
traffic, including pedestrians, bicyclists,
and others that crosses one or more
railroad tracks at grade. The term
‘‘sidewalk’’ means that portion of a
street between the curb line, or the
lateral line of a roadway, and the
adjacent property line or, on easements
of private property, that portion of a
street that is paved or improved and
intended for use by pedestrians.
Highway-rail grade crossing accident/
incident means any impact between
railroad on-track equipment and a
highway user at a highway-rail grade
crossing. The term ‘‘highway user’’
includes pedestrians, as well as
automobiles, buses, trucks, motorcycles,
bicycles, farm vehicles, and all other
modes of surface transportation
motorized and un-motorized.
Impact accident, (1) Impact accident
means a train accident, as defined in
this section, consisting either of—
(i) A head-on or rear-end collision
between on-track equipment;
(ii) A side collision, derailment
collision, raking collision, switching
collision, or ‘‘other impact accident,’’ as
defined by this section;
(iii) Impact with a deliberately-placed
obstruction, such as a bumping post (but
not a derail); or
(iv) Impact between on-track
equipment and any railroad equipment
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
fouling the track, such as an impact
between a train and the boom of an offrail vehicle.
(2) The definition of ‘‘impact
accident’’ does not include an impact
with naturally-occurring obstructions
such as fallen trees, rock or snow slides,
livestock, etc.
*
*
*
*
*
Joint operations means rail operations
conducted by more than one railroad on
the same track (except for minimal joint
operations necessary for the purpose of
interchange), regardless of whether such
operations are the result of contractual
arrangements between the railroads,
order of a governmental agency or a
court of law, or any other legally
binding directive. For purposes of this
part only, minimal joint operations are
considered necessary for the purpose of
interchange when:
(1) The maximum authorized speed
for operations on the shared track does
not exceed 20 mph;
(2) Operations are conducted under
operating rules that require every
locomotive and train to proceed at a
speed that permits stopping within one
half the range of vision of the
locomotive engineer;
(3) The maximum distance for
operations on the shared track does not
exceed 3 miles; and
(4) Any operations extending into
another railroad’s yard are for the sole
purpose of setting out or picking up cars
on a designated interchange track.
Maintenance-of-way employee or
MOW employee means a roadway
worker as defined in § 214.7 of this
chapter.
Medical facility means a hospital,
clinic, physician’s office, or laboratory
where post-accident toxicological
testing specimens can be collected
according to recognized professional
standards, and where an individual’s
post-accident medical needs can be
attended to.
*
*
*
*
*
Non-peer means a supervisor (other
than a co-worker), labor organization
representative, or family member of a
regulated employee.
On-track or fouling equipment means
any railroad equipment that is
positioned on the rails or that is fouling
the track, and includes, but is not
limited to, the following: A train,
locomotive, cut of cars, single car,
motorcar, yard switching train, work
train, inspection train, track motorcar,
highway-rail vehicle, push car, crane, or
other roadway maintenance machine,
such as a ballast tamping machine, if the
machine is positioned on or over the
rails or is fouling the track.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
Other impact accident means an
accident or incident, not classified as a
head-on, rear-end, side, derailment,
raking, or switching collision, that
involves contact between on-track or
fouling equipment. This includes
impacts in which single cars or cuts of
cars are damaged during operations
involving switching, train makeup,
setting out, etc.
*
*
*
*
*
Person means an entity of any type
covered under 1 U.S.C. 1, including but
not limited to the following: A railroad;
a manager, supervisor, official, or other
employee or agent of a railroad; any
owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of
railroad equipment, track, or facilities;
any independent contractor providing
goods or services to a railroad, such as
a service agent performing functions
under part 40 of this title; and any
employee of such owner, manufacturer,
lessor, lessee, or independent
contractor.
Plant railroad means a plant or
installation that owns or leases a
locomotive, uses that locomotive to
switch cars throughout the plant or
installation, and is moving goods solely
for use in the facility’s own industrial
processes. The plant or installation
could include track immediately
adjacent to the plant or installation if
the plant railroad leases the track from
the general system railroad and the lease
provides for (and actual practice entails)
the exclusive use of that trackage by the
plant railroad and the general system
railroad for purposes of moving only
cars shipped to or from the plant. A
plant or installation that operates a
locomotive to switch or move cars for
other entities, even if solely within the
confines of the plant or installation,
rather than for its own purposes or
industrial processes, will not be
considered a plant railroad because the
performance of such activity makes the
operation part of the general railroad
system of transportation.
*
*
*
*
*
Railroad property damage or damage
to railroad property means damage to
railroad property (specifically, on-track
equipment, signals, track, track
structure, or roadbed) and must be
calculated according to the provisions
for calculating costs and reportable
damage in the FRA Guide for Preparing
Accident/Incident Reports (see § 225.21
of this chapter for instructions on how
to obtain a copy). Generally, railroad
property damage includes labor costs
and all other costs to repair or replace
in-kind damaged on-track equipment,
signals, track, track structures
(including bridges and tunnels), or
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
37925
roadbed. (Labor costs that must be
accounted for include hourly wages,
transportation costs, and hotel
expenses.) It does not include the cost
of clearing a wreck; however, additional
damage to the above-listed items caused
while clearing the wreck must be
included in the damage estimate. It also
includes the cost of rental and/or
operation of machinery such as cranes
and bulldozers, including the services of
contractors, to replace or repair the track
right-of-way and associated structures.
Railroad property damage does not
include damage to lading. Trailers/
containers on flatcars are considered to
be lading and damage to these is not to
be included in on-track equipment
damage. Damage to a flat car carrying a
trailer/container, however, is included
in railroad property damage. Railroads
should refer directly to the FRA Guide
for Preparing Accident/Incident Reports
for additional guidance on what
constitutes railroad property damage.
Raking collision means a collision
between parts or lading of a consist on
an adjacent track, or with a structure
such as a bridge.
Regulated employee means a covered
employee or maintenance-of-way
employee who performs regulated
service for a railroad subject to the
requirements of this part.
Regulated service means covered
service or maintenance-of-way
activities, the performance of which
makes an employee subject to the
requirements of this part.
*
*
*
*
*
Responsible railroad supervisor
means any responsible line supervisor
(e.g., a trainmaster or road foreman of
engines) or superior official in authority
over the regulated employees to be
tested.
*
*
*
*
*
Side collision means a collision at a
turnout where one consist strikes the
side of another consist.
*
*
*
*
*
Tourist, scenic, historic, or excursion
operations that are not part of the
general railroad system of
transportation means a tourist, scenic,
historic, or excursion operation
conducted only on track used
exclusively for that purpose (i.e., there
is no freight, intercity passenger, or
commuter passenger railroad operation
on the track).
Train accident means a rail
equipment accident described in
§ 225.19(c) of this chapter involving
damage in excess of the current
reporting threshold (see § 225.19(e) of
this chapter), including an accident
involving a switching movement. Rail
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37926
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(c) Contractor responsibility for
compliance. As provided by paragraph
(a) of this section, any independent
contractor or other entity that performs
regulated service for a railroad, or any
other services under this part or part 40
of this title, has the same
responsibilities as a railroad under this
part with respect to its employees who
perform regulated service or other
service required by this part or part 40
of this title for the railroad. The entity’s
responsibility for compliance with this
part may be fulfilled either directly by
that entity or by the railroad treating the
entity’s regulated employees as if they
were the railroad’s own employees for
purposes of this part. The responsibility
for compliance must be clearly spelled
out in the contract between the railroad
and the other entity or in another
document. In the absence of a clear
delineation of responsibility, FRA may
hold the railroad and the other entity
jointly and severally liable for
compliance.
■ 7. Add § 219.10 to read as follows:
§ 219.9
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
equipment accidents include, but are
not limited to, collisions, derailments,
and other events involving the
operations of on-track or fouling
equipment (whether standing or
moving).
Train incident means an event
involving the operation of railroad ontrack or fouling equipment that results
in a casualty but in which railroad
property damage does not exceed the
reporting threshold.
*
*
*
*
*
Watchman/lookout means an
employee who has been annually
trained and qualified to provide
warning of approaching trains or ontrack equipment. Watchmen/lookouts
must be properly equipped to provide
visual and auditory warning by such
means as a whistle, air horn, white disk,
red flag, lantern, or fusee. A watchman/
lookout’s sole duty is to look out for
approaching trains/on-track equipment
and provide at least fifteen seconds
advanced warning to employees before
the arrival of trains/on-track equipment.
■ 6. Revise § 219.9 to read as follows:
Any person, as defined by § 219.5,
who violates any requirement of this
part or causes the violation of any such
requirement is subject to a civil penalty
of at least $650 and not more than
$25,000 per violation, except that:
Penalties may be assessed against
individuals only for willful violations;
where a grossly negligent violation or a
pattern of repeated violations has
created an imminent hazard of death or
injury, or has caused death or injury, a
penalty not to exceed $105,000 per
violation may be assessed; and the
standard of liability for a railroad will
vary depending upon the requirement
involved. See, e.g., § 219.105, which is
construed to qualify the responsibility
of a railroad for the unauthorized
conduct of an employee that violates
§ 219.101 or § 219.102 (while imposing
a duty of due diligence to prevent such
conduct). Each day a violation
continues constitutes a separate offense.
See Appendix A to this part for a
statement of agency civil penalty policy.
■ 8. Amend § 219.11 by revising
paragraphs (a), (b)(1) and (2), and (c)
through (h) to read as follows:
Responsibility for compliance.
(a) General. Although the
requirements of this part are stated in
terms of the duty of a railroad, when
any person, as defined by § 219.5,
performs any function required by this
part, that person (whether or not a
railroad) shall perform that function in
accordance with this part.
(b) Joint operations. (1) In the case of
joint operations, primary responsibility
for compliance with subparts C, D, and
E of this part rests with the host
railroad, and all affected employees
must be responsive to direction from the
host railroad that is consistent with this
part. However, nothing in this
paragraph restricts railroads engaged in
joint operations from appropriately
assigning responsibility for compliance
with this part amongst themselves
through a joint operating agreement or
other binding contract. FRA reserves the
right to bring an enforcement action for
noncompliance with this part against
the host railroad, the employing
railroad, or both.
(2) When an employee of a railroad
engaged in joint operations is required
to participate in breath or body fluid
testing under subpart C, D, or E of this
part and is subsequently subject to
adverse action alleged to have arisen out
of the required test (or alleged refusal
thereof), necessary witnesses and
documents available to the other
railroad engaged in the joint operations
must be made available to the employee
and his or her employing railroad on a
reasonable basis.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
§ 219.10
§ 219.11
tests.
Penalties.
General conditions for chemical
(a)(1) Any regulated employee who is
subject to performing regulated service
for a railroad is deemed to have
consented to testing as required in
subparts B, C, D, E, F, G, and K of this
part.
(2) A regulated employee required to
participate in alcohol and/or drug
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
testing under this part must be on duty
and subject to performing regulated
service when the specimen collection is
initiated and the alcohol testing/urine
specimen collection is conducted (with
the exception of pre-employment testing
under subpart F of this part).
(b)(1) Each regulated employee must
participate in such testing, as required
under the conditions set forth in this
part and implemented by a
representative of the railroad or
employing contractor.
(2) In any case where an employee is
suffering a substantiated medical
emergency and is subject to alcohol or
drug testing under this part, necessary
medical treatment must be accorded
priority over provision of the breath or
body fluid specimen(s). A medical
emergency is an acute medical
condition requiring immediate medical
care. A railroad may require an
employee to substantiate a medical
emergency by providing verifiable
documentation from a credible outside
professional (e.g., doctor, dentist,
hospital, or law enforcement officer)
substantiating the medical emergency
within a reasonable period of time.
*
*
*
*
*
(c) A regulated employee who is
required to be tested under subparts C,
D, or E of this part and who is taken to
a medical facility for observation or
treatment after an accident or incident
is deemed to have consented to the
release to FRA of the following:
(1) The remaining portion of any body
fluid specimen taken by the medical
facility within 12 hours of the accident
or incident that is not required for
medical purposes, together with any
normal medical facility record(s)
pertaining to the taking of such
specimen;
(2) The results of any laboratory tests
for alcohol or any drug conducted by or
for the medical facility on such
specimen;
(3) The identity, dosage, and time of
administration of any drugs
administered by the medical facility
before the time specimens were taken by
the medical facility or before the time
specimens were taken in compliance
with this part; and
(4) The results of any breath tests for
alcohol conducted by or for the medical
facility.
(d) Any person required to participate
in body fluid testing under subpart C of
this part (post-accident toxicological
testing) shall, if requested by a
representative of the railroad or the
medical facility, evidence consent to the
taking of specimens, their release for
toxicological analysis under pertinent
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
provisions of this part, and release of
the test results to the railroad’s Medical
Review Officer by promptly executing a
consent form, if required by the medical
facility. A regulated employee is not
required to execute any document or
clause waiving rights that the employee
would otherwise have against the
railroad, and any such waiver is void.
The employee may not be required to
waive liability with respect to
negligence on the part of any person
participating in the collection, handling
or analysis of the specimen or to
indemnify any person for the negligence
of others. Any consent provided
consistent with this section may be
construed to extend only to those
actions specified in this section.
(e)(1) A regulated employee who is
notified of selection for testing under
this part must cease to perform his or
her assigned duties and proceed to the
testing site either immediately or as
soon as possible without adversely
affecting safety.
(2) A railroad must ensure that the
absence of a regulated employee from
his or her assigned duties to report for
testing does not adversely affect safety.
(3) Nothing in this part may be
construed to authorize the use of
physical coercion or any other
deprivation of liberty to compel breath
or body fluid testing.
(f) Any employee performing duties
for a railroad who is involved in a
qualifying accident or incident
described in subpart C of this part, and
who dies within 12 hours of that
accident or incident as the result
thereof, is deemed to have consented to
the removal of body fluid and/or tissue
specimens necessary for toxicological
analysis from the remains of such
person, and this consent is implied by
the performance of duties for the
railroad (i.e., a consent form is not
required). This consent provision
applies to all employees performing
duties for a railroad, and not just
regulated employees.
(g) Each supervisor responsible for
regulated employees (except a working
supervisor who is a co-worker as
defined in § 219.5) must be trained in
the signs and symptoms of alcohol and
drug influence, intoxication, and misuse
consistent with a program of instruction
to be made available for inspection
upon demand by FRA. Such a program
shall, at a minimum, provide
information concerning the acute
behavioral and apparent physiological
effects of alcohol, the major drug groups
on the controlled substances list, and
other impairing drugs. The program
must also provide training on the
qualifying criteria for post-accident
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
toxicological testing contained in
subpart C of this part, and the role of the
supervisor in post-accident collections
described in subpart C and appendix C
of this part.
(h) Nothing in this subpart restricts
any discretion available to the railroad
to request or require that a regulated
employee cooperate in additional breath
or body fluid testing. However, no such
testing may be performed on urine or
blood specimens provided under this
part. For purposes of this paragraph (h),
all urine from a void constitutes a single
specimen.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 9. Add § 219.12 to read as follows:
§ 219.12 Hours-of-service laws
implications.
(a) A railroad is not excused from
performing alcohol or drug testing
under subpart C (post-accident
toxicological testing) and subpart D
(reasonable suspicion testing) of this
part because the performance of such
testing would violate the hours-ofservice laws at 49 U.S.C. ch. 211. If a
railroad establishes that a violation of
the hours-of-service laws is caused
solely because it was required to
conduct post-accident toxicological
testing or reasonable suspicion testing,
FRA will not take enforcement action
for the violation if the railroad used
reasonable due diligence in completing
the collection and otherwise completed
it within the time limitations of
§ 219.203(d) (for post-accident
toxicological testing) or § 219.305 (for
reasonable suspicion testing), although
the railroad must still report any excess
service to FRA.
(b) A railroad may perform alcohol or
drug testing authorized under subpart E
(reasonable cause testing) of this part
even if the performance of such testing
would violate the hours-of-service laws
at 49 U.S.C. ch. 211. If a railroad
establishes that a violation of the hoursof-service laws is caused solely by its
decision to conduct authorized
reasonable cause testing, FRA will not
take enforcement action for the violation
if the railroad used reasonable due
diligence in completing the collection
and otherwise completed it within the
time limitations of § 219.407, although
the railroad must still report any excess
service to FRA.
(c) A railroad must schedule random
alcohol and drug tests under subpart G
of this part so that sufficient time is
provided to complete the test within a
covered employee’s hours-of-service
limitations under 49 U.S.C. ch. 211.
However, if a direct observation
collection is required during a random
test per the requirements of part 40 of
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
37927
this title, then the random test must be
completed regardless of the hours-ofservice law limitations, although the
railroad must still report any excess
service to FRA. A railroad may not place
a regulated employee on-duty for the
sole purpose of conducting a random
alcohol or drug test under subpart G of
this part.
(d) A railroad must schedule followup tests under § 219.104 so that
sufficient time is provided to complete
a test within a covered employee’s
hours-of-service limitations under 49
U.S.C. ch. 211. If a railroad is having a
difficult time scheduling the required
number of follow-up tests because a
covered employee’s work schedule is
unpredictable, there is no prohibition
against the railroad placing an employee
(who is subject to being called to
perform regulated service) on duty for
the purpose of conducting the follow-up
tests; except that an employee may be
placed on duty for a follow-up alcohol
test only if he or she is required to
completely abstain from alcohol by a
return-to-duty agreement, as provided
by § 40.303(b) of this title. A railroad
must maintain documentation
establishing the need to place the
employee on duty for the purpose of
conducting the follow-up test and
provide this documentation for review
upon request of an FRA representative.
■ 10. Revise § 219.23 to read as follows:
§ 219.23
Railroad policies.
(a) Whenever a breath or body fluid
test is required of an employee under
this part, the railroad (either through a
railroad employee or a designated agent,
such as a contracted collector) must
provide clear and unequivocal written
notice to the employee that the test is
being required under FRA regulations
and is being conducted under Federal
authority. The railroad must also
provide the employee clear and
unequivocal written notice of the type
of test that is required (e.g., reasonable
suspicion, reasonable cause, random
selection, follow-up, etc.). These notice
requirements are satisfied if:
(1) For all FRA testing except
mandatory post-accident toxicological
testing under subpart C of this part, a
railroad uses the mandated DOT alcohol
or drug testing form, circles or checks
off the box corresponding to the type of
test, and shows this form to the
employee before testing begins; or
(2) For mandatory post-accident
toxicological testing under subpart C of
this part, a railroad uses the approved
FRA form and shows this form to the
employee before testing begins.
(b) Use of the mandated DOT alcohol
or drug testing forms for non-Federal
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
37928
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
tests or mandatory post-accident
toxicological testing under subpart C of
this part is prohibited (except for postaccident breath alcohol testing
permitted under § 219.203(c)). Use of
the approved FRA post-accident
toxicological testing form for any testing
other than that mandated under subpart
C is prohibited.
(c) Each railroad must develop and
publish educational materials,
specifically designed for regulated
employees that clearly explain the
requirements of this part, as well as the
railroad’s policies and procedures with
respect to meeting those requirements.
The railroad must ensure that a copy of
these materials is distributed to each
regulated employee hired for or
transferred to a position that requires
alcohol and drug testing under this part.
(This requirement does not apply to an
applicant for a regulated service
position who either refuses to provide a
specimen for pre-employment testing or
who has a pre-employment test with a
result indicating a violation of the
alcohol or drug prohibitions of this
part.) A railroad may satisfy this
requirement by either—
(1)(i) Continually posting the
materials in a location that is easily
visible to all regulated employees going
on duty at their designated reporting
place and, if applicable, providing a
copy of the materials to any employee
labor organization representing a class
or craft of regulated employees of the
railroad; or
(ii) Providing a copy of the materials
in some other manner that will ensure
regulated employees can find and access
these materials explaining the critical
aspects of the program (e.g., by posting
the materials on a company Web site
that is accessible to all regulated
employees); or
(2) For a minimum of three years after
June 12, 2017, also ensuring that a hard
copy of these materials is provided to
each maintenance-of-way employee.
(d) Required content. The materials to
be made available to regulated
employees under paragraph (c) of this
section must, at a minimum, include
clear and detailed discussion of the
following:
(1) The position title, name, and
means of contacting the person(s) the
railroad designates to answer employee
questions about the materials;
(2) The specific classes or crafts of
employees who are subject to the
provisions of this part, such as
engineers, conductors, MOW
employees, signal maintainers, or train
dispatchers;
(3) Sufficient information about the
regulated service functions those
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
employees perform to make clear that
the period of the work day the regulated
employee is required to be in
compliance with the alcohol
prohibitions of this part is that period
when the employee is on duty and is
required to perform or is available to
perform regulated service;
(4) Specific information concerning
regulated employee conduct that is
prohibited under subpart B of this part
(e.g., the minimum requirements of
§§ 219.101, 219.102, and 219.103);
(5) The requirement that a railroad
utilizing the reasonable cause testing
authority provided by subpart E of this
part must give prior notice to regulated
employees of the circumstances under
which they will be subject to reasonable
cause testing;
(6) The circumstances under which a
regulated employee will be tested under
this part;
(7) The procedures used to test for the
presence of alcohol and controlled
substances, protect the regulated
employee and the integrity of the testing
processes, safeguard the validity of the
test results, and ensure that those results
are attributed to the correct employee;
(8) The requirement that a regulated
employee submit to alcohol and drug
tests administered in accordance with
this part;
(9) An explanation of what constitutes
a refusal to submit to an alcohol or drug
test and the attendant consequences;
(10) The consequences for a regulated
employee found to have violated
subpart B of this part, including the
requirement that the employee be
removed immediately from regulated
service, and the responsive action
requirements of § 219.104;
(11) The consequences for a regulated
employee who has a Federal alcohol test
indicating an alcohol concentration of
0.02 or greater but less than 0.04; and
(12) Information concerning the
effects of alcohol and drug misuse on an
individual’s health, work, and personal
life; signs and symptoms of an alcohol
or drug problem (the employee’s or a coworker’s); and available methods of
evaluating and resolving problems
associated with the misuse of alcohol
and drugs, and the names, addresses,
and telephone numbers of DACs and
counseling and treatment programs.
(e) Optional provisions. The materials
supplied to employees may also include
information on additional railroad
policies with respect to the use or
possession of alcohol and drugs,
including any consequences for an
employee found to have a specific
alcohol concentration that are based on
the railroad’s company authority
independent of this part. Any such
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
additional policies or consequences
must be clearly and obviously described
as being based on the railroad’s
independent company authority.
■ 11. Add § 219.25 to subpart A to read
as follows:
§ 219.25 Previous employer drug and
alcohol checks.
(a) As required by § 219.701(a) and
(b), a railroad must conduct drug or
alcohol testing under this part in
compliance with part 40 of this title
(except for post-accident toxicological
testing under subpart C of this part). A
railroad must therefore comply with
§ 40.25 of this title by checking the
alcohol and drug testing record of any
direct regulated employee (a regulated
employee who is not employed by a
contractor to the railroad) it intends to
use for regulated service before the
employee performs such service for the
first time. A railroad is not required to
check the alcohol and drug testing
record of contractor employees
performing regulated service on its
behalf (the alcohol and drug testing
record of those contractor employees
must be checked by their direct
employers).
(b) When determining whether a
person may become or remain certified
as a locomotive engineer or a conductor,
a railroad must comply with the
requirements in § 240.119(c) (for
engineers) or § 242.115(e) (for
conductors) of this chapter regarding the
consideration of Federal alcohol and
drug violations that occurred within a
period of 60 consecutive months before
the review of the person’s records.
Subpart B—Prohibitions
12. Revise § 219.101(a) to read as
follows:
■
§ 219.101
Alcohol and drug use prohibited.
(a) Prohibitions. Except as provided in
§ 219.103—
(1) No regulated employee may use or
possess alcohol or any controlled
substance when the employee is on duty
and subject to performing regulated
service for a railroad.
(2) No regulated employee may report
for regulated service, or go or remain on
duty in regulated service, while—
(i) Under the influence of or impaired
by alcohol;
(ii) Having 0.04 or more alcohol
concentration in the breath or blood; or
(iii) Under the influence of or
impaired by any controlled substance.
(3) No regulated employee may use
alcohol for whichever is the lesser of the
following periods:
(i) Within four hours of reporting for
regulated service; or
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(ii) After receiving notice to report for
regulated service.
(4)(i) No regulated employee tested
under the provisions of this part whose
Federal test result indicates an alcohol
concentration of 0.02 or greater but less
than 0.04 may perform or continue to
perform regulated service for a railroad,
nor may a railroad permit the regulated
employee to perform or continue to
perform regulated service, until the start
of the regulated employee’s next
regularly scheduled duty period, but not
less than eight hours following
administration of the test.
(ii) Nothing in this section prohibits a
railroad from taking further action
under its own independent company
authority when a regulated employee
tested under the provisions of this part
has a Federal test result indicating an
alcohol concentration of 0.02 or greater,
but less than 0.04. However, while a
Federal test result of 0.02 or greater but
less than 0.04 is a positive test and may
be a violation of a railroad’s operating
rules, it is not a violation of this section
and cannot be used to decertify an
engineer under part 240 of this chapter
or a conductor under part 242 of this
chapter.
(5) If an employee tested under the
provisions of this part has a test result
indicating an alcohol concentration
below 0.02, the test is negative and is
not evidence of alcohol misuse. A
railroad may not use a Federal test
result below 0.02 either as evidence in
a company proceeding or as a basis for
subsequent testing under company
authority. A railroad may take further
action to compel cooperation in other
breath or body fluid testing only if it has
an independent basis for doing so. An
independent basis for subsequent
company authority testing will exist
only when, after having a negative
Federal reasonable suspicion alcohol
test result, the employee exhibits
additional or continuing signs and
symptoms of alcohol use. If a company
authority test then indicates a violation
of the railroad’s operating rules, this
result is independent of the Federal test
result and must stand on its own merits.
*
*
*
*
*
13. Revise § 219.102 to read as
follows:
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
■
§ 219.102 Prohibition on abuse of
controlled substances.
No regulated employee may use a
controlled substance at any time,
whether on duty or off duty, except as
permitted by § 219.103.
14. Revise § 219.104 to read as
follows:
■
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
§ 219.104
Responsive action.
(a) Removal from regulated service.
(1) If a railroad determines that a
regulated employee has violated
§ 219.101 or § 219.102, or the alcohol or
controlled substances misuse rule of
another DOT agency, the railroad must
immediately remove the employee from
regulated service and the procedures
described in paragraphs (b) through (d)
of this section apply.
(2) If a regulated employee refuses to
provide a breath or body fluid specimen
or specimens when required to by the
railroad under a provision of this part,
a railroad must immediately remove the
regulated employee from regulated
service, and the procedures described in
paragraphs (b) through (d) of this
section apply. This provision also
applies to Federal reasonable cause
testing under subpart E of this part (if
the railroad has elected to conduct this
testing under Federal authority).
(b) Notice. Before or upon removing a
regulated employee from regulated
service under this section, a railroad
must provide written notice to the
employee of the reason for this action.
A railroad may provide a regulated
employee with an initial verbal notice
so long as it provides a follow-up
written notice to the employee as soon
as possible. In addition to the reason for
the employee’s withdrawal from
regulated service, the written notice
must also inform the regulated
employee that he may not perform any
DOT safety-sensitive duties until he
completes the return-to-duty process of
part 40.
(c) Hearing procedures. (1) Except as
provided in paragraph (e)(5) of this
section, if a regulated employee denies
that a test result or other information is
valid evidence of a § 219.101 or
§ 219.102 violation, the regulated
employee may demand and must be
provided an opportunity for a prompt
post-suspension hearing before a
presiding officer other than the charging
official. This hearing may be
consolidated with any disciplinary
hearing arising from the same accident
or incident (or conduct directly related
thereto), but the presiding officer must
make separate findings as to compliance
with §§ 219.101 and 219.102.
(2) The hearing must be convened
within the period specified in the
applicable collective bargaining
agreement. In the absence of an
agreement provision, the regulated
employee may demand that the hearing
be convened within 10 calendar days of
the employee’s suspension or, in the
case of a regulated employee who is
unavailable due to injury, illness, or
other sufficient cause, within 10 days of
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
37929
the date the regulated employee
becomes available for the hearing.
(3) A post-suspension proceeding
conforming to the requirements of an
applicable collective bargaining
agreement, together with the provisions
for adjustment of disputes under sec. 3
of the Railway Labor Act (49 U.S.C.
153), satisfies the procedural
requirements of this paragraph (c).
(4) With respect to a removal or other
adverse action taken as a consequence
of a positive test result or refusal in a
test authorized or required by this part,
nothing in this part may be deemed to
abridge any procedural rights or
remedies consistent with this part that
are available to a regulated employee
under a collective bargaining agreement,
the Railway Labor Act, or (with respect
to employment at will) at common law.
(5) Nothing in this part restricts the
discretion of a railroad to treat a
regulated employee’s denial of
prohibited alcohol or drug use as a
waiver of any privilege the regulated
employee would otherwise enjoy to
have such prohibited alcohol or drug
use treated as a non-disciplinary matter
or to have discipline held in abeyance.
(d) A railroad must comply with the
requirements for Substance Abuse
Professional evaluations, the return-toduty process, and follow-up testing
contained in part 40 of this title.
(1) Post-accident toxicology testing
exception. If a regulated employee has a
post-accident toxicology test result
under subpart C of this part that is
positive for a drug not listed in § 40.5’s
definition of ‘‘Drugs,’’ a railroad may
conduct the employee’s return-to-duty
and follow-up tests under part 40, or
may conduct the employee’s return-toduty and follow-up tests under its own
authority to comply with the
requirements of paragraph (d) of this
section, so long as its testing procedures
are otherwise identical to those of part
40, and include the specific drug for
which the violation occurred, on an
expanded drug testing panel.
(e) Applicability. (1) This section does
not apply to actions based on breath or
body fluid tests for alcohol or drugs that
are conducted exclusively under
authority other than that provided in
this part (e.g., testing under a company
medical policy, testing for cause wholly
independent of the subpart E Federal
authority of this part, or testing under a
labor agreement).
(2) This section does not apply to
Federal alcohol tests indicating an
alcohol concentration of less than 0.04.
(3) This section does not apply to a
locomotive engineer or conductor who
has an off-duty conviction for, or a
completed state action to cancel, revoke,
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37930
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
suspend, or deny a motor vehicle
driver’s license for operating while
under the influence of or impaired by
alcohol or a controlled substance.
(However, this information remains
relevant for the purpose of locomotive
engineer or conductor certification,
according to the requirements of parts
240 or 242 of this chapter.)
(4) This section does not apply to an
applicant who declines to be subject to
pre-employment testing and withdraws
an application for employment before
the test begins. The determination of
when a drug or alcohol test begins is
made according to the provisions found
in subparts E and L of part 40 of this
title.
(5) Paragraph (c) of this section does
not apply to an applicant who tests
positive or refuses a DOT preemployment test.
(6) As provided by § 40.25(j) of this
title, paragraph (d) of this section
applies to any DOT-regulated employer
seeking to hire for DOT safety-sensitive
functions an applicant who tested
positive or who refused a DOT preemployment test.
■ 15. Revise § 219.105 to read as
follows:
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 219.105 Railroad’s duty to prevent
violations.
(a) A railroad may not, with actual
knowledge, permit a regulated employee
to go or remain on duty in regulated
service in violation of the prohibitions
of § 219.101 or § 219.102. As used in
this section, the actual knowledge
imputed to the railroad is limited to that
of a railroad management employee
(such as a supervisor deemed an
‘‘officer,’’ whether or not such person is
a corporate officer) or a supervisory
employee in the offending regulated
employee’s chain of command. A
railroad management or supervisory
employee has actual knowledge of a
violation when he or she:
(1) Personally observes a regulated
employee use or possess alcohol or use
drugs in violation of this subpart. It is
not sufficient for actual knowledge if the
supervisory or management employee
merely observes the signs and
symptoms of alcohol or drug use that
require a reasonable suspicion test
under § 219.301;
(2) Receives information regarding a
violation of this subpart from a previous
employer of a regulated employee, in
response to a background information
request required by § 40.25 of this title;
or
(3) Receives a regulated employee’s
admission of prohibited alcohol
possession or prohibited alcohol or drug
use.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
(b) A railroad must exercise due
diligence to assure compliance with
§§ 219.101 and 219.102 by each
regulated employee.
(c) A railroad’s alcohol and/or drug
use education, prevention,
identification, intervention, and
rehabilitation programs and policies
must be designed and implemented in
such a way that they do not circumvent
or otherwise undermine the
requirements, standards, and policies of
this part. Upon FRA’s request, a railroad
must make available for FRA review all
documents, data, or other records
related to such programs and policies.
(d) Each year, a railroad’s supervisors
must conduct and record a number of
‘‘Rule G’’ employee observations at a
minimum equal to twice the railroad’s
total number of regulated employees.
Each ‘‘Rule G’’ observation must be
made sufficiently close to an individual
regulated employee to determine
whether the employee is displaying
signs and symptoms indicative of a
violation of the prohibitions of this part.
■ 16. Revise § 219.107 to read as
follows:
§ 219.107
Consequences of refusal.
(a) A regulated employee who refuses
to provide a breath or body fluid
specimen or specimens when required
to by the railroad under a provision of
this part must be withdrawn from
regulated service for a period of nine (9)
months. Per the requirements of part 40
of this title, a regulated employee who
provides an adulterated or substituted
specimen is deemed to have refused to
provide the required specimen and must
be withdrawn from regulated service in
accordance with this section.
(b) Notice. Before or upon
withdrawing a regulated employee from
regulated service under this section, a
railroad must provide written notice to
the employee of the reason for this
action, and the procedures described in
§ 219.104(c) apply. A railroad may
provide a regulated employee with an
initial verbal notice so long as it
provides a follow-up written notice as
soon as possible.
(c) The withdrawal required by this
section applies only to an employee’s
performance of regulated service for any
railroad with notice of such withdrawal.
During the period of withdrawal, a
railroad with notice of such withdrawal
must not authorize or permit the
employee to perform any regulated
service for the railroad.
(d) The requirement of withdrawal for
nine (9) months does not limit any
discretion on the part of the railroad to
impose additional sanctions for the
same or related conduct.
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(e) Upon the expiration of the nine
month period described in this section,
a railroad may permit an employee to
return to regulated service only under
the conditions specified in § 219.104(d),
and the regulated employee must be
subject to return-to-duty and follow-up
tests, as provided by that section.
Subpart C—Post-Accident
Toxicological Testing
17. In § 219.201, revise paragraphs (a)
and (b) to read as follows:
■
§ 219.201
required.
Events for which testing is
(a) List of events. Except as provided
in paragraph (b) of this section, FRA
post-accident toxicological tests must be
conducted after any event that involves
one or more of the circumstances
described in paragraphs (a)(1) through
(5) of this section:
(1) Major train accident. Any train
accident (i.e., a rail equipment accident
involving damage in excess of the
current reporting threshold) that
involves one or more of the following:
(i) A fatality to any person;
(ii) A release of hazardous material
lading from railroad equipment
accompanied by—
(A) An evacuation; or
(B) A reportable injury resulting from
the hazardous material release (e.g.,
from fire, explosion, inhalation, or skin
contact with the material); or
(iii) Damage to railroad property of
$1,500,000 or more.
(2) Impact accident. Any impact
accident (i.e., a rail equipment accident
defined as an ‘‘impact accident’’ in
§ 219.5) that involves damage in excess
of the current reporting threshold,
resulting in—
(i) A reportable injury; or
(ii) Damage to railroad property of
$150,000 or more.
(3) Fatal train incident. Any train
incident that involves a fatality to an onduty employee (as defined in § 219.5)
who dies within 12 hours of the
incident as a result of the operation of
on-track equipment, regardless of
whether that employee was performing
regulated service.
(4) Passenger train accident. Any train
accident (i.e., a rail equipment accident
involving damage in excess of the
current reporting threshold) involving a
passenger train and a reportable injury
to any person.
(5) Human-factor highway-rail grade
crossing accident/incident. A highwayrail grade crossing accident/incident
when it involves:
(i) A regulated employee who
interfered with the normal functioning
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
of a grade crossing signal system, in
testing or otherwise, without first taking
measures to provide for the safety of
highway traffic that depends on the
normal functioning of such system, as
prohibited by § 234.209 of this chapter;
(ii) A train crewmember who was, or
who should have been, flagging
highway traffic to stop due to an
activation failure of the grade crossing
system, as provided by § 234.105(c)(3) of
this chapter;
(iii) A regulated employee who was
performing, or should have been
performing, the duties of an
appropriately equipped flagger (as
defined in § 234.5 of this chapter) due
to an activation failure, partial
activation, or false activation of the
grade crossing signal system, as
provided by § 234.105(c)(1) and (2),
§ 234.106, or § 234.107(c)(1)(i) of this
chapter;
(iv) A fatality to any regulated
employee performing duties for the
railroad, regardless of fault; or
(v) A regulated employee who
violated an FRA regulation or railroad
operating rule and whose actions may
have played a role in the cause or
severity of the accident/incident.
(b) Exceptions. Except for a humanfactor highway-rail grade crossing
accident/incident described in
paragraph (a)(5) of this section, no test
may be required in the case of a
collision between railroad rolling stock
and a motor vehicle or other highway
conveyance at a highway/rail grade
crossing. No test may be required for an
accident/incident the cause and severity
of which are wholly attributable to a
natural cause (e.g., flood, tornado, or
other natural disaster) or to vandalism
or trespasser(s), as determined on the
basis of objective and documented facts
by the railroad representative
responding to the scene.
*
*
*
*
*
■ 18. Revise § 219.203 to read as
follows:
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 219.203 Responsibilities of railroads and
employees.
(a) Employees tested. A regulated
employee subject to post-accident
toxicological testing under this subpart
must cooperate in the provision of
specimens as described in this part and
appendix C to this part.
(1) General. Except as otherwise
provided for by this section, following
each qualifying event described in
§ 219.201, a regulated employee directly
involved in a qualifying event under
this subpart must provide blood and
urine specimens for toxicological testing
by FRA. This includes any regulated
employee who may not have been
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
present or on-duty at the time or
location of the event, but whose actions
may have played a role in its cause or
severity, including, but not limited to,
an operator, dispatcher, or signal
maintainer.
(2) Fatalities. Testing of the remains
of an on-duty employee (as defined in
§ 219.5) who is fatally injured in a
qualifying event described in § 219.201
is required, regardless of fault, if the
employee dies within 12 hours of the
qualifying event as a result of such
qualifying event.
(3) Major train accidents. For an
accident or incident meeting the criteria
of a major train accident in
§ 219.201(a)(1)—
(i) All assigned crew members of all
trains or other on-track equipment
involved in the qualifying event must be
subjected to post-accident toxicological
testing, regardless of fault.
(ii) Other surviving regulated
employees who are not assigned crew
members of an involved train or other
on-track equipment (e.g., a dispatcher or
a signal maintainer) must be tested if a
railroad representative can immediately
determine, on the basis of specific
information, that the employee may
have had a role in the cause or severity
of the accident/incident. In making this
determination, the railroad
representative must consider any such
information that is immediately
available at the time the qualifying
event determination is made under
§ 219.201.
(4) Fatal train incidents. For a fatal
train incident under § 219.201(a)(3), the
remains of any on-duty employee (as
defined in § 219.5) performing duties for
a railroad who is fatally injured in the
event are always subject to postaccident toxicological testing, regardless
of fault.
(5) Human-factor highway-rail grade
crossing accident/incidents. (i) For a
human-factor highway-rail grade
crossing accident/incident under
§ 219.201(a)(5)(i), only a regulated
employee who interfered with the
normal functioning of a grade crossing
signal system and whose actions may
have contributed to the cause or severity
of the event is subject to testing.
(ii) For a human-factor highway-rail
grade crossing accident/incident under
§ 219.201(a)(5)(ii), only a regulated
employee who was a train crew member
responsible for flagging highway traffic
to stop due to an activation failure of a
grade crossing system (or who was onsite and directly responsible for
ensuring that flagging was being
performed), but who failed to do so, and
whose actions may have contributed to
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
37931
the cause or severity of the event, is
subject to testing.
(iii) For a human-factor highway-rail
grade crossing accident/incident under
§ 219.201(a)(5)(iii), only a regulated
employee who was responsible for
performing the duties of an
appropriately equipped flagger (as
defined in § 234.5 of this chapter), but
who failed to do so, and whose actions
may have contributed to the cause or
severity of the event is subject to testing.
(iv) For a human-factor highway-rail
grade crossing accident/incident under
§ 219.201(a)(5)(iv), only the remains of
any fatally-injured employee(s) (as
defined in § 219.5) performing regulated
service for the railroad are subject to
testing.
(v) For a human-factor highway-rail
grade crossing accident/incident under
§ 219.201(a)(5)(v), only a regulated
employee who violated an FRA
regulation or railroad operating rule and
whose actions may have contributed to
the cause or severity of the event is
subject to testing.
(6) Exception. For a qualifying impact
accident, passenger train accident, fatal
train incident, or human-factor
highway-rail grade crossing accident/
incident under § 219.201(a)(2) through
(5), a surviving crewmember or other
regulated employee must be excluded
from testing if the railroad
representative can immediately
determine, on the basis of specific
information, that the employee had no
role in the cause or severity of the
accident/incident. In making this
determination, the railroad
representative must consider any
information that is immediately
available at the time the qualifying
event determination is made under
§ 219.201.
(i) This exception is not available for
assigned crew members of all involved
trains if the qualifying event also meets
the criteria for a major train accident
under § 219.201(a)(1) (e.g., this
exception is not available for an Impact
Accident that also qualifies as a major
train accident because it results in
damage to railroad property of
$1,500,000 or more).
(ii) This exception is not available for
any on-duty employee who is fatallyinjured in a qualifying event.
(b) Railroad responsibility. (1) A
railroad must take all practicable steps
to ensure that all surviving regulated
employees of the railroad who are
subject to FRA post-accident
toxicological testing under this subpart
provide blood and urine specimens for
the toxicological testing required by
FRA. This includes any regulated
employee who may not have been
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
37932
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
present or on-duty at the time or
location of the event, but whose actions
may have played a role in its cause or
severity, including, but not limited to,
an operator, dispatcher, or signal
maintainer.
(2) A railroad must take all practicable
steps to ensure that tissue and fluid
specimens taken from fatally injured
employees are subject to FRA postaccident toxicological testing under this
subpart.
(3) FRA post-accident toxicological
testing under this subpart takes priority
over toxicological testing conducted by
state or local law enforcement officials.
(c) Alcohol testing. Except as
provided for in paragraph (e)(4) of this
section, if the conditions for mandatory
post-accident toxicological testing exist,
a railroad may also require an employee
to provide breath for testing in
accordance with the procedures set
forth in part 40 of this title and in this
part, if such testing does not interfere
with timely collection of required urine
and blood specimens.
(d) Timely specimen collection. (1) A
railroad must make every reasonable
effort to assure that specimens are
provided as soon as possible after the
accident or incident, preferably within
four hours. Specimens that are not
collected within four hours after a
qualifying accident or incident must be
collected as soon thereafter as
practicable. If a specimen is not
collected within four hours of a
qualifying event, the railroad must
immediately notify the FRA Drug and
Alcohol Program Manager at 202–493–
6313 and provide detailed information
regarding the failure (either verbally or
via a voicemail). The railroad must also
submit a concise, written narrative
report of the reasons for such a delay to
the FRA Drug and Alcohol Program
Manager, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE.,
Washington, DC 20590. The report must
be submitted within 30 days after the
expiration of the month during which
the accident or incident occurred. This
report may also be submitted via email
to an email address provided by the
FRA Drug and Alcohol Program
Manager.
(2) The requirements of paragraph (d)
of this section must not be construed to
inhibit an employee who is required to
be post-accident toxicological tested
from performing, in the immediate
aftermath of an accident or incident, any
duties that may be necessary for the
preservation of life or property. Where
practical, however, a railroad must
utilize other employees to perform such
duties.
(3) If a passenger train is in proper
condition to continue to the next station
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
or its destination after an accident or
incident, the railroad must consider the
safety and convenience of passengers in
determining whether the crew should be
made immediately available for postaccident toxicological testing. A relief
crew must be called to relieve the train
crew as soon as possible.
(4) A regulated employee who may be
subject to post-accident toxicological
testing under this subpart must be
retained in duty status for the period
necessary to make the determinations
required by § 219.201 and this section
and (as appropriate) to complete
specimen collection.
(e) Recall of employees for testing. (1)
Except as otherwise provided for in
paragraph (e)(2) of this section, a
regulated employee may not be recalled
for testing under this subpart if that
employee has been released from duty
under the normal procedures of the
railroad. An employee who has been
transported to receive medical care is
not released from duty for purposes of
this section. Furthermore, nothing in
this section prohibits the subsequent
testing of an employee who has failed to
remain available for testing as required
(e.g., an employee who is absent
without leave). However, subsequent
testing does not excuse a refusal by the
employee to provide the specimens in a
timely manner.
(2) A railroad must immediately recall
and place on duty a regulated employee
for post-accident drug testing, if—
(i) The employee could not be
retained in duty status because the
employee went off duty under normal
railroad procedures before being
contacted by a railroad supervisor and
instructed to remain on duty pending
completion of the required
determinations (e.g., in the case of a
dispatcher or signal maintainer remote
from the scene of an accident who was
unaware of the occurrence at the time
he or she went off duty); and
(ii) The railroad’s preliminary
investigation (contemporaneous with
the determination required by
§ 219.201) indicates a clear probability
that the employee played a role in the
cause or severity of the accident/
incident.
(3) If the criteria in paragraph (e)(2) of
this section are met, a regulated
employee must be recalled for postaccident drug testing regardless of
whether the qualifying event happened
or did not happen during the
employee’s tour of duty. However, an
employee may not be recalled for testing
if more than 24 hours have passed since
the qualifying event. An employee who
has been recalled must be placed on
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
duty for the purpose of accomplishing
the required post-accident drug testing.
(4) Urine and blood specimens must
be collected from an employee who is
recalled for testing in accordance with
this section. If the employee left railroad
property before being recalled, however,
the specimens must be tested for drugs
only. A railroad is prohibited from
requiring a recalled employee to provide
breath specimens for alcohol testing,
unless the regulated employee has
remained on railroad property since the
time of the qualifying event and the
railroad has a company policy
completely prohibiting the use of
alcohol on railroad property.
(5) A railroad must document its
attempts to contact an employee subject
to the recall provisions of this section.
If a railroad is unable, as a result of the
non-cooperation of an employee or for
any other reason, to obtain specimen(s)
from an employee subject to mandatory
recall within the 24-hour period after a
qualifying event and to submit
specimen(s) to FRA as required by this
subpart, the railroad must contact FRA
and prepare a concise narrative report
according to the requirements of
paragraph (d)(1) of this section. The
report must also document the railroad’s
good faith attempts to contact and recall
the employee.
(f) Place of specimen collection. (1)
With the exception of Federal breath
testing for alcohol (when conducted as
authorized under this subpart), an
employee must be transported to an
independent medical facility for
specimen collection. In all cases, blood
may be drawn only by a qualified
medical professional or by a qualified
technician subject to the supervision of
a qualified medical professional (e.g., a
phlebotomist). A collector contracted by
a railroad or medical facility may collect
and/or assist in the collection of
specimens at the medical facility if the
medical facility does not object and the
collector is qualified to do so.
(2) If an employee has been injured,
a railroad must ask the treating medical
facility to obtain the specimens. Urine
may be collected from an injured
employee (conscious or unconscious)
who has already been catheterized for
medical purposes, but an employee may
not be catheterized solely for the
purpose of providing a specimen under
this subpart. Under § 219.11(a), an
employee is deemed to have consented
to FRA post-accident toxicological
testing by the act of being subject to
performing regulated service for a
railroad.
(g) Obtaining cooperation of facility.
(1) In seeking the cooperation of a
medical facility in obtaining a specimen
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
under this subpart, a railroad must, as
necessary, make specific reference to the
requirements of this subpart and the
instructions in FRA’s post-accident
toxicological shipping kit.
(2) If an injured employee is
unconscious or otherwise unable to
evidence consent to the procedure and
the treating medical facility declines to
obtain blood and/or urine specimens
after having been informed of the
requirements of this subpart, the
railroad must immediately notify the
duty officer at the National Response
Center (NRC) at (800) 424–8802, stating
the employee’s name, the name and
location of the medical facility, the
name of the appropriate decisional
authority at the medical facility, and the
telephone number at which that person
can be reached. FRA will then take
appropriate measures to assist in
obtaining the required specimens.
(h) Discretion of physician. Nothing in
this subpart may be construed to limit
the discretion of a medical professional
to determine whether drawing a blood
specimen is consistent with the health
of an injured employee or an employee
afflicted by any other condition that
may preclude drawing the specified
quantity of blood.
■ 19. Revise § 219.205 to read as
follows:
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 219.205 Specimen collection and
handling.
(a) General. Urine and blood
specimens must be obtained, marked,
preserved, handled, and made available
to FRA consistent with the requirements
of this subpart, the instructions
provided inside the FRA post-accident
toxicological shipping kit, and the
technical specifications set forth in
appendix C to this part.
(b) Information requirements. Basic
information concerning the accident/
incident and any treatment
administered after the accident/incident
is necessary to process specimens,
analyze the significance of laboratory
findings, and notify railroads and
employees of test results. Accordingly,
the railroad representative must
complete the information required by
Form FRA 6180.73 (revised) for
shipping with the specimens. Each
employee subject to testing must
cooperate in completion of the required
information on Form FRA F 6180.74
(revised) for inclusion in the shipping
kit and processing of the specimens.
The railroad representative must ask an
appropriate representative of the
medical facility to complete the
remaining portion of the information on
each Form 6180.74. A Form 6180.73
must be forwarded in the shipping kit
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
with each group of specimens. A Form
6180.74 must be forwarded in the
shipping kit for each employee who
provides specimens. A Form 6180.73
and either a Form 6180.74 or a Form
6180.75 (for fatalities) are included in
the shipping kit. (See paragraph (c) of
this section.)
(c) Shipping kits. (1) FRA and the
laboratory designated in appendix B to
this part make available for purchase a
limited number of standard shipping
kits for the purpose of routine handling
of post-accident toxicological specimens
under this subpart. Specimens must be
placed in the shipping kit and prepared
for shipment according to the
instructions provided in the kit and
appendix C to this part.
(2) Standard shipping kits may be
ordered directly from the laboratory
designated in appendix B to this part by
first requesting an order form from
FRA’s Drug and Alcohol Program
Manager at 202–493–6313. In addition
to the standard kit for surviving
employees, FRA also has distributed a
post-mortem shipping kit to Class I, II,
and commuter railroads. The postmortem kit may not be ordered by other
railroads. If a smaller railroad has a
qualifying event involving a fatality to
an on-duty employee, the railroad
should advise the NRC at 1–800–424–
8802 of the need for a post-mortem kit,
and FRA will send one overnight to the
medical examiner’s office or assist the
railroad in obtaining one from a nearby
railroad.
(d) Shipment. Specimens must be
shipped as soon as possible by pre-paid
air express (or other means adequate to
ensure delivery within 24 hours from
time of shipment) to the laboratory
designated in appendix B to this part.
However, if delivery cannot be ensured
within 24 hours due to a suspension in
air express delivery services, the
specimens must be held in a secure
refrigerator until delivery can be
accomplished. In no circumstances may
specimens be held for more than 72
hours. Where express courier pickup is
available, the railroad must ask the
medical facility to transfer the sealed
toxicology kit directly to the express
courier for transportation. If courier
pickup is not available at the medical
facility where the specimens are
collected or if for any other reason a
prompt transfer by the medical facility
cannot be assured, the railroad must
promptly transport the sealed shipping
kit holding the specimens to the most
expeditious point of shipment via air
express. The railroad must maintain and
document a secure chain of custody of
the kit(s) from its release by the medical
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
37933
facility to its delivery for transportation,
as described in appendix C to this part.
(e) Specimen security. After a
specimen kit or transportation box has
been sealed, no entity other than the
laboratory designated in appendix B to
this part may open it. If the railroad or
medical facility discovers an error with
either the specimens or the chain of
custody form after the kit or
transportation box has been sealed, the
railroad or medical facility must make a
contemporaneous written record of that
error and send it to the laboratory,
preferably with the transportation box.
§ 219.207—[Amended]
20. Section 219.207 is amended by—
a. In paragraph (a), removing the word
‘‘and/or’’ and adding, in its place, the
word ‘‘and’’; removing the words
‘‘timely collected’’ and adding, in their
place, ‘‘collected in a timely fashion’’;
removing the word ‘‘shipping’’ and
adding, in its place, ‘‘post-mortem
shipping’’; and removing the words ‘‘if
a person’’ and adding, in their place, ‘‘if
the custodian is someone’’;
■ b. In the introductory text of
paragraph (b), removing ‘‘(800) 424–
8801 or’’;
■ c. In paragraph (c), removing the word
‘‘and/or’’ and adding, in its place, the
word ‘‘and’’; and
■ d. In paragraph (d), removing the
word ‘‘specifies’’ and adding, in its
place, the words ‘‘and the instructions
included inside the shipping kits
specify’’.
■ 21. In § 219.209, revise paragraphs
(a)(2)(iv), (a)(2)(v), and (b), and remove
paragraph (c), to read as follows:
■
■
§ 219.209
Reports of tests and refusals.
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(iv) Brief summary of the
circumstances of the accident/incident,
including basis for testing (e.g., impact
accident with a reportable injury); and
(v) Number of employees tested.
(b) If a railroad is unable, as a result
of non-cooperation of an employee or
for any other reason, to obtain a
specimen and provide it to FRA as
required by this subpart, the railroad
must immediately notify the FRA Drug
and Alcohol Program Manager at 202–
493–6313 and provide detailed
information regarding the failure (either
verbally or via a voicemail). The
railroad must also provide a concise
narrative written report of the reason for
such failure and, if appropriate, any
action taken in response to the cause of
such failure. This report must be
appended to the report of the accident/
incident required to be submitted under
part 225 of this chapter and must also
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37934
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
be mailed to the FRA Drug and Alcohol
Program Manager at 1200 New Jersey
Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
22. Section 219.211 is amended by—
■ a. Adding a sentence at the end of
paragraph (b);
■ b. Revising the second sentence of
paragraph (c) and the second sentence
of paragraph (e); and
■ c. Revising paragraph (g)(3).
The revisions and additions read as
follows:
■
§ 219.211
Analysis and follow-up.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * * An employer is prohibited
from temporarily removing an employee
from the performance of regulated
service based only on a report from the
laboratory to the MRO of a confirmed
positive test for a drug or drug
metabolite, an adulterated test, or a
substituted test, before the MRO has
completed verification of the test result.
(c) * * * The Medical Review Officer
must promptly report the results of each
review to the Associate Administrator
for Railroad Safety, FRA, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC
20590. * * *
(e) * * * An employee wishing to
respond may do so by email or letter
addressed to the Drug and Alcohol
Program Manager, Office of Railroad
Safety, FRA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE., Washington, DC 20590 within 45
days of receipt of the test results. * * *
*
*
*
*
*
(g) * * *
(3) This provision does not authorize
holding any employee out of service
pending receipt of PAT testing results.
It also does not restrict a railroad from
taking such action based on the
employee’s underlying conduct, so long
as it is consistent with the railroad’s
disciplinary policy and is taken under
the railroad’s own authority.
*
*
*
*
*
§ 219.213
[Amended]
23. In § 219.213, paragraphs (a) and
(b), revise all references to ‘‘covered
service’’ to read ‘‘regulated service,’’ and
in paragraph (b), add ‘‘written’’ in front
of the word ‘‘notice’’.
■ 24. Revise subpart D to read as
follows:
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
■
Subpart D—Reasonable Suspicion Testing
Sec.
219.301 Mandatory reasonable suspicion
testing.
219.303 Reasonable suspicion observations.
219.305 Prompt specimen collection; time
limitations.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
Subpart D—Reasonable Suspicion
Testing
§ 219.301
testing.
Mandatory reasonable suspicion
(a) Each railroad must require a
regulated employee to submit to a
breath alcohol test when the railroad
has reasonable suspicion to believe that
the regulated employee has violated any
prohibition of subpart B of this part
concerning use of alcohol. The
railroad’s determination that reasonable
suspicion exists to require the regulated
employee to undergo an alcohol test
must be based on specific,
contemporaneous, articulable
observations concerning the appearance,
behavior, speech, or body odors of the
employee. A Federal reasonable
suspicion alcohol test is not required to
confirm the on-duty possession of
alcohol.
(b) Each railroad must require a
regulated employee to submit to a drug
test when the railroad has reasonable
suspicion to believe that the regulated
employee has violated the prohibitions
of subpart B of this part concerning use
of controlled substances. The railroad’s
determination that reasonable suspicion
exists to require the regulated employee
to undergo a drug test must be based on
specific, contemporaneous, articulable
observations concerning the appearance,
behavior, speech, or body odors of the
employee. Such observations may
include indications of the chronic and
withdrawal effects of drugs.
(c) Reasonable suspicion observations
made under this section must comply
with the requirements of § 219.303.
(d) As provided by § 219.11(b)(2), in
any case where an employee is suffering
a substantiated medical emergency and
is subject to alcohol or drug testing
under this subpart, necessary medical
treatment must be accorded priority
over provision of the breath or body
fluid specimens. However, when the
employee’s condition is stabilized,
reasonable suspicion testing must be
completed if within the eight-hour limit
provided for in § 219.305.
§ 219.303 Reasonable suspicion
observations.
(a) With respect to an alcohol test, the
required observations must be made by
a responsible railroad supervisor
(defined by § 219.5) trained in
accordance with § 219.11(g). The
supervisor who makes the
determination that reasonable suspicion
exists may not conduct the reasonable
suspicion testing on that regulated
employee.
(b) With respect to a drug test, the
required observations must be made by
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
two responsible railroad supervisors
(defined by § 219.5), at least one of
whom must be both on site and trained
in accordance with § 219.11(g). If one of
the supervisors is off site, the on-site
supervisor must communicate with the
off-site supervisor, as necessary, to
provide him or her the information
needed to make the required
observation. This communication may
be performed via telephone, but not via
radio or any other form of electronic
communication.
(c) This subpart does not authorize
holding any employee out of service
pending receipt of toxicological analysis
for reasonable suspicion testing, nor
does it restrict a railroad from taking
such action based on the employee’s
underlying conduct, provided it is
consistent with the railroad’s policy and
taken under the railroad’s own
authority.
(d) The railroad must maintain
written documentation that specifically
describes the observed signs and
symptoms upon which the
determination that reasonable suspicion
exists is based. This documentation
must be completed promptly by the
trained supervisor.
§ 219.305 Prompt specimen collection;
time limitations.
(a) Consistent with the need to protect
life and property, testing under this
subpart must be conducted promptly
following the observations upon which
the testing decision is based.
(b) If a test required by this subpart is
not administered within two hours
following a determination made under
this section, the railroad must prepare
and maintain on file a record stating the
reasons the test was not administered
within that time period. If an alcohol or
drug test required by this subpart is not
administered within eight hours of a
determination made under this subpart,
the railroad must cease attempts to
administer the test and must record the
reasons for not administering the test.
The eight-hour requirement is satisfied
if the individual has been delivered to
the collection site (where the collector
is present) and the request has been
made to commence collection of the
specimens within that period. The
records required by this section must be
submitted to FRA upon request of the
FRA Drug and Alcohol Program
Manager.
(c) A regulated employee may not be
tested under this subpart if that
individual has been released from duty
under the normal procedures of a
railroad. An individual who has been
transported to receive medical care is
not released from duty for purposes of
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
this section. Nothing in this section
prohibits the subsequent testing of an
employee who has failed to remain
available for testing as required (i.e.,
who is absent without leave).
■ 25. Revise subpart E to read as
follows:
Subpart E—Reasonable Cause Testing
Sec.
219.401 Authorization for reasonable cause
testing.
219.403 Requirements for reasonable cause
testing.
219.405 Documentation requirements.
219.407 Prompt specimen collection; time
limitations.
219.409 Limitations on authority.
Subpart E—Reasonable Cause Testing
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 219.401 Authorization for reasonable
cause testing.
(a) Each railroad may, at its own
discretion, elect to conduct Federal
reasonable cause testing authorized by
this subpart. If a railroad chooses to do
so, the railroad must use only Federal
authority for all reasonable cause testing
that meets the criteria of § 219.403. In
addition, the railroad must notify its
regulated employees of its decision to
use Federal reasonable cause testing
authority in the employee educational
policy required by § 219.23(e)(5). The
railroad must also provide written
notification of its decision to FRA’s
Drug and Alcohol Program Manager,
1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., Washington,
DC 20590.
(b) If a railroad elects to conduct
reasonable cause testing under the
authority of this subpart, the railroad
may, under the conditions specified in
this subpart, require any regulated
employee, as a condition of employment
in regulated service, to cooperate with
breath or body fluid testing, or both, to
determine compliance with §§ 219.101
and 219.102 or a railroad rule
implementing the requirements of
§§ 219.101 and 219.102. This authority
is limited to testing after observations or
events that occur during duty hours
(including any period of overtime or
emergency service). The provisions of
this subpart apply only when, and to the
extent that, the test in question is
conducted in reliance upon the
authority conferred by this section. A
railroad may not require an employee to
be tested under the authority of this
subpart unless reasonable cause, as
defined in this section, exists with
respect to that employee.
§ 219.403 Requirements for reasonable
cause testing.
Each railroad’s decision process
regarding whether reasonable cause
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
testing is authorized must be completed
before the reasonable cause testing is
performed and documented according
to the requirements of § 219.405. The
following circumstances constitute
reasonable cause for the administration
of alcohol and/or drug tests under the
authority of this subpart.
(a) Train accident or train incident. A
regulated employee has been involved
in a train accident or train incident (as
defined in § 219.5) reportable under part
225 of this chapter, and a responsible
railroad supervisor (as defined in
§ 219.5) has a reasonable belief, based
on specific, articulable facts, that the
individual employee’s acts or omissions
contributed to the occurrence or severity
of the accident; or
(b) Rule violation. A regulated
employee has been directly involved in
one or more of the following railroad or
FRA rule violations or other errors:
(1) Noncompliance with a train order,
track warrant, track bulletin, track
permit, stop and flag order, timetable,
signal indication, special instruction or
other directive with respect to
movement of railroad on-track
equipment that involves—
(i) Occupancy of a block or other
segment of track to which entry was not
authorized;
(ii) Failure to clear a track to permit
opposing or following movements to
pass;
(iii) Moving across a railroad crossing
at grade without authorization; or
(iv) Passing an absolute restrictive
signal or passing a restrictive signal
without stopping (if required);
(2) Failure to protect on-track
equipment, including leaving on-track
equipment fouling an adjacent track;
(3) Operation of a train or other
speedometer-equipped on-track
equipment at a speed that exceeds the
maximum authorized speed by at least
10 miles per hour or by 50% of such
maximum authorized speed, whichever
is less;
(4) Alignment of a switch in violation
of a railroad rule, failure to align a
switch as required for movement,
operation of a switch under on-track
equipment, or unauthorized running
through a switch;
(5) Failure to restore and secure a
main track switch as required;
(6) Failure to apply brakes or stop
short of a derail as required;
(7) Failure to secure a hand brake or
failure to secure sufficient hand brakes,
as required;
(8) Entering a crossover before both
switches are lined for movement or
restoring either switch to normal
position before the crossover movement
is completed;
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
37935
(9) Failure to provide point protection
by visually determining that the track is
clear and giving the signals or
instructions necessary to control the
movement of on-track equipment when
engaged in a shoving or pushing
movement;
(10) In the case of a person performing
a dispatching function or block operator
function, issuance of a mandatory
directive or establishment of a route that
fails to provide proper protection for ontrack equipment;
(11) Interference with the normal
functioning of any grade crossing signal
system or any signal or train control
device without first taking measures to
provide for the safety of highway traffic
or train operations which depend on the
normal functioning of such a device.
Such interference includes, but is not
limited to, failure to provide alternative
methods of maintaining safety for
highway traffic or train operations while
testing or performing work on the
devices or on track and other railroad
systems or structures which may affect
the integrity of the system;
(12) Failure to perform stop-and-flag
duties necessary as a result of a
malfunction of a grade crossing signal
system;
(13) Failure of a machine operator that
results in a collision between a roadway
maintenance machine and on-track
equipment or a regulated employee;
(14) Failure of a roadway worker-incharge to notify all affected employees
when releasing working limits;
(15) Failure of a flagman or
watchman/lookout to notify employees
of an approaching train or other on-track
equipment;
(16) Failure to ascertain that provision
was made for on-track safety before
fouling a track;
(17) Improper use of individual train
detection in a manual interlocking or
control point; or
(18) Failure to apply three point
protection (fully apply the locomotive
and train brakes, center the reverser,
and place the generator field switch in
the off position) that results in a
reportable injury to a regulated
employee.
§ 219.405
Documentation requirements.
(a) Each railroad must maintain
written documentation that specifically
describes the basis for each reasonable
cause test it performs under Federal
authority. This documentation must be
completed promptly by the responsible
railroad supervisor; although it does not
need to be completed before the
reasonable cause testing is conducted.
(b) For a rule violation, the
documentation must include the type of
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37936
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
rule violation and the involvement of
each tested regulated employee. For a
train accident or train incident
reportable under part 225 of this
chapter, a railroad must describe either
the amount of railroad property damage
or the reportable casualty and the basis
for the supervisor’s belief that the
employee’s acts or omissions
contributed to the occurrence or severity
of the train accident or train incident.
§ 219.407 Prompt specimen collection;
time limitations.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
(a) Consistent with the need to protect
life and property, testing under this
subpart must be conducted promptly
following the observations upon which
the testing decision is based.
(b) If a test conducted pursuant to the
authority of this subpart is not
administered within two hours
following the observations upon which
the testing decision is based, the
railroad must prepare and maintain on
file a record stating the reasons the test
was not conducted within that time
period. If an alcohol or drug test
authorized by this subpart is not
administered within eight hours of the
event under this subpart, the railroad
must cease attempts to administer the
test and must record the reasons for not
administering the test. The eight-hour
time period begins at the time a
responsible railroad supervisor receives
notice of the train accident, train
incident, or rule violation. The eighthour requirement is satisfied if the
employee has been delivered to the
collection site (where the collector is
present) and the request has been made
to commence collection of specimen(s)
within that period. The records required
by this section must be submitted to
FRA upon request of the FRA Drug and
Alcohol Program Manager.
(c) A regulated employee may not be
tested under this subpart if that
individual has been released from duty
under the normal procedures of the
railroad. An individual who has been
transported to receive medical care is
not released from duty for purposes of
this section. Nothing in this section
prohibits the subsequent testing of a
regulated employee who has failed to
remain available for testing as required
(i.e., who is absent without leave).
§ 219.409
Limitations on authority.
(a) The alcohol and/or drug testing
authority conferred by this subpart does
not apply with respect to any event that
meets the criteria for post-accident
toxicological testing required under
subpart C of this part.
(b) This subpart does not authorize
holding an employee out of service
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
pending receipt of toxicological analysis
for reasonable cause testing because
meeting the testing criteria is only a
basis to inquire whether alcohol or
drugs may have played a role in the
accident or rule violation. However, this
subpart does not restrict a railroad from
holding an employee out of service
based on the employee’s underlying
conduct, so long as it is consistent with
the railroad’s policy and the action is
taken under the railroad’s own
authority.
(c) When determining whether
reasonable cause testing is justified, a
railroad must consider the involvement
of each crewmember in the qualifying
event, not the involvement of the crew
as a whole.
Subpart F—Pre-Employment Tests
26. Revise § 219.501 to read as
follows:
■
§ 219.501
Pre-employment drug testing.
(a) Before an individual performs
regulated service the first time for a
railroad, the railroad must ensure that
the individual undergoes testing for
drugs in accordance with the
regulations of a DOT agency. No
railroad may allow a direct employee (a
railroad employee who is not employed
by a contractor to the railroad) to
perform regulated service, unless that
railroad has conducted a DOT preemployment test for drugs on that
individual with a result that did not
indicate the misuse of controlled
substance. This requirement applies
both to a final applicant for direct
employment and to a direct employee
seeking to transfer for the first time from
non-regulated service to duties
involving regulated service. A regulated
employee must have a negative DOT
pre-employment drug test for each
railroad for which he or she performs
regulated service as the result of a direct
employment relationship.
(b) Each railroad must ensure that
each employee of a contractor who
performs regulated service on the
railroad’s behalf has a negative DOT
pre-employment drug test on file with
his or her employer. The railroad must
also maintain documentation indicating
that it had verified that the contractor
employee had a negative DOT preemployment drug test on file with his or
her direct employer. A contractor
employee who performs regulated
service for more than one railroad does
not need to have a DOT preemployment drug test for each railroad
for which he or she provides service.
(c) If a railroad has already conducted
a DOT pre-employment test resulting in
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
a negative for a regulated service
applicant under the rules and
regulations of another DOT agency
(such as the Federal Motor Carrier
Safety Administration), FRA will accept
the result of that negative DOT preemployment test for purposes of the
requirements of this subpart.
(d) As used in subpart H of this part
with respect to a test required under this
subpart, the term regulated employee
includes an applicant for preemployment testing only. If an applicant
declines to be tested and withdraws an
application for employment before the
pre-employment testing process
commences, no record may be
maintained of the declination.
(e) The pre-employment drug testing
requirements of this section do not
apply to covered employees of railroads
qualifying for the small railroad
exception (see § 219.3(c)) or
maintenance-of-way employees who
were performing duties for a railroad
before June 12, 2017. However, a
grandfathered employee must have a
negative pre-employment drug test
before performing regulated service for
a new employing railroad after June 12,
2017.
■ 27. In § 219.502, revise paragraph (a)
introductory text, (a)(1), (a)(2), (a)(5),
and (b) to read as follows:
§ 219.502
Pre-employment alcohol testing.
(a) A railroad may, but is not required
to, conduct pre-employment alcohol
testing under this part. If a railroad
chooses to conduct pre-employment
alcohol testing, the railroad must
comply with the following
requirements:
(1) The railroad must conduct a preemployment alcohol test before the first
performance of regulated service by an
employee, regardless of whether he or
she is a new employee or a first-time
transfer to a position involving the
performance of regulated service.
(2) The railroad must treat all
employees performing regulated service
the same for the purpose of preemployment alcohol testing (i.e., a
railroad must not test some regulated
employees and not others.)
*
*
*
*
*
(5) If a regulated employee’s Federal
pre-employment test indicates an
alcohol concentration of 0.04 or greater,
a railroad may not allow him or her to
begin performing regulated service until
he or she has completed the Federal
return-to-duty process under
§ 219.104(d).
(b) As used in subpart H of this part
with respect to a test authorized under
this subpart, the term regulated
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
employee includes an applicant for preemployment testing only. If an applicant
declines to be tested before the testing
process commences, no record may be
maintained of the declination. The
determination of when an alcohol test
commences must be made according to
the provisions of § 40.243(a) of this title.
■ 28. Revise § 219.503 to read as
follows:
§ 219.503
Notification; records.
Each railroad must provide for
medical review of drug test results
according to the requirements of part 40
of this title, as provided in subpart H of
this part. The railroad must also notify
the applicant in writing of the results of
any Federal drug and/or alcohol test
that is a positive, adulteration,
substitution, or refusal in the same
manner as provided for employees in
part 40 of this title and subpart H of this
part. Records must be maintained
confidentially and be retained in the
same manner as required under subpart
J of this part for employee test records,
except that such records need not reflect
the identity of an applicant who
withdrew an application to perform
regulated service before the
commencement of the testing process.
■ 29. Revise § 219.505 to read as
follows:
§ 219.505
Non-negative tests and refusals.
An applicant who has tested positive
or refused to submit to pre-employment
testing under this section may not
perform regulated service for any
railroad until he or she has completed
the Federal return-to-duty process under
§ 219.104(d). An applicant may also not
perform DOT safety-sensitive functions
for any other employer regulated by a
DOT agency until he or she has
completed the Federal return-to-duty
process under § 219.104(d). This section
does not create any right on the part of
the applicant to have a subsequent
application considered; nor does it
restrict the discretion of the railroad to
entertain a subsequent application for
employment from the same person.
■ 30. Revise subpart G to read as
follows:
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
219.611 Random alcohol and drug testing
pools.
219.613 Random testing selections.
219.615 Random testing collections.
219.617 Participation in random alcohol
and drug testing.
219.619 Positive alcohol and drug test
results and refusals; procedures.
219.621 Use of service agents.
219.623 Records.
219.625 FRA Administrator’s determination
of random alcohol and drug testing rates.
Subpart G—Random Alcohol and Drug
Testing Programs
Sec.
219.601 Purpose and scope of random
testing programs.
219.603 General requirements for random
testing programs.
219.605 Submission and approval of
random testing plans.
219.607 Requirements for random testing
plans.
219.609 Inclusion of contractor employees
and volunteers in random testing plans.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
Subpart G—Random Alcohol and Drug
Testing Programs
§ 219.601 Purpose and scope of random
testing programs.
(a) Purpose. The purpose of random
alcohol and drug testing is to promote
safety by deterring regulated employees
from misusing drugs and abusing
alcohol.
(b) Regulated employees. Each
railroad must ensure that a regulated
employee is subject to being selected for
random testing as required by this
subpart whenever the employee
performs regulated service on the
railroad’s behalf.
(c) Contractor employees and
volunteers. A regulated employee who
is a volunteer or an employee of a
contractor to a railroad may be
incorporated into the random testing
program of more than one railroad if:
(1) The contractor employee or
volunteer is not already part of a
random testing program that meets the
requirements of this subpart and has
been accepted by the railroad for which
he or she performs regulated service (as
described in § 219.609); or
(2) The railroad for which the
contractor employee or volunteer
performs regulated service is unable to
verify that the individual is part of a
random testing program acceptable to
the railroad that meets the requirements
of this subpart.
(d) Multiple DOT agencies. (1) If a
regulated employee performs functions
subject to the random testing
requirements of more than one DOT
agency, a railroad must ensure that the
employee is subject to selection for
random drug and alcohol testing at or
above the current minimum annual
testing rate set by the DOT agency that
regulates more than 50 percent of the
employee’s DOT-regulated functions.
(2) A railroad may not include a
regulated employee in more than one
DOT random testing pool for regulated
service performed on its behalf, even if
the regulated employee is subject to the
random testing requirements of more
than one DOT agency.
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
37937
§ 219.603 General requirements for
random testing programs.
(a) General. To the extent possible,
each railroad must ensure that its FRA
random testing program is designed and
implemented so that each employee
performing regulated service on its
behalf should reasonably anticipate that
he or she may be called for a random
test without advance warning at any
time while on duty and subject to
performing regulated service.
(b) Prohibited selection bias. A
random testing program may not have a
selection bias or an appearance of
selection bias, or appear to provide an
opportunity for a regulated employee to
avoid complying with this section.
(c) Plans. As required by §§ 219.603
through 219.609, each railroad must
submit for FRA approval a random
testing plan meeting the requirements of
this subpart. The plan must address all
regulated employees, as defined in
§ 219.5.
(d) Pools. Each railroad must
construct and maintain random testing
pools in accordance with § 219.611.
(e) Selections. Each railroad must
conduct random testing selections in
accordance with § 219.613.
(f) Collections. Each railroad must
perform random testing collections in
accordance with § 219.615.
(g) Cooperation. Each railroad and its
regulated employees must cooperate
with and participate in random testing
in accordance with § 219.617.
(h) Responsive action. Each railroad
must handle positive random tests and
verified refusals to test in accordance
with § 219.619.
(i) Service agents. Each railroad may
use a service agent to perform its
random testing responsibilities in
accordance with § 219.621.
(j) Records. Each railroad must
maintain records required by this
subpart in accordance with § 219.623.
§ 219.605 Submission and approval of
random testing plans.
(a) Plan submission. (1) Each railroad
must submit for review and approval a
random testing plan meeting the
requirements of §§ 219.607 and 219.609
to the FRA Drug and Alcohol Program
Manager, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE.,
Washington, DC 20590. A railroad
commencing start-up operations must
submit its plan no later than 30 days
before its date of commencing
operations. A railroad that must comply
with this subpart because it no longer
qualifies for the small railroad exception
under § 219.3 (due to a change in
operations or its number of covered
employees) must submit its plan no
later than 30 days after it becomes
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37938
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
subject to the requirements of this
subpart. A railroad may not implement
a Federal random testing plan or any
substantive amendment to that plan
before FRA approval.
(2) A railroad may submit separate
random testing plans for each category
of regulated employees (as defined in
§ 219.5), combine all categories into a
single plan, or amend its current FRAapproved plan to add additional
categories of regulated employees, as
defined by this part.
(b) Plan approval notification. FRA
will notify a railroad in writing whether
its plan is approved. If the plan is not
approved because it does not meet the
requirements of this subpart, FRA will
inform the railroad of its non-approval,
with specific explanations of any
required revisions. The railroad must
resubmit its plan with the required
revisions within 30 days of the date of
FRA’s written notice. Failure to
resubmit the plan with the necessary
revisions will be a failure to submit a
plan under this part.
(c) Plan implementation. Each
railroad must implement its random
testing plan no later than 30 days from
the date of FRA approval.
(d) Plan amendments. (1) Each
railroad must submit to FRA a
substantive amendment to an approved
plan at least 30 days before its intended
effective date. A railroad may not
implement any substantive amendment
before FRA approval.
(2) Each railroad must provide a nonsubstantive amendment to an approved
plan (such as the replacement or
addition of service providers) to the
FRA Drug and Alcohol Program
Manager in writing (by letter or email)
before its effective date. However, FRA
pre-approval is not required.
(e) Previously approved plans. A
railroad is not required to resubmit a
random testing plan that FRA had
approved before June 12, 2017, unless
the railroad must amend the plan to
comply with the requirements of this
subpart. A railroad must submit new
plans, combined plans, or amended
plans incorporating new categories of
regulated employees (i.e., maintenanceof-way employees) for FRA approval at
least 30 days before June 12, 2017.
§ 219.607 Requirements for random
testing plans.
(a) General. A random testing plan
that a railroad submits under this
subpart must address and comply with
the requirements of this subpart. The
railroad must also comply with these
requirements in implementing the plan.
(b) Model random testing plan. A
railroad (or a contractor or service agent
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
that submits a part 219-compliant
random testing plan to a railroad for
submission as a part of the railroad’s
random testing plan) may complete,
modify if necessary, and submit a plan
based on the FRA model random testing
plan that can be downloaded from
FRA’s Drug and Alcohol Program Web
site.
(c) Specific plan requirements. Each
random testing plan must contain the
following items of information, each of
which must be contained in a separate,
clearly identified section:
(1) Total number of covered
employees, including covered service
contractor employees and volunteers;
(2) Total number of maintenance-ofway employees, including maintenanceof-way contractor employees and
volunteers;
(3) Names of any contractors who
perform regulated service for the
railroad, with contact information;
(4) Method used to ensure that any
regulated service contractor employees
and volunteers are subject to the
requirements of this subpart, as required
by § 219.609;
(5) Name, address, and contact
information for the railroad’s Designated
Employer Representative (DER) and any
alternates (if applicable);
(6) Name, address, and contact
information for any service providers,
including the railroad’s Medical Review
Officers (MROs), Substance Abuse and
Mental Health Services Administration
(SAMHSA) certified drug testing
laboratory(ies), Drug and Alcohol
Counselors (DACs), Substance Abuse
Professionals (SAPs), and C/TPA or
collection site management companies.
Individual collection sites do not have
to be identified;
(7) Number of random testing pools
and the proposed general pool entry
assignments for each pool. If using a C/
TPA, a railroad must identify whether
its regulated employees are combined
into one pool, contained in separate
pools, or combined in a larger pool with
other FRA or other DOT agency
regulated employees, or both.
(8) Target random testing rates;
(9) Method used to make random
selections, including a detailed
description of the computer program or
random number table selection process
employed;
(10) Selection unit(s) for each random
pool (e.g., employee name or ID number,
job assignment, train symbol) and
whether the individual selection unit(s)
will be selected for drugs, alcohol, or
both;
(11) If a railroad makes alternate
selections, under what limited
PO 00000
Frm 00046
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
circumstances these alternate selections
will be tested (see § 219.613);
(12) Frequency of random selections
(e.g., monthly);
(13) Designated testing window. A
designated testing window extends from
the beginning to the end of the
designated testing period established in
the railroad’s FRA-approved random
plan (see § 219.603), after which time
any individual selections for that
designated testing window that have not
been collected are no longer active
(valid); and
(14) Description of how the railroad
will notify a regulated employee that he
or she has been selected for random
testing.
§ 219.609 Inclusion of contractor
employees and volunteers in random
testing plans.
(a) Each railroad’s random testing
plan must demonstrate that all of its
regulated service contractor employees
and volunteers are subject to random
testing that meets the requirements of
this subpart. A railroad can demonstrate
that its regulated service contractor
employees and volunteers are in
compliance with this subpart by either:
(1) Directly including regulated
service contractor employees and
volunteers in its own random testing
plan and ensuring that they are tested
according to that plan; or
(2) Indicating in its random testing
plan that its regulated service contractor
employees and volunteers are part of a
random testing program which is
compliant with the requirements of this
subpart, e.g., conducted by a contractor
or C/TPA (‘‘non-railroad random testing
program’’). If a railroad chooses this
option, the railroad must append to its
own random testing plan one or more
addenda describing the method it will
use to ensure that the non-railroad
random testing program is testing its
regulated service contractor employees
and volunteers according to the
requirements of this subpart. A railroad
may comply with this requirement by
appending the non-railroad random
testing program or a detailed description
of the program and how it complies
with this subpart.
(b) Each railroad’s random testing
plan(s) and any addenda must contain
sufficient detail to fully document that
the railroad is meeting the requirements
of this subpart for all personnel
performing regulated service on its
behalf.
(c) If a railroad chooses to use
regulated service contractor employees
and volunteers who are part of a nonrailroad random testing program, the
railroad remains responsible for
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
ensuring that the non-railroad program
is testing the regulated service
contractor employees and volunteers
according to the requirements of this
subpart.
(d) FRA does not pre-approve
contractor or service agent random
testing plans, but may accept them as
part of its approval process of a
railroad’s plan.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 219.611 Random alcohol and drug
testing pools.
(a) General. Each railroad must ensure
that its random testing pools include all
regulated employees who perform
regulated service on its behalf, except
that a railroad’s random testing pools do
not have to include regulated employees
who are part of a non-railroad random
testing program that is compliant with
the requirements of this subpart and
that has been accepted by the railroad.
(b) Pool entries. Each railroad must
clearly indicate who will be tested when
a specific pool entry is selected.
(1) Pool entries may be employee
names or identification numbers, train
symbols, or specific job assignments,
although all the entries in a single pool
must be of generally consistent sizes
and types.
(2) Pool entries must not allow a field
manager or field supervisor to have
discretion over which employee is to be
tested when an entry is selected.
(3) Pool entries must be constructed
and maintained so that all regulated
employees have an equal chance of
being selected for random testing for
each selection draw.
(c) Minimum number of pool entries.
A railroad (including a service agent
used by a railroad to carry out its
responsibilities under this subpart) may
not maintain a random testing pool with
less than four pool entries. Placeholder
pool entries (entries that do not
represent legitimate selections of
regulated employees) are not permitted.
A railroad or contractor with less than
four regulated employees can comply
with this requirement by having its
regulated employees incorporated into a
railroad or non-railroad random testing
pool that contains more than four
entries.
(d) Pool construction. (1) An
individual who is not subject to the
random testing requirements of FRA or
another DOT agency may not be placed
in the same pool as a regulated
employee.
(2) A railroad may not include a
regulated employee in more than one
random testing pool established under
the regulations of a DOT agency.
(3) A regulated employee may be
placed in a random testing pool with
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
employees subject to the random testing
requirements of another DOT agency,
only if all entries in the pool are subject
to testing at the highest minimum
random testing rate required by the
regulations of a DOT agency for any
single member in the pool.
(4) A regulated employee does not
have to be placed in separate pools for
random drug and random alcohol
testing selection.
(5) A regulated employee must be
incorporated into a random testing pool
as soon as possible after his or her hire
or first transfer into regulated service.
(e) Frequency of regulated service. (1)
A railroad may not place a person in a
random testing pool for any selection
period in which he or she is not
expected to perform regulated service.
(2) A railroad employee who performs
regulated service on average less than
once a quarter is a de minimis safety
concern for random testing purposes,
and does not have to be in a random
testing program. A railroad that chooses
to random test de minimis employees
must place them in a separate random
testing pool from employees who
perform regulated service on a regular
basis (e.g., engineers, conductors,
dispatchers, and signal maintainers).
(3) A railroad must make a good faith
effort to determine the frequency of an
employee’s performance of regulated
service and must evaluate the
employee’s likelihood of performing
regulated service in each upcoming
selection period.
(f) Pool maintenance. Pool entries
must be updated at least monthly,
regardless of how often selections are
made, and a railroad must ensure that
each of its random testing pools is
complete and does not contain outdated
or inappropriate entries.
(g) Multiple random testing pools. A
railroad may maintain more than one
random testing pool if it can
demonstrate that its random testing
program is not adversely impacted by
the number and types of pools or the
construction of pool entries, and that
selections from each pool will meet the
requirements of this subpart.
§ 219.613
Random testing selections.
(a) General. Each railroad must ensure
that each regulated employee has an
equal chance of being selected for
random testing whenever selections are
made. A railroad may not increase or
decrease an employee’s chance of being
selected by weighting an entry or pool.
(b) Method of selection. (1) Each
railroad must use a selection method
that is acceptable to FRA and meets the
requirements of this subpart, such as a
computer selection program, proper use
PO 00000
Frm 00047
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
37939
of a random number table, or an
alternative method which FRA has
approved as part of the railroad’s
random testing plan.
(2) A selection method must be free of
bias or apparent bias and employ
objective, neutral criteria to ensure that
every regulated employee has an equal
statistical chance of being selected
within a specified time frame. The
selection method may not utilize
subjective factors that permit a railroad
to manipulate or control selections in an
effort to either target or protect any
employee, job, or operational unit from
testing.
(3) The randomness of a selection
method must be verifiable, and, as
required by § 219.623, any records
necessary to document the randomness
of a selection must be retained for not
less than two years from the date the
designated testing window for that
selection expired.
(c) Minimum random testing rate. (1)
Each railroad must distribute random
tests reasonably throughout the calendar
year and make sufficient selections to
ensure that each random testing pool
meets the Administrator’s minimum
annual random testing rates as
established according to § 219.625.
(2) Each railroad must continually
monitor changes in its workforce to
ensure that the required number of
selections and tests are conducted each
year.
(d) Selection frequency. Each railroad
must select at least one entry from each
of its random testing pools every three
months.
(e) Discarded selection draws. Each
selection draw must identify who will
be subject to random testing. A railroad
cannot discard a selection draw without
an acceptable explanation (e.g., the
selection was drawn from an incomplete
or inaccurate pool). A railroad must
document and retain records for all
discarded selection draws, including the
specific reason the selection draw was
not used, as required by § 219.623.
(f) Increasing random selections. A
railroad that is unable to complete a
collection for each selection made
during a designated testing period may
increase the number of selections in a
subsequent selection period to ensure
that it meets the annual minimum
random testing rate for the calendar
year.
(g) Selection snapshots. Each railroad
must capture and maintain an electronic
or hard copy snapshot of each random
testing pool at the time it makes a
testing selection. A railroad must not recreate pool entries from records after the
time of the original selection. The
railroad must maintain this snapshot for
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37940
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
a period of two years, as required by
subpart J of this part.
(h) Multiple DOT agencies. Each
railroad must ensure that each regulated
employee who performs functions
subject to the random testing
requirements of more than one DOT
agency is subject to random selection at
or above the current minimum annual
testing rate set by the DOT agency that
regulates more than 50 percent of the
employee’s DOT-regulated functions.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 219.615
Random testing collections.
(a) Minimum random testing rates.
Each railroad must complete a sufficient
number of random alcohol and drug
testing collections from each of its
random testing pools to meet the
Administrator’s minimum annual
testing rates established in accordance
with § 219.625.
(b) Designated testing window. Each
railroad must complete the collection
for a selected pool entry within the
FRA-approved designated testing
window for that selection. Once a
designated testing window has closed,
any selections not collected during that
window are no longer valid and may not
be subject to random testing.
(c) Collection timing. (1) A regulated
employee may be subject to random
testing only while on duty and subject
to performing regulated service.
(2) Each railroad’s random alcohol
and drug testing collections must be
unannounced and spread reasonably
throughout the calendar year.
Collections must also be distributed
unpredictably throughout the
designated testing window and must
reasonably cover all operating days of
the week (including operating weekends
and holidays), shifts, and locations.
(3) Random alcohol test collections
must be performed unpredictably and in
sufficient numbers at either end of an
operating shift to attain an acceptable
level of deterrence throughout the entire
shift. At a minimum, a railroad must
perform 10% of its random alcohol tests
at the beginning of shifts and 10% of its
random alcohol tests at the end of shifts.
(4) If a regulated employee has been
selected for both random drug and
alcohol testing, a railroad may conduct
these tests separately, so long as both
required collections can be completed
by the end of the employee’s shift and
the railroad does not inform the
employee that an additional collection
will occur later.
(d) Collection scheduling. While pool
entries must be selected randomly, a
railroad may schedule each random test
collection during a designated testing
window according to its approved plan.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
(1) A railroad may schedule a
collection based on the availability of
the selected pool entry, the logistics of
performing the collection, and any other
requirements of this subpart.
(2) If a selected pool entry does not
identify the selection by name (i.e., train
crews or job functions), a railroad may
not use its scheduling discretion to
deliberately target or protect a particular
employee or work crew. Unless
otherwise approved in a random testing
plan, railroad field supervisors or field
management personnel may not use
discretion to choose or to change
collection dates or times if that choice
could intentionally alter who is to be
tested.
(e) Notification requirements. (1) A
railroad may notify a regulated
employee that he or she has been
selected for random testing only during
the duty tour in which the collection is
to be conducted, and only so far in
advance as is reasonably necessary to
ensure the employee’s presence at the
scheduled collection time and place.
(2) A railroad must make collections
as soon as possible. Each collection
must begin within two hours after the
railroad has notified the employee of his
or her selection for random testing,
unless the railroad has an acceptable
reason for the delay. A railroad should
monitor each employee after
notification and, whenever possible,
arrange for the employee to be
immediately escorted by supervisory or
management personnel to the collection
location.
(3) A railroad must inform an
regulated employee that he or she has
been selected for random testing at the
time the employee is notified.
Completion of the Federal Drug Testing
Custody and Control Form (CCF) or the
DOT Alcohol Testing Form (ATF)
indicating the basis of the test satisfies
this requirement, so long as the
employee has been shown and directed
to sign the CCF or ATF as required by
§§ 40.73 and 40.241 of this title.
(f) Incomplete collections. A railroad
must use due diligence to ensure that a
random testing collection is completed
for each selected pool entry, unless it
has an acceptable explanation for not
conducting the collection. All reasons
for incomplete collections must be fully
documented and are subject to
inspection by FRA upon request.
(g) Hours-of-service limitations. (1)
Except as provided by paragraph (g)(2)
of this section, a railroad must
immediately terminate a random
collection and may not reschedule it if
the collection is not completed within a
covered employee’s hours-of-service
limitations.
PO 00000
Frm 00048
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
(2) If a random collection requires a
direct observation collection under
§ 40.67 of this title, the directly
observed collection must immediately
proceed until completed. A railroad
must submit an excess service report, as
required by part 228 of this chapter, if
completion of the directly observed
collection causes the covered employee
to exceed his or her hours-of-service
limitations.
§ 219.617 Participation in random alcohol
and drug testing.
(a) Railroad responsibility. (1) A
railroad must, under the conditions
specified in this subpart and subpart H
of this part, require a regulated
employee selected for random testing to
cooperate in alcohol and/or drug testing.
(2) If an employee is performing
regulated service at the time he or she
is notified of his or her selection for
random testing, the railroad must ensure
that the employee immediately ceases to
perform regulated service and proceeds
to the collection site without adversely
affecting safety. A railroad must also
ensure that the absence of an employee
from his or her assigned duties to report
for testing does not adversely affect
safety. Once an employee begins the
testing process, he or she may not be
returned to regulated service until the
testing process is complete.
(3) A railroad may excuse an
employee who has been notified of or
her selection for random testing only if
the employee can substantiate that a
medical emergency involving the
employee or an immediate family
member (e.g., birth, death, or medical
emergency) supersedes the requirement
to complete the test. A medical
emergency is defined in this part as an
acute medical condition requiring
immediate emergency care. To be
eligible for exclusion from random
testing, the employee must provide
verifiable documentation of the
emergency situation from a credible
outside professional within a reasonable
period of time (e.g., a doctor, dentist,
hospital, law enforcement officer, or
school authority). A railroad may not
test an employee who has been excused
from testing under the same random
selection.
(b) Employee responsibility. (1) A
regulated employee subject to the
random testing requirements of this
subpart must cooperate with the
selection and testing process, and must
proceed to the testing site upon
notification that he or she has been
selected for random testing.
(2) A regulated employee must fully
cooperate and comply with the urine
drug collection and/or breath alcohol
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
testing procedures required by subpart
H of this part, and provide the required
specimen(s), and must, upon request,
complete the required paperwork and
certifications.
§ 219.619 Positive alcohol and drug test
results and refusals; procedures.
Section 219.104 contains the
procedures for administrative handling
by the railroad or contractor in the event
a urine specimen provided under this
subpart is reported as a verified positive
by the Medical Review Officer, a breath
alcohol specimen is reported at 0.04 or
greater by the Breath Alcohol
Technician, or a refusal to test has
occurred. The responsive action
required in § 219.104 is not stayed
pending the result of the testing of a
split urine specimen or a challenge to
any part of the testing process or
procedure.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 219.621
Use of service agents.
(a) A railroad may use a service agent
(such as a consortium/third party
administrator (C/TPA)) to act as its
agent to carry out any role in random
testing specifically permitted under
subpart Q of part 40 of this title, such
as maintaining random pools,
conducting random selections, and
performing random urine drug
collections and breath alcohol tests.
(b) A railroad may not use a service
agent to notify a regulated employee
that he or she has been selected for
random testing. A regulated employee
who has been selected for random
testing must otherwise be notified of the
selection by his or her employer. A
service agent may also not perform any
role that § 40.355 of this title
specifically reserves to an employer,
which, for purposes of this subpart, is
defined as a railroad or a contractor
performing railroad-accepted testing.
(c) A railroad is primarily responsible
for compliance with the random alcohol
and drug testing of this subpart, but
FRA reserves the right to bring an
enforcement action for noncompliance
against the railroad, its service agents,
its contractors, and/or its employees.
(d) If a railroad conducts random drug
and/or alcohol testing through a C/TPA,
the number of employees required to be
tested may be calculated for each
individual railroad belonging to the C/
TPA, or may be based on the total
number of regulated employees covered
by the C/TPA in a larger combined
railroad or DOT agency random pool.
Selections from combined railroad
random pools must meet or exceed the
highest minimum annual percentage
rate established under this subpart or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
any DOT agency drug testing rule that
applies to any member of that pool.
§ 219.623
Records.
(a) As provided by § 219.901, each
railroad is required to maintain records
related to random testing for a minimum
of two years.
(b) Contractors and service agents
performing random testing
responsibilities under this subpart must
provide records required by this subpart
whenever requested by the contracting
railroad or by FRA. A railroad remains
responsible for maintaining records
demonstrating that it is in compliance
with the requirements of this subpart.
§ 219.625 FRA Administrator’s
determination of random alcohol and drug
testing rates.
(a) Notice. Each year, the
Administrator publishes a Federal
Register notice announcing the
minimum annual random alcohol and
drug testing rates which take effect on
January 1 of the following calendar year.
These rates are based on the railroad
industry’s random testing violation rates
for the preceding two consecutive
calendar years, which are determined
using annual railroad alcohol and drug
program data required to be submitted
to the FRA’s Management Information
System (MIS) under § 219.800.
(b) Information. Data from MIS
reports provide the information used for
this determination. In order to ensure
reliability of the data, the Administrator
may consider the quality and
completeness of the reported data,
obtain additional information or reports
from railroads, or make appropriate
modifications in calculating the
industry positive rate.
(c) Initial minimum annual random
testing rates. The Administrator has
established an initial minimum annual
random testing rate of 50 percent for
drugs and 25 percent for alcohol for any
new category of regulated employees
added to those already being tested
under this part.
(1) These initial testing rates are
subject to amendment by the
Administrator in accordance with
paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section
after at least 18 months of MIS data have
been compiled for the new category of
regulated employees.
(2) The Administrator will determine
separate minimum annual random
testing rates for each added category of
regulated employees for a minimum of
three calendar years after that category
is incorporated into random testing
under this part.
(3) The Administrator may move to
combine categories of regulated
PO 00000
Frm 00049
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
37941
employees requiring separate
determinations into a single
determination once the categories’
testing rates are identical for two
consecutive years.
(d) Drug testing rate. The
Administrator may set the minimum
annual random drug testing rate for the
railroad industry at either 50 percent or
25 percent.
(1) When the minimum annual
percentage rate for random drug testing
is 50 percent, the Administrator may
lower the rate to 25 percent if the
Administrator determines that the MIS
data for two consecutive calendar years
show that the reported random testing
positive rate is less than 1.0 percent.
(2) When the minimum annual
percentage rate for random drug testing
is 25 percent, and the MIS data for any
calendar year show that the reported
random testing positive rate is equal to
or greater than 1.0 percent, the
Administrator will increase the
minimum annual percentage rate for
random drug testing to 50 percent.
(e) Alcohol testing rate. The
Administrator may set the minimum
annual random alcohol testing rate for
the railroad industry at 50 percent, 25
percent, or 10 percent.
(1) When the minimum annual
percentage rate for random alcohol
testing is 50 percent or 25 percent, the
Administrator may lower this rate to 10
percent if the Administrator determines
that the MIS data for two consecutive
calendar years show that the random
testing violation rate is less than 0.5
percent.
(2) When the minimum annual
percentage rate for random alcohol
testing is 50 percent, the Administrator
may lower the rate to 25 percent if the
Administrator determines that the MIS
data for two consecutive calendar years
show that the random testing violation
rate is less than 1.0 percent but equal to
or greater than 0.5 percent.
(3) When the minimum annual
percentage rate for random alcohol
testing is 25 percent, and the MIS data
for that calendar year show that the
random testing violation rate for drugs
is equal to or greater than 0.5 percent
but less than 1.0 percent, the
Administrator will increase the
minimum annual percentage rate for
random drug testing to 50 percent.
(4) When the minimum annual
percentage rate for random alcohol
testing is 10 percent or 25 percent, and
the MIS data for any calendar year show
that the random testing violation rate is
equal to or greater than 1.0 percent, the
Administrator will increase the
minimum annual percentage rate for
random alcohol testing to 50 percent.
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37942
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
Subpart H—Drug and Alcohol Testing
Procedures
§ 219.701
[Amended]
31. Revise § 219.701 by:
a. In paragraphs (a) and (b), removing
the phrase ‘‘B, D, F, and G’’ wherever it
appears and adding, in its place, ‘‘B, D,
E, F, G, and K (but only for co-worker
or non-peer referrals that involve a
violation of the prohibitions of this
subpart)’’; and
■ b. Removing paragraph (c).
■
■
Subpart I—Annual Report
32. In § 219.800, revise the last
sentence of paragraph (b) and the first
sentence of paragraph (d) and add a new
paragraph (f) to read as follows:
■
§ 219.800
Annual reports.
*
*
*
*
*
(b) * * * For information on where to
submit MIS forms and for the electronic
version of the form, see: https://
www.fra.dot.gov/eLib/details/L02639.
*
*
*
*
*
(d) As a railroad, if you have a
regulated employee who performs
multi-DOT agency functions (e.g., an
employee drives a commercial motor
vehicle and performs switchman duties
for you), count the employee only on
the MIS report for the DOT agency
under which he or she is random tested.
* * *
*
*
*
*
*
(f) A railroad required to submit an
MIS report under this section must
submit separate reports for covered
employees and MOW employees.
Subpart J—Recordkeeping
Requirements
33. Revise § 219.901 to read as
follows:
■
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 219.901 Retention of alcohol and drug
testing records.
(a) General. (1) In addition to the
records part 40 of this title requires
keeping, a railroad must also maintain
alcohol and drug misuse prevention
program records in a secure location
with controlled access under this
section’s requirements.
(2) A railroad must maintain for two
years, rather than one year, the records
to which § 40.333(a)(4) of this title
applies (i.e., records of negative and
cancelled drug test results and alcohol
test results with a concentration of less
than 0.02). A railroad may maintain
legible and accessible scanned or
electronic copies of these records for the
second year.
(b) Records maintained for a
minimum of five years. Each railroad
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
must maintain the following records for
a minimum of five years:
(1) A summary record or the
individual files of each regulated
employee’s test results; and
(2) A copy of the annual report
summarizing the results of its alcohol
and drug misuse prevention program (if
required to submit the report under
§ 219.800(a)).
(c) Records maintained for a
minimum of two years. Each railroad
must maintain the following records for
a minimum of two years:
(1) Records related to the collection
process:
(i) Collection logbooks, if used;
(ii) Documents relating to the random
selection process, including the
railroad’s approved random testing plan
and FRA’s approval letter for that plan;
(iii) Documents generated in
connection with decisions to administer
Federal reasonable suspicion or
reasonable cause alcohol or drug tests;
(iv) Documents generated in
connection with decisions on postaccident testing; and
(v) Documents verifying the existence
of a medical explanation for the
inability of a regulated employee to
provide an adequate specimen;
(2) Records related to test results:
(i) The railroad’s copy of the alcohol
test form, including the results of the
test;
(ii) The railroad’s copy of the drug test
custody and control form, including the
results of the test;
(iii) Documents related to any
regulated employee’s refusal to submit
to an alcohol or drug test required under
this part; and
(iv) Documents a regulated employee
presented to dispute the result of an
alcohol or drug test administered under
this part;
(3) Records related to other violations
of this part; and
(4) Records related to employee
training:
(i) Materials on alcohol and drug
abuse awareness, including a copy of
the railroad’s policy on alcohol and
drug abuse;
(ii) Documentation of compliance
with the requirements of § 219.23; and
(iii) Documentation of training
(including attendance records and
training materials) the railroad provided
to supervisors for the purpose of
qualifying the supervisors to make a
determination concerning the need for
reasonable suspicion or post-accident
alcohol and drug testing.
■ 34. Revise § 219.903 to read as
follows:
PO 00000
Frm 00050
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
§ 219.903
Access to facilities and records.
(a) Release of regulated employee
information contained in records
required to be maintained under
§ 219.901 must be in accordance with
part 40 of this title and with this
section. (For purposes of this section
only, urine drug testing records are
considered equivalent to breath alcohol
testing records.)
(b) Each railroad must grant access to
all facilities used to comply with this
part to the Secretary of Transportation,
United States Department of
Transportation, or any DOT agency with
regulatory authority over the railroad or
any of its regulated employees.
(c) Each railroad must make available
copies of all results for its drug and
alcohol testing programs conducted
under this part and any other
information pertaining to the railroad’s
alcohol and drug misuse prevention
program, when requested by the
Secretary of Transportation or any DOT
agency with regulatory authority over
the railroad or regulated employee.
§ 219.905
[Removed and Reserved]
35. Remove and reserve § 219.905.
36. Add a new subpart K to read as
follows:
■
■
Subpart K—Referral Programs
Sec.
219.1001 Requirement for referral
programs.
219.1003 Referral program conditions.
219.1005 Optional provisions.
219.1007 Alternate programs.
Subpart K—Referral Programs
§ 219.1001
programs.
Requirement for referral
(a) The purpose of this subpart is to
help prevent the adverse effects of drug
and alcohol abuse in connection with
regulated employees.
(b) A railroad must adopt, publish,
and implement the following programs:
(1) Self-referral program. A program
designed to encourage and facilitate the
identification of a regulated employee
who abuses drugs or alcohol by
providing the employee the opportunity
to obtain counseling or treatment before
the employee’s drug or alcohol abuse
manifests itself in a detected violation of
this part; and
(2) Co-worker referral program. A
program designed to encourage coworker participation in preventing
violations of this part.
(c) A railroad may adopt, publish, and
implement the following programs:
(1) Non–peer referral program. A
program designed to encourage nonpeer participation in preventing
violations of this part; and
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
(2) Alternate program(s). An alternate
program or programs meeting the
specific requirements of § 219.1003 or
complying with § 219.1007, or both.
(d) Nothing in this subpart may be
construed to:
(1) Require payment of compensation
for any period a regulated employee is
restricted from performing regulated
service under a voluntary, co-worker, or
non-peer referral program;
(2) Require a railroad to adhere to a
voluntary, co-worker, or non-peer
referral program when the referral is
made for the purpose, or with the effect,
of anticipating or avoiding the imminent
and probable detection of a rule
violation by a supervising employee;
(3) Interfere with the subpart D
requirement for Federal reasonable
suspicion testing when a regulated
employee is on duty and a supervisor
determines the employee is exhibiting
signs and symptoms of alcohol and/or
drug use;
(4) Interfere with the requirements in
§ 219.104(d) for responsive action when
a violation of § 219.101 or § 219.102 is
substantiated; or
(5) Limit the discretion of a railroad
to dismiss or otherwise discipline a
regulated employee for specific rule
violations or criminal offenses, except
as this subpart specifically provides.
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
§ 219.1003
Referral program conditions.
(a) General. A referral program must
specify the allowances, conditions, and
procedures under which a self-referral,
co-worker referral, and, if adopted, a
non-peer referral, can occur, as follows:
(1) For a self-referral, a railroad must
identify one or more designated DAC
contacts (including telephone number
and email (if available)) and any
expectations regarding when the referral
is allowed to take place (such as during
non-duty hours, or while the employee
is unimpaired, or both, as § 219.1005
permits);
(2) For a co-worker referral, a railroad
may accept a referral under this subpart
only if it alleges that the regulated
employee was apparently unsafe to
work with or in violation of this part or
the railroad’s drug and alcohol abuse
rules. The employee must waive
investigation of the rule charge and
must contact the DAC within a
reasonable period of time;
(3) For a non-peer referral, a railroad
may remove a regulated employee from
service only if a railroad representative
confirms that the employee is unsafe to
work with or in violation of this part or
the railroad’s drug and alcohol abuse
rules. The employee must waive
investigation of the rule charge and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
must contact the DAC within a
reasonable period of time.
(b) Employment maintained. A
regulated employee who is affected by
a drug or alcohol abuse problem may
maintain an employment relationship
with a railroad if:
(1) The employee seeks assistance
through the railroad’s voluntary referral
program for his or her drug or alcohol
abuse problem or a co-worker or a nonpeer refers the employee for such
assistance; and
(2) The employee successfully
completes the education, counseling, or
treatment program a DAC specifies
under this subpart.
(c) Employment action. If a regulated
employee does not choose to seek
assistance through a referral program, or
fails to cooperate with a DAC’s
recommended program, the disposition
of the employee’s relationship with the
railroad is subject to normal
employment action.
(d) Qualified DAC evaluation. (1) A
DAC acceptable to the railroad must
evaluate a regulated employee entering
a self-referral, co-worker referral, or
non-peer referral program;
(2) The DAC must meet any
applicable state standards and comply
with this subpart; and
(3) The DAC must determine the
appropriate level of care (education,
counseling, or treatment, or all three)
necessary to resolve any identified drug
or alcohol abuse problems.
(e) Removal from regulated service. A
referral program must stipulate that a
regulated employee a DAC has
evaluated as having an active drug
abuse disorder may not perform
regulated service until the DAC can
report that safety is no longer affected.
(f) Confidentiality maintained. Except
as provided under paragraph (l) of this
section, a railroad must treat a regulated
employee’s referral and subsequent
handling (including education,
counseling, and treatment) as
confidential. Only personnel who
administer the railroad’s referral
programs may have access to the
identities of the individuals in these
programs.
(g) Leave of absence. A railroad must
grant a regulated employee the
minimum leave of absence the DAC
recommends to complete a primary
education, counseling, or treatment
program and to establish control over
the employee’s drug or alcohol abuse
problem.
(h) Return to regulated service. (1)
Except as §§ 219.1001(d)(4) and
219.1005 may provide, a railroad must
return an regulated employee to
regulated service upon the DAC’s
PO 00000
Frm 00051
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
37943
recommendation that the employee has
established control over his or her drug
or alcohol abuse problem, has a low risk
to return to drug or alcohol abuse, and
has complied with any recommended
return-to-service requirements.
(2) The DAC determines the
appropriate number and frequency of
required follow-up tests. The railroad
determines the dates of testing.
(3) The railroad may condition an
employee’s return to regulated service
on successful completion of a return-toservice medical evaluation.
(4) A railroad must return an
employee to regulated service within
five working days of the DAC’s
notification to the railroad that the
employee is fit to return to regulated
service, unless the employee has a
disqualifying medical condition. (i.e.,
the employee is at a low risk to return
to drug or alcohol abuse).
(i) Rehabilitation plan. No person—
whether an employing railroad,
managed care provider, service agent,
individual, or any person other than the
DAC who conducted the initial
evaluation—may change in any way the
DAC’s evaluation or recommendations
for assistance. The DAC who made the
initial evaluation may modify the
employee’s initial evaluation and
follow-up recommendation(s) based on
new or additional information.
(j) Locomotive engineers and
conductors. Consistent with
§§ 240.119(e) and 242.115(g) of this
chapter, for a certified locomotive
engineer, certified conductor, or a
candidate for engineer or conductor
certification, the referral program must
state that confidentiality is waived (to
the extent the railroad receives from a
DAC official notice of the active drug
abuse disorder and suspends or revokes
the certification, as appropriate) if the
employee at any time refuses to
cooperate in a recommended course of
counseling or treatment.
(k) Contacting a DAC. If a regulated
employee does not contact a DAC
within the railroad’s specified time
limits, the railroad may begin an
investigation to assess the employee’s
cooperation and compliance with its
referral program.
(l) Time requirements for DAC
evaluations. Once a regulated employee
has contacted the designated DAC, the
DAC’s evaluation must be completed
within 10 working days. If the employee
needs more than one evaluation, the
evaluations must be completed within
20 working days.
(m) Time limitations on follow-up
treatment, care, or testing. Any followup treatment, care, or testing established
under a referral program must not
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37944
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
exceed 24 months beyond an regulated
employee’s initial removal from
regulated service, unless the regulated
employee’s entry into the program
involved a substantiated part 219
violation.
§ 219.1005
Optional provisions.
A railroad’s referral program may
include any of the following provisions
at the option of the railroad and with
the approval of the labor organization(s)
affected:
(a) The program may provide that the
rule of confidentiality is waived if:
(1) The regulated employee at any
time refuses to cooperate in a DAC’s
recommended course of education,
counseling, or treatment; or
(2) The railroad determines, after
investigation, that the regulated
employee has been involved in a drugor alcohol-related disciplinary offense
growing out of subsequent conduct.
(b) The program may require
successful completion of a return-toservice medical examination as a further
condition of reinstatement in regulated
service.
(c) The program may provide that it
does not apply to a regulated employee
whom the railroad has previously
assisted under a program substantially
consistent with this section.
(d) The program may provide that, in
order to invoke its benefits, the
regulated employee must report to the
railroad’s designated contact either:
(1) During non-duty hours (i.e., at a
time when the regulated employee is off
duty); or
(2) While unimpaired and otherwise
in compliance with the railroad’s drug
and alcohol rules consistent with this
subpart.
§ 219.1007
Alternate programs.
(a) Instead of the referral programs
required under § 219.1001, a railroad is
permitted to develop, publish, and
implement alternate programs that meet
the standards established in § 219.1001.
Such programs must have the written
concurrence of the recognized
representatives of the regulated
employees. Nothing in this subpart
restricts a railroad or labor organization
from adopting, publishing, and
implementing programs that afford more
favorable conditions to regulated
employees troubled by drug or alcohol
abuse problems, consistent with a
railroad’s responsibility to prevent
violations of §§ 219.101, 219.102, and
219.103.
(b) The concurrence of the recognized
representatives of the regulated
employees in an alternate program may
be evidenced by a collective bargaining
agreement or any other document
describing the class or craft of
employees to which the alternate
program applies. The agreement or other
document must make express reference
to this subpart and to the intention of
the railroad and employee
representatives that the alternate
program applies instead of the program
required by this subpart.
(c) The railroad must file the
agreement or other document described
in paragraph (b) of this section along
with the requested alternate program it
submits for approval with the FRA Drug
and Alcohol Program Manager. FRA
will base its approval on whether the
alternative program meets the
§ 219.1001 objectives. The alternative
program does not have to include each
§ 219.1001 component, but must meet
the general standards and intent of
§ 219.1001. If a railroad amends or
revokes an approved alternate policy,
the railroad must file a notice with FRA
of such amendment or revocation at
least 30 days before the effective date of
such action.
(d) This section does not excuse a
railroad from adopting, publishing, and
implementing the programs § 219.1001
requires for any group of regulated
employees not falling within the
coverage of an appropriate, approved
alternate program.
(e) Consistent with § 219.105(c), FRA
has the authority to inspect the
aggregate data of any railroad alcohol
and/or drug use education, prevention,
identification, and rehabilitation
program or policy, including alternate
peer support programs, to ensure that
they are not designed or implemented in
such a way that they circumvent or
otherwise undermine Federal
requirements, including the
requirements in this part regarding peer
support programs.
■ 37. Revise appendix A to read as
follows:
Appendix A to Part 219—Schedule of
Penalties
The following chart lists the schedule of
civil penalties:
PENALTY SCHEDULE 1
Section 2
Violation
Willful
violation
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Subpart A—General
219.3 Application:
(a) Railroad or contractor does not have required program ............................................................................
(c) Railroad or contractor improperly tests under subpart E or G of this part .................................................
219.9 Responsibility for compliance:
(b)(1) Host railroad failed to take responsibility for compliance or other railroad or contractor did not take
responsive action of direction of host railroad during joint operations .........................................................
219.11 General conditions for chemical tests:
(b)(1) Employee unlawfully refuses to participate in testing ............................................................................
(b)(2) Employer fails to give priority to medical treatment ...............................................................................
(b)(3) Employee fails to remain available ........................................................................................................
(d) Employee unlawfully required to execute a waiver of rights ......................................................................
(e)(1) Failure to direct employee to proceed to collection site as soon as possible without affecting safety
(e)(3) Railroad used or authorized the use of coercion to obtain specimens .................................................
(g) Failure to meet supervisory training requirements or program of instruction not available or program
not complete .................................................................................................................................................
(h) Urine or blood specimens provided for Federal testing were used for non-authorized testing .................
219.12 Hours-of-service laws implications:
(a)–(d) Failure to exceed Hours of Service to conduct required testing or exceeding HOS when not authorized to conduct testing ............................................................................................................................
219.23 Railroad policies:
(a) Failure to provide written notice of FRA test ..............................................................................................
(a)(1) Failure to provide written notice of basis for FRA test ..........................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00052
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
$5,000
2,500
$7,500
5,000
5,000
7,500
2,500
3,000
2,500
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
8,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
7,500
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
2,500
5,000
1,000
1,000
4,000
4,000
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
37945
PENALTY SCHEDULE 1—Continued
Section 2
Violation
(a)(2) Use of a non-approved FRA form for mandatory post-accident toxicological testing ...........................
(b) Improper use of Federal drug or alcohol testing form or use of Subpart C form for other test ................
(c) Failure to make required educational materials available ..........................................................................
(d) Failure to provide required minimum educational content .........................................................................
(e) Non-Federal provisions are not clearly described as independent authority .............................................
219.25 Previous employer drug and alcohol checks:
(a)(1)Failure to conduct previous employer drug and alcohol check or failure to provide response to previous employer when requested ...................................................................................................................
(a)(2) Failure to perform and complete FRA and DOT-required background checks in a timely manner ......
(a)(3) Failure to document due diligence in completing FRA and DOT-required background checks ...........
(b) Failure to comply with § 240.119(c) (for engineers) or § 242.115(e) (for conductors) of this chapter regarding the consideration of Federal alcohol and drug violations that occurred within a period of 60 consecutive months prior to the review of the person’s records .......................................................................
Willful
violation
1,000
1,000
2,500
2,500
2,500
4,000
4,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
2,500
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
5,000
2,500
5,000
........................
10,000
2,500
5,000
5,000
2,500
2,500
5,000
7,500
5,000
5,000
7,500
2,500
5,000
7,500
5,000
2,500
10,000
7,500
5,000
5,000
2,500
5,000
7,500
5,000
7,500
5,000
5,000
2,500
5,000
7,500
7,500
5,000
10,000
5,000
5,000
2,500
2,500
1,000
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
7,500
7,500
5,000
5,000
3,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
2,500
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
2,500
2,500
7,500
5,000
5,000
1,000
1,000
1,000
2,000
2,000
2,000
2,500
5,000
2,500
5,000
Subpart B—Prohibitions
219.101 Alcohol and drug use prohibited:
(a) Railroad with actual knowledge of use, possession or impairment from alcohol or controlled substances permits employee to go on duty or remain on duty ........................................................................
219.103 Prescribed and over-the-counter drugs:
(a) Failure to train employee properly on requirements ..................................................................................
219.104 Responsive action:
(a) Failure to remove employee from regulated service immediately .............................................................
(b) Failure to provide written notice for removal ..............................................................................................
(c) Failure to provide prompt hearing within 10 calendar days .......................................................................
(d) Employee improperly returned to regulated service ...................................................................................
(e) Failure to ensure certified locomotive engineers and conductors received required follow-up testing
minimums as per § 240.119(d)(2) and § 242.115(f)(2) of this chapter .........................................................
219.105 Railroad’s duty to prevent violations:
(a) Employee improperly permitted to remain in regulated service .................................................................
(b) Failure to exercise due diligence to assure compliance with prohibition ...................................................
(d) Failure to conduct and record minimum number of Rule G observations .................................................
219.107 Consequences of unlawful refusal:
(a) Failure to disqualify an employee for nine months following a refusal ......................................................
(b) Fail to provide written notice of withdrawal to employee ...........................................................................
(c) Employee unlawfully returned to service ....................................................................................................
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Subpart C—Post-Accident Toxicological Testing
219.201 Events for which testing is required:
(a) Failure to test after qualifying event (each regulated employee not tested is a violation) ........................
(c)(1)(i) Failure to make good faith determination ...........................................................................................
(c)(1)(ii) Failure to provide requested decision report to FRA .........................................................................
(c)(2) Testing performed after non-qualifying event .........................................................................................
219.203 Responsibilities of railroads and employees:
(a)(1)(i) and (a)(2)(i) Failure to properly test/exclude from testing ..................................................................
(a)(1)(ii) and (a)(2)(ii) Non-regulated service employee tested .......................................................................
(b)(1) Delay in obtaining specimens due to failure to make every reasonable effort .....................................
(c) Independent medical facility not utilized .....................................................................................................
(d) Failure to report event or contact FRA when intervention required ...........................................................
(d)(1) Failure to collect specimens in a timely manner ....................................................................................
(e)(2) Failure to recall employee for testing when conditions met ..................................................................
(e)(5) Failure to document why employee could not be recalled ....................................................................
(f)(1) Specimen collection not completed at an independent medical facility .................................................
219.205 Specimen collection and handling:
(a) Failure to observe requirements with respect to specimen collection, marking and handling ..................
(b) Failure to provide properly prepared forms with specimens ......................................................................
(d) Failure to promptly or properly forward specimens ....................................................................................
219.207 Fatality:
(a) Failure to collect specimens .......................................................................................................................
(a)(1) Failure to ensure timely collection and shipment of required specimens ..............................................
(b) Failure to request assistance when necessary ..........................................................................................
219.209 Reports of tests and refusals:
(a)(1) Failure to provide telephonic report .......................................................................................................
(b) Failure to provide written report of refusal to test ......................................................................................
(c) Failure to maintain report explaining why test not conducted within 4 hours ............................................
219.211 Analysis and follow-up:
(c) Failure of the MRO to report MRO downgrades and/or verified non-negative results to FRA in a timely
manner ..........................................................................................................................................................
(g)(3) Unauthorized withholding of regulated employee out of regulated service pending receipt of PAT
testing results ................................................................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00053
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37946
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
PENALTY SCHEDULE 1—Continued
Section 2
Violation
Willful
violation
Subpart D—Reasonable Suspicion Testing
219.301 Mandatory reasonable suspicion testing:
(a) Failure to conduct breath alcohol test when reasonable suspicion testing criteria met or conduct breath
alcohol test under reasonable suspicion when criteria not met ...................................................................
(b) Failure to conduct drug test when reasonable suspicion testing criteria met or conduct drug test under
reasonable suspicion when criteria not met .................................................................................................
219.303 Testing when reasonable suspicion criteria not met:
(a) Failure to use a trained supervisor when conducting a reasonable suspicion determination for alcohol
(b) Failure to use two supervisors, one of which must have been trained, when conducting a reasonable
suspicion determination for drugs .................................................................................................................
(c) Improperly holding employee out of service ...............................................................................................
(d) Failure to provide adequate written documentation for the reasons for a reasonable suspicion test .......
219.305 Prompt specimen collections; time limitations:
(a) Fail to promptly conduct test ......................................................................................................................
(b) Failure to document why test not administered within time limits ..............................................................
(c) Improper recall of employee .......................................................................................................................
5,000
7,500
5,000
7,500
2,500
5,000
2,500
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
5,000
2,500
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
5,000
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
1,000
2,500
1,000
2,500
2,500
1,000
2,500
5,000
2,500
5,000
2,500
5,000
2,500
5,000
2,500
1,000
5,000
2,500
2,500
5,000
2,500
5,000
1,000
2,500
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
2,500
5,000
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
2,500
5,000
Subpart E—Reasonable Cause Testing
219.401 Authorization for reasonable cause testing:
(a) Failure to declare which authority (Federal or company) is being used for reasonable cause testing .....
(b) Testing conducted after regulated employee is released from duty ..........................................................
219.403 Requirements for reasonable cause testing:
(a) Testing when event did not meet the criteria for train accident or train incident .......................................
(b) Testing when event did not meet the criteria for rule violation ..................................................................
219.405 Documentation requirements:
(a) Failure to provide adequate written documentation for the reasons for a reasonable cause test ............
(b) Failure to document specific type of rule violation and the involvement of each tested regulated employee ............................................................................................................................................................
219.407 Prompt Specimen Collection; Time Limitations:
(a) Failure to perform a test in a timely ...........................................................................................................
(b) Failure to document why test not administered within time limits ..............................................................
(c) Improper recall of employee .......................................................................................................................
219.409 Limitations on authority:
(b) Improper withholding of regulated employee from regulated service pending test results .......................
Subpart F—Pre-Employment Tests
219.501 Pre-employment drug testing:
(a) Failure to conduct a Federal pre-employment test before a final applicant or employee transfer performs regulated service ................................................................................................................................
(b) Failure to conduct a Federal pre-employment test before an employee of a contractor performs regulated service ..................................................................................................................................................
(e) Pre-employment testing of grandfathered regulated employee .................................................................
219.502 Pre-employment alcohol testing:
(a)(1) Failure to conduct alcohol testing of a regulated employee after choosing to perform Federal preemployment alcohol testing ..........................................................................................................................
(a)(2) Failure to treat all regulated employees the same for purposes of Federal pre-employment alcohol
testing ............................................................................................................................................................
219.503 Notification; records:
Failure to notify the applicant in writing of non-negative test results or refusal ..............................................
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
Subpart G—Random Alcohol and Drug Testing Programs
219.601 Purpose and scope of random testing programs:
(b) Failure to ensure regulated employee is subject to random testing ..........................................................
(c) Contractor or volunteer not included in random testing while subject to performing regulated service ....
(d)(1) Regulated employee not subject to random testing at minimum rate set by agency covering more
than 50% of employee’s regulated functions ...............................................................................................
219.605 Submission and approval of random testing plans:
(a)(1) Failure to obtain FRA approval of random testing program ..................................................................
(c) Failure to implement random testing plan within 30 days of notification of FRA approval ........................
(d)(1) Failure to implement substantive plan amendment within 30 days of notification of FRA approval, or
failure to obtain FRA approval before implementing substantive plan amendment before implementation
(d)(2) Failure to submit non-substantive plan amendment before implementation .........................................
219.607 Requirements for random testing plans:
(a) Railroad implementation failed to comply with approved plan ...................................................................
(c) Failure to contain required plan elements ..................................................................................................
219.609 Inclusion of contractor employees and volunteers in random testing plans:
(a) Failure to demonstrate that regulated service contractor employees and volunteers are subject to random testing ...................................................................................................................................................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00054
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
37947
PENALTY SCHEDULE 1—Continued
Section 2
Violation
(c) Failure to ensure regulated service contractor and volunteers are tested in accordance with this subpart ................................................................................................................................................................
219.611 Random drug and alcohol and drug testing pools:
(a) Failure of railroad to ensure that all regulated employees including contractors and volunteers are included in random testing pools .....................................................................................................................
(b)(2) Improper criteria for pool entries which allows for employer discretion over who is to be tested ........
(b)(3) Failure to construct and maintain pool entries that will ensure regulated employees have an equal
chance of being selected randomly for each draw ......................................................................................
(c) Maintaining a random testing pool with less than four pool entries ...........................................................
(d)(1) Failure to ensure that pools do not contain non-regulated employees .................................................
(d)(2) Regulated employee included in more than one DOT random pool .....................................................
(d)(3) Failure to maintain pools and/or pool entries that meet FRA/DOT regulations ....................................
(d)(5) Failure to add or remove regulated employees to or from the proper random pool in a timely manner .................................................................................................................................................................
(e)(2) Failure to remove employees who perform de minimis service from pools which include employees
who perform regulated service on a regular basis .......................................................................................
(f) Failure to have an effective mechanism to update and maintain pools .....................................................
219.613 Random testing selections:
(b)(1) Failure to use an FRA-acceptable selection procedure .........................................................................
(b)(2) Failure to ensure every regulated employee has an equal chance at being selected at each draw ...
(b)(3) Failure to have necessary documentation verifying the selection process for testing window .............
(c)(1) Failure to select pool entries at a rate which ensures compliance with FRA required random rates or
fail to reasonably distribute selections throughout the selection year .........................................................
(d) Railroad failed to select at least one entry from each of its random testing pools every three months ...
(e) Railroad discarded selection draws without an acceptable explanation ....................................................
(g) Failure to capture and maintain electronic or hard copy snapshot of each random testing pool at the
time it makes a testing selection ..................................................................................................................
219.615 Random testing collections:
(a) Failure to comply with minimum annual random collection testing rates ..................................................
(b) Failure to test selections within the approved testing window ...................................................................
(c)(1) Testing a regulated employee while not on duty or testing a regulated employee not randomly selected or testing a non-regulated employee .................................................................................................
(c)(2) Failure to distribute collections reasonably throughout all shifts, days of the week, weeks of the
month, and months of the year ....................................................................................................................
(c)(3) Failure to perform at least 10% of its random alcohol tests at the beginning of shifts and at least
10% of random alcohol tests at the end of shifts .........................................................................................
(e)(1) Advance notification given to employees selected for testing ...............................................................
(e)(2) Fail to begin collection within two hours of notice of random selection without an acceptable reason
for the delay ..................................................................................................................................................
(f) Failure to test a selection without an FRA-acceptable reason ...................................................................
(g)(1) Fail to immediately terminate random collection due to hours of service expiration ............................
219.617 Participation in random alcohol and drug testing:
(a)(1) Failure to test regulated employee when properly selected for random test ........................................
(a)(2) Failure to restrict regulated employee from performing regulated service prior to completion of random testing ...................................................................................................................................................
(a)(3) Improperly excused without substantiated medical emergency ............................................................
219.621 Use of Service Agents:
(g) Improper use a service agent to notify a regulated employee that they have been selected for random
testing ............................................................................................................................................................
219.623 Records
(a) Failure of railroads to meet recordkeeping requirements ..........................................................................
(g) Failure of contractors and service agents to provide required random testing records when requested
by the contracting railroad or FRA ...............................................................................................................
219.625 FRA Administrator’s determination of random alcohol and drug rates
(d) Failure to meet the required FRA random testing rate for drugs ...............................................................
(e) Failure to meet the required FRA random testing rate for alcohol ............................................................
Willful
violation
2,500
5,000
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
2,500
5,000
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
2,500
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
5,000
2,500
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
5,000
2,500
5,000
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
2,500
5,000
2,500
5,000
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
2,500
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
5,000
2,500
5,000
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
2,500
5,000
2,500
5,000
2,500
5,000
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
5,000
7,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
5,000
Subpart H—Drug and Alcohol Testing Procedures
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
219.701 Standards for drug and alcohol testing:
(a) Failure to comply with part 40 procedures in subpart B, D, E, F, G and K testing ...................................
Subpart I—Annual Report
219.800 Annual Reports:
(a) Failure to submit MIS report on time ..........................................................................................................
(c) Failure to submit accurate MIS report ........................................................................................................
(d) Failure to include required data ..................................................................................................................
Subpart J—Recordkeeping Requirements
219.901
Retention of alcohol and drug testing records:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00055
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4700
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
37948
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules and Regulations
PENALTY SCHEDULE 1—Continued
Section 2
Violation
(a) Failure to maintain records required to be kept by part 40 of this chapter ...............................................
(b) Failure to maintain records required to be kept for five years ...................................................................
(c) Failure to maintain records required to be kept for two years ...................................................................
219.903 Access to facilities and records:
(a) Failure to release records in this subpart in accordance with part 40 of this chapter ...............................
(b) Failure to permit access to facilities ...........................................................................................................
(c) Failure to provide access to results of railroad alcohol and drug testing programs ..................................
Willful
violation
2,500
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
5,000
2,500
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
5,000
2,500
5,000
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
5,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
5,000
2,500
5,000
2,500
5,000
Subpart K—Referral Programs
219.1001 Requirement for referral programs:
(b)(1) Failure to adopt or implement required self-referral program or alternate program that meets the requirements of this subpart ............................................................................................................................
(b)(2) Failure to adopt or implement required co-worker referral program or alternate program that meets
the requirements of subpart K of this part ....................................................................................................
(d) Violation of referral program prohibitions ...................................................................................................
219.1003 Referral program conditions:
(a) Failure to comply with referral program conditions ....................................................................................
(b) Failure to maintain employment .................................................................................................................
(c) Failure to disqualify regulated employee when referral conditions not met ...............................................
(d) Use of unqualified DAC ..............................................................................................................................
(e) Allowing person evaluated as having active substance abuse disorder to perform regulated service .....
(f) Breach of confidentiality
(g) Failure to allow recommended leave of absence .......................................................................................
(h)(1)–(3) Failure to meet return to service conditions ....................................................................................
(h)(4) Failure to return to service when conditions met ...................................................................................
(i) Improper modification to rehabilitation plan .................................................................................................
(l) Failure to complete DAC evaluation within time limit ..................................................................................
(m) Exceeding 24 month time limit on aftercare when not associated with a substantiated part 219 violation ................................................................................................................................................................
219.1007 Alternate programs:
(c) Failure to obtain FRA approval of alternate program .................................................................................
1A
penalty may be assessed against an individual only for a willful violation. The FRA Administrator reserves the right to assess a penalty of
up to $105,000 for any violation, including ones not listed in this penalty schedule, where circumstances warrant. See 49 CFR part 209, appendix
A.
2 The penalty schedule uses section numbers from 49 CFR part 219; and if more than one item is listed as a type of violation of a given section, each item is also designated by a ‘‘penalty code,’’ which is used to facilitate assessment of civil penalties. For convenience, penalty citations
will cite the CFR section and the penalty code, if any. FRA reserves the right, should litigation become necessary, to substitute in its complaint
the CFR citation in place of the combined CFR and penalty code citation.
Issued in Washington, DC, on May 27,
2016.
Amitabha Bose,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016–13058 Filed 6–6–16; 8:45 am]
asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with RULES
BILLING CODE 4910–06–P
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:38 Jun 09, 2016
Jkt 238001
PO 00000
Frm 00056
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
E:\FR\FM\10JNR3.SGM
10JNR3
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 112 (Friday, June 10, 2016)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 37893-37948]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-13058]
[[Page 37893]]
Vol. 81
Friday,
No. 112
June 10, 2016
Part IV
Department of Transportation
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Railroad Administration
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
49 CFR Part 219
Control of Alcohol and Drug Use: Coverage of Maintenance of Way (MOW)
Employees and Retrospective Regulatory Review-Based Amendments; Final
Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 81 , No. 112 / Friday, June 10, 2016 / Rules
and Regulations
[[Page 37894]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Federal Railroad Administration
49 CFR Part 219
[Docket No. FRA-2009-0039, Notice No. 3]
RIN 2130-AC10
Control of Alcohol and Drug Use: Coverage of Maintenance of Way
(MOW) Employees and Retrospective Regulatory Review-Based Amendments
AGENCY: Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Department of
Transportation (DOT).
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: In response to Congress' mandate in the Rail Safety
Improvement Act of 2008 (RSIA), FRA is expanding the scope of its drug
and alcohol regulation to cover MOW employees. This rule also codifies
guidance from FRA compliance manuals, responds to National
Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) recommendations, and adopts
substantive amendments based upon FRA's regulatory review of 30 years
of implementation of this part.
The final rule contains two significant differences from FRA's July
28, 2014 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). First, it adopts part
214's definition of ``roadway worker'' to define ``MOW employee'' under
this part. Second, because FRA has withdrawn its proposed peer support
requirements, subpart K contains a revised version of the troubled
employee identification requirements previously in subpart E.
DATES: This rule is effective June 12, 2017. Petitions for
reconsideration must be received on or before August 9, 2016. Petitions
for reconsideration will be posted in the docket for this proceeding.
Comments on any submitted petition for reconsideration must be received
on or before September 13, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Petitions for Reconsideration related to Docket No. FRA-
2009-0039 may be submitted by any of the following methods: Web site:
The Federal eRulemaking Portal, https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the
online instructions for submitting comments.
Fax: 202-493-2251.
Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. DOT, 1200 New Jersey Avenue
SE., W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
Hand Delivery: Room W12-140 on the Ground level of the West
Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC between 9 a.m. and
5 p.m. Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
Instructions: All submissions must include the agency name and
docket number or Regulatory Identification Number (RIN) for this
rulemaking. Please see the Privacy Act heading in the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section of this document for Privacy Act information
related to any submitted comments or materials.
Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
comments received, go to www.regulations.gov or to Room W12-140 on the
Ground level of the West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE.,
Washington, DC between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday, except
Federal holidays.
A complete version of part 219 as amended in this final rule is
available for review in the public docket of this rulemaking (docket
no. FRA-2009-0039). Interested persons can review this document to
learn how this rule affects part 219 as a whole.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gerald Powers, Drug and Alcohol
Program Manager, Office of Safety Enforcement, Federal Railroad
Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Mail Stop 25, Washington,
DC 20590 (telephone 202-493-6313), Patricia V. Sun, Trial Attorney,
Office of Chief Counsel, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Mail Stop 10, Washington, DC 20590 (telephone 202-
493-6060), patricia.sun@dot.gov; or Elizabeth A. Gross, Trial Attorney,
Office of Chief Counsel, Federal Railroad Administration, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Mail Stop 10, Washington, DC 20590 (telephone 202-
493-1342), elizabeth.gross@dot.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents for Supplementary Information
I. Executive Summary
II. Rulemaking Proceedings
III. Effective Date
IV. Maintenance-of-Way Employees and Contactors
A. Definitions
B. MOW Employees and the Small Railroad Exception
C. MOW Contractors and the Small Railroad Exception
D. Railroad and Contractor Responsibility for Compliance
E. Pre-employment Drug Testing of MOW Employees
F. Initial MOW Employee Random Testing Rates
G. MOW Employee Minimum Random Testing Pool Size
V. Restructuring of Part 219
A. Division of Reasonable Suspicion and Reasonable Cause Testing
into Subparts D and E
B. Transfer of Revised and Retitled Troubled Employee
Requirements to Subpart K
VI. Section-by-Section Analysis
VII. Regulatory Impact and Notices
A. Executive Orders 12866 and13563 and DOT Policies and
Procedures
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 13272; Final
Regulatory Flexibility Assessment
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
D. Federalism Implications
E. Environmental Impact
F. Executive Order 12898 (Environmental Justice)
G. Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation)
H. International Trade Impact Assessment
I. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
J. Energy Impact
K. Privacy Act Information
I. Executive Summary
In the first major updating of its drug and alcohol regulation (49
CFR part 219) since its inception in 1985, FRA is expanding the scope
of part 219 to cover Maintenance-of-Way (MOW) employees. Historically,
FRA has conducted only post-mortem post-accident toxicological (PAT)
testing of MOW employees, since an MOW employee, unlike a covered
service employee, has been subject to part 219 testing only when he or
she has died as the result of a reportable railroad accident or
incident. Even in this comparatively small sample of post-mortem
results, however, FRA found a disproportionately high level of positive
test results among deceased MOW employees compared to the PAT testing
and random testing results of covered employees who are already wholly
subject to part 219.
Congress, in the Rail Safety Act of 2008 (RSIA), recognized the
substance abuse problem among MOW employees by directing FRA to make
them fully subject to the policies and protections of part 219. Partly
in response to comments received, FRA is adopting the definition of
roadway worker in part 214 of this chapter to define who is an MOW
employee for purposes of part 219. FRA will introduce MOW employees to
random drug and alcohol testing at the same initial minimum random
testing rates it initially applied to covered employees. FRA is also
adding a new definition, ``regulated employee,'' to encompass both
covered and MOW employees.
In this rule, FRA is making MOW employees subject to all part 219
testing, namely, random testing, PAT testing, reasonable suspicion
testing, reasonable cause testing, pre-employment testing, return-to-
duty testing, and follow-up testing. Because many MOW employees work
for multiple contractors or contract for short-term jobs, FRA is
addressing not only the roles and responsibilities of railroads with
respect to those employees who directly
[[Page 37895]]
perform MOW activities for them, but also the roles and
responsibilities of contractors and subcontractors who provide MOW
services to railroads on a contract basis. As has been its practice,
FRA is holding railroads, contractors, and subcontractors equally
responsible for ensuring that their employees who perform MOW
activities are in compliance with the requirements of this rule. FRA is
also continuing its practice of counting only a railroad's total number
of covered employees to determine whether that railroad qualifies for
certain exceptions as a small entity.
In addition, FRA has used this lookback at part 219 to conduct a
complete retrospective regulatory review of the rule. As a result, FRA
has largely restructured and rewritten large sections of this rule and
incorporated longstanding compliance guidance, to make part 219's
requirements easier to read, find, and implement.
Finally, in response to widespread opposition from commenters, FRA
is not adopting its proposal to require peer support programs. FRA is
instead transferring part 219's requirements for troubled employee
programs to a new subpart in a revised, expanded, and clarified format.
Costs and Benefits of Final Rule
The final rule will impose costs that are outweighed by the
quantified safety benefits. For the 20-year period analyzed, the
estimated costs that will be imposed on industry total approximately
$24.3 million (undiscounted), with discounted costs totaling $14.2
million (Present Value (PV), 7 percent) and $18.9 million (PV, 3
percent). The estimated quantified benefits for this 20-year period
total approximately $115.8 million (undiscounted), with discounted
benefits totaling $57.4 million (PV, 7 percent) and $83.6 million (PV,
3 percent).
The costs will primarily be derived from implementation of the
statutory mandate to expand the scope of part 219 to cover MOW
employees. The benefits will primarily accrue from the expected injury,
fatality, and property damage avoidance resulting from the expansion of
part 219 to cover MOW employees, as well as the PAT testing threshold
increase. The table below summarizes the quantified costs and benefits
expected to accrue over a 20-year period from adoption of the final
rule and identifies the statutory costs and benefits (those required by
the RSIA mandate to expand part 219 to MOW employees) and the
discretionary costs and benefits (those that are due to the non-RSIA
requirements).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Statutory Discretionary Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Costs (20 year)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PAT Testing--Adding MOW................................... $ 52,000 ................ $ 52,000
PAT Testing--Impact Def + Xing............................ ................ $241,974 241,974
Reasonable Suspicion Testing.............................. 842,398 ................ 842,398
Pre-Employment Testing--Adding MOW........................ 673,897 ................ 673,897
Pre-Employment Testing--Sm, RR............................ ................ 29,904 29,904
Random Testing............................................ 20,863,074 ................ 20,863,074
Annual Reporting.......................................... 160,911 ................ 160,911
Recordkeeping Requirement................................. 1,397,840 ................ 1,397,840
-----------------------------------------------------
Costs Subtotal........................................ 23,990,120 271,878 24,261,998
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits (20 year)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accident Reduction........................................ 115,369,281 ................ 115,369,281
PAT Testing Threshold Reduction........................... ................ 388,295 388,295
-----------------------------------------------------
Benefits Subtotal..................................... 115,369,281 388,295 115,757,576
-----------------------------------------------------
Net Benefit....................................... 91,379,161 116,417 91,495,578
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Rulemaking Proceedings
On July 28, 2014, in response to a Congressional mandate (see sec.
412 of the RSIA (Pub. L. 110-432, October 16, 2008)) and NTSB
recommendation R-08-07, FRA published an NPRM (79 FR 48380) which
proposed to expand the scope of part 219 to cover MOW employees. See 79
FR 43830. FRA also proposed to modify its post-accident toxicology
(PAT) testing criteria and to replace its subpart E programs addressing
troubled employees with a peer support program in new subpart K. The
NPRM also proposed to adopt longstanding program guidance, and to
clarify and restructure part 219 to make its requirements easier to
understand and implement.
On September 15, 2014, in a jointly filed petition, the American
Public Transportation Association (APTA), American Short Line and
Regional Railroad Association (ASLRRA), Association of American
Railroads (AAR), and National Railroad Construction and Maintenance
Association, Inc. (NRCMA), requested a 60 day extension of the NPRM's
comment period, which had been scheduled to close on September 26,
2014. FRA agreed to this request, and published a notice allowing
commenters until November 25, 2014, to submit comments. (September 25,
2014, 79 FR 57495).
FRA received 16 comments during this extended comment period,
including an AAR/ASLRRA (hereinafter referred to as the
``Associations'') joint submission, as well as comments from APTA, the
NRCMA, the NTSB, SMART (the American Train Dispatchers Association,
Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen, Brotherhood of
Maintenance of Way Employees Division, International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers; and Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation),
Twin Cities & Western Railroad Company (TC&W), Drug Abuse Program
Administrators Administration Worldwide (SAPAA), Pacific Southwest
Railway Museum (PSRM), SAPlist.com, and Southeastern Pennsylvania
Transportation Authority (SEPTA). Six individuals also submitted
comments. (Although SMART had requested a public hearing in its
November 28, 2014 comment, the deadline for filing such a request was
30 days after the
[[Page 37896]]
publication of the NPRM, or August 27, 2014).
In this final rule, FRA will not address comments that raised
issues outside the scope of, or not specific to, the proposals in the
NPRM, or comments submitted after the extended comment period had
closed. In addition, the NPRM proposed to make this part more user-
friendly, by reorganizing sections, re-designating paragraphs, updating
terms, and amending language for consistency. Because FRA received no
comment on these minor edits, FRA is not repeating the NPRM's
discussion of them.
III. Effective Date
FRA received only one comment concerning the rule's effective date.
The Associations requested that the final rule become effective two
years after its publication, to allow for the implementation of new
testing policies and procedures, and for the creation of random testing
pools for MOW employees. FRA notes, however, that many MOW employees
are already subject to drug and alcohol testing under Federal
authority, company authority, or both. For example, any MOW employee
whose duties require the holding of a Commercial Driver's License (CDL)
is subject to Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA)
testing requirements. MOW employees may also be subject to testing
under company authority, often in a ``look-alike'' (a company testing
program that mirrors FRA standards and procedures) program. This
familiarity with drug and alcohol programs will facilitate the
implementation of part 219 requirements for MOW employees.
Moreover, railroads have thirty years of experience implementing
part 219 requirements for their covered service employees; while
employers who are newly subject to part 219, such as contractors who
provide MOW service to railroads, have service agents (e.g., random
testing consortia and third party administrators) readily available to
facilitate adoption and compliance with this part. Given the experience
and resources railroads and contractors have to draw on, FRA believes a
one year implementation window is reasonable for the requirements in
this rule.
IV. Maintenance-of-Way Employees and Contractors
A. Definitions
As proposed, FRA is expanding the scope of part 219 to cover
employees and contractors who perform MOW activities. This rule also
adopts FRA's proposal to define the term ``employee'' to include
employees, volunteers, and probationary employees of railroads and
contractors (including subcontractors) to railroads, and to adopt the
term ``regulated service'' to encompass both covered service and MOW
activities. Performance of regulated service makes an individual a
``regulated employee'' subject to part 219, regardless of whether the
individual is employed by a railroad or a contractor to a railroad.
In the NPRM, FRA requested comment on who should be subject to the
expanded scope of this part. As alternatives, FRA asked whether part
219's definition of MOW employee should: (1) Be identical to the
roadway worker definition in part 214, Roadway Workplace Safety; (2)
include all employees subject to disqualification under 49 CFR 209.303,
as recommended by the NTSB; or (3) incorporate a modified version of
part 214's definition of roadway worker which would include certain
roadway worker functions but not others, as proposed in the NPRM. Of
those who commented on FRA's proposed definition of MOW activities,
SEPTA stated that the definition of MOW activities in part 219 should
be consistent with the definition of roadway worker duties in part 214.
While the Associations supported FRA's proposed exclusions from MOW
activities, they agreed with SEPTA's view that part 219's definition of
MOW activities and Sec. 214.7's definition of roadway worker duties
should be consistent. SMART, however, commented that FRA's proposed MOW
activities definition was both too inclusive and too exclusive, while
the NRCMA unqualifiedly supported the proposed definition.
In its comments, the NTSB continued to advocate for adoption of
Recommendation R-08-07, which recommended that FRA expand the scope of
part 219 to include all employees subject to Sec. 209.303. No other
commenter supported so wide an expansion. As noted in the NPRM, Sec.
209.303 encompasses many employees besides those who perform covered
service and MOW activities, no matter how such activities are defined.
As examples, Sec. 209.303 includes employees who conduct tests and
training, and mechanics who maintain locomotives, and freight and
passenger cars, among others.
In Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn., 489 U.S. 602 (1989),
the Supreme Court held that an alcohol or drug test conducted under FRA
authority is a Fourth Amendment search, and in its determination of who
should be subject to part 219 testing, FRA must carefully balance
public safety interests against individual privacy rights. FRA has done
so, and can find no overriding safety interest that would justify
making every employee covered by Sec. 209.303 subject to part 219
testing. In its comment to the NPRM, the NTSB cited no accidents or
data to support adoption of R-08-07. To date, FRA has no data
suggesting that the functions of testers, trainers, and mechanics are
of such a safety-sensitive nature that employees who perform these
functions should be subject to drug and alcohol testing. FRA therefore
finds no compelling reason to expand the scope of part 219 to equal
that of Sec. 209.303.
Upon consideration of the other comments, however, FRA has
reevaluated its proposed definition of MOW employee. Almost all
commenters pointed out that an employee who performs activities on or
near a railroad's roadbed or track is by definition one who performs
work that could pose risks to the safety of both the employee and the
public. As demonstrated by the high positive rate among MOW employee
fatalities (detailed in the NPRM), the misuse of drugs or alcohol by
these employees can have disastrous consequences. Congress determined
when it enacted the RSIA, that an employee who performs MOW activities
performs work that is sufficiently safety-sensitive to trigger FRA's
drug and alcohol requirements. Adoption of the NPRM's proposed
definition of MOW employee would have required railroads to maintain
fine distinctions among MOW activities, since the performance of
certain activities would make an employee subject to both parts 214 and
219, while the performance of others would make an employee subject
only to part 214 or to part 219.
FRA's proposed MOW definition could have potentially required a
railroad or contractor to establish three different categories of
coverage, with the attendant administrative burdens necessary to sort
and maintain such categories. In contrast, because the term ``roadway
worker'' has been long established by part 214, the railroad industry
is already familiar with its meaning and application. FRA is therefore
adopting, for its definition of MOW employee, Sec. 214.7's definition
of roadway worker, which includes ``any employee of a railroad or a
contractor to a railroad, whose duties include inspection,
construction, maintenance or repair of roadway track; bridges, roadway,
signal and communications systems, electric traction systems, roadway
facilities or roadway maintenance machinery on or near track
[[Page 37897]]
or with the potential of fouling a track, and flagmen and watchmen/
lookouts as defined in this section.'' By doing so, FRA is adopting the
recommendation of the majority of commenters, who asserted that an
individual subject to roadway worker protection under part 214 should
also be a MOW employee subject to drug and alcohol testing under part
219.
B. MOW Employees and the Small Railroad Exception
Since the inception of its alcohol and drug program in 1985, FRA
has counted the number of covered employees a railroad has (including
covered service contractors and volunteers) as one factor in
determining the railroad's risk of alcohol and drug-related accidents.
See 50 FR 31529, Aug. 2, 1985. Historically, a small railroad, defined
by FRA as one that has 15 or fewer covered employees and no joint
operations with other railroads, has proven less likely to have a drug
and alcohol-related accident than a larger railroad. Therefore, FRA has
always required a larger railroad (defined as one that has 16 or more
covered employees or is engaged in joint operations) to implement all
of part 219, while Sec. 219.3 previously excepted a small railroad
from the requirements of subpart D (reasonable suspicion and reasonable
cause testing), subpart E (previously identification of troubled
employees), subpart F (pre-employment testing), and subpart G (random
alcohol and drug testing); these exceptions lessened part 219's
regulatory burden on small railroads.
As proposed, FRA is continuing its longstanding approach of
counting only a railroad's covered employees for purposes of
determining whether the railroad qualifies for the small railroad
exception (the railroad also cannot participate in any joint
operations) because FRA believes this is the best measure of the risks
posed by the railroad's operations. FRA received no objections to this
proposal.
C. MOW Contractors and the Small Railroad Exception
With respect to a contractor who performs MOW activities for a
railroad, FRA is amending Sec. 219.3 to apply part 219 to an MOW
contractor to the same extent as it applies to the railroad for which
the MOW contractor performs regulated service. As proposed, a
contractor's level of part 219 compliance will be determined by the
size of the railroad for which it is performing regulated service,
regardless of the size of the contractor itself. New language in the
small railroad exception states that a contractor who performs MOW
activities exclusively for small railroads that are excepted from full
compliance with part 219 will also be excepted from full compliance.
For example, an MOW contractor with five employees who perform
regulated service for a large railroad must implement a full part 219
program if the railroad for which it performs regulated service must do
so, while an MOW contractor with 20 employees does not have to
implement a full part 219 program if it performs regulated service for
a small railroad that is excepted from full compliance with part 219.
FRA recognizes that an MOW contractor may perform regulated service
for multiple railroads, some of which may not be required to comply
fully with part 219. To simplify application, FRA is adding new
language to the small railroad exception requiring an MOW contractor
who performs regulated service for multiple railroads to implement a
full part 219 program if the contractor performs regulated service for
at least one large railroad fully subject to part 219. If an MOW
contractor performs regulated service for at least one large railroad,
it must incorporate all of its regulated employees into a full part 219
program, even if only some of these employees perform regulated service
for large railroads, regardless of whether or not a particular employee
is currently performing regulated service for a large or a small
railroad. This approach allows an MOW contractor to flexibly allocate
its employees between small and large railroads. To ensure that it does
not encourage the hiring of MOW contractors in lieu of MOW employees,
FRA is excluding both contractor employees who perform MOW activities
and railroad employees who perform MOW activities, for purposes of the
employee count to determine whether a railroad qualifies as a small
railroad. Labor supported FRA's decision.
D. Railroad and Contractor Responsibility for Compliance
FRA is adopting its proposal to hold both a railroad and its
contractor(s) responsible for ensuring that any contractor employees
who perform regulated service for the railroad are in compliance with
part 219. In their comments, the Associations objected that the RSIA
mandated that part 219 cover contractors who perform regulated service,
but did not make railroads responsible for ensuring that compliance,
and that a contractor who performs regulated service for more than one
railroad would be required to comply with the drug and alcohol training
requirements of multiple railroads. The TC&W commented that FRA should
audit the drug and alcohol compliance of contractors who perform
regulated service.
FRA notes that making a railroad responsible for its contractor's
compliance, and making a contractor who performs regulated service
responsible for its own compliance, are not new requirements, because
existing Sec. 219.9 makes every person--including a railroad, an
independent contractor and an employee of an independent contractor--
who violates or causes a violation of a part 219 requirement subject to
a civil penalty. To avoid confusion, FRA is discussing a contractor's
options to ensure part 219 compliance for its regulated employees
below, while the corresponding railroad options to ensure that its
contractor employees who perform regulated service are in compliance
will be discussed below in the section-by-section analysis of Sec.
219.609.
A contractor who must establish a random testing program for its
regulated service employees may do so through any of the following
methods. As discussed in the NPRM, a contractor may choose to:
Establish its own part 219 program and provide the
railroad with documentation of its compliance with part 219. If a
contractor chooses this option, FRA will not audit the contractor but
will instead require the railroad to maintain the contractor's
documentation for FRA audit purposes. If the contractor's documentation
or program contains a deficiency or violation that the railroad could
not have reasonably detected, FRA may use its enforcement discretion to
take action solely against the contractor. As discussed earlier in the
preamble, the extent of a regulated service contractor's
responsibilities will be determined by the size of the railroad(s) with
which it contracts.
Contract with a consortium to administer its part 219
program. The consortium may either place the contractor's regulated
employees in a stand-alone random testing pool or in a random testing
pool with the regulated employees of other regulated service
contractors. The contractor must then submit documentation of its
membership in the consortium and its compliance with part 219 to the
contracting railroad. As with the option described above, if the
contractor's documentation or program contains a deficiency or
violation that the railroad could not have reasonably detected, FRA may
use its enforcement discretion to take action only against the
contractor. Upon request, FRA will
[[Page 37898]]
assist a railroad in reviewing the part 219 documentation of its
regulated service contractors.
Ensure that any employees who perform regulated service
for a railroad are incorporated into the railroad's part 219 program.
To facilitate part 219 implementation for railroads and
contractors, FRA has developed two sets of model drug and alcohol plans
(including testing plans); a set for an entity subject to all of part
219 and another for an entity that qualifies for the small railroad
exception. Both sets are currently available at FRA's Web site: https://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0345.
FRA had proposed an alternative two-pronged approach, which would
require a contractor to provide a railroad with: (1) Written
certification that all of its regulated employees are in compliance
with part 219, and (2) a summary of its part 219 data at least every
six months. The NRCMA commented that it was unnecessary to require
certification of compliance with part 219, noting that railroad
contracts routinely require a contractor to certify compliance with all
relevant Federal, state, and local laws and regulations. The NCRMA also
objected to providing summary data, commenting that this was both
unnecessary and an undue administrative burden. FRA agrees, and has
decided not to adopt these proposed requirements.
A railroad has the additional option of accepting a contractor's
plan for random testing, regardless of whether that plan is managed by
the contractor or by a consortium/third party administrator (C/TPA). If
a railroad adopts this approach, the contractor must:
Certify in writing to the railroad that all of its
regulated employees are subject to part 219 (including, as applicable,
random testing under subpart G, pre-employment drug testing under
subpart F, and a previous employer background check as required by
Sec. 40.25); and
Report, in an FRA model format, summary part 219 testing
data to the railroad at least every six months.
The railroad should review this summary data since it remains
responsible for monitoring the contractor's compliance.
E. Pre-Employment Drug Testing of MOW Employees
As proposed, FRA is exempting all current MOW employees from
subpart F pre-employment drug testing (with certain limitations, pre-
employment alcohol testing is authorized but not required). Only MOW
employees hired after the effective date of this rule must have a
negative DOT pre-employment drug test result before performing
regulated service for the first time. As with its initial minimum
random testing rates, FRA used a similar approach to exempt current
covered employees from pre-employment drug testing in 1986. Although
these employees do not have to be pre-employment drug tested, current
MOW employees are subject to FRA's initial minimum random drug testing
rate of 50%.
FRA realizes that a large percentage of MOW employees may already
have a negative pre-employment drug test result under the alcohol and
drug testing regulations of another DOT agency; usually these MOW
employees are required by their employers to hold a Commercial Driver's
License (CDL), and are therefore subject to the regulations of both FRA
and FMCSA. To hold a CDL, an individual must have a negative FMCSA pre-
employment drug test. See Sec. 382.301. To ease the compliance burden
on both employees and employers, an employing railroad may use a
negative pre-employment drug test conducted under the rules and
regulations of another DOT agency to satisfy FRA's pre-employment drug
test requirements for employees initially transferring into regulated
service after the effective date of this rule. This amendment adopts
previous FRA guidance on pre-employment drug testing.
F. Initial MOW Employee Random Testing Rates
This rule makes MOW employees subject to FRA random testing, with
the exception of those who perform regulated service solely for a small
railroad. For covered employees, FRA has annually set minimum random
drug and alcohol testing rates determined by the overall railroad
random testing violation rates for covered employees. FRA determines
this overall rate from program data that railroads submit to its
Management Information System (MIS). See 49 CFR 219.602 and 219.608.
When FRA first established minimum random testing rates for covered
employees, it set the initial minimums for drugs and alcohol at the top
end of their respective ranges, at 50 percent for drugs and 25 percent
for alcohol. At that time, FRA had no rail industry random testing data
because the MIS had been newly established. FRA later lowered both
minimum annual random testing rates to the bottom of their ranges after
MIS data showed consistently low overall random testing violation rates
for covered employees. These minimum rates, which have been unchanged
since 2000, are 25 percent for drugs and 10 percent for alcohol in
2016.
Similarly, because MOW employees are being introduced to random
testing, FRA has no overall railroad random testing violation rate data
for these employees. To develop this data, FRA is setting the initial
minimum random testing rates for MOW employees at 50 percent for drugs
and 25 percent for alcohol, as it initially did for covered employees.
A railroad must therefore create and maintain a separate random testing
pool for its MOW employees, both to allow these employees to be tested
at their own minimum random testing rates and, from those railroads
required to file an MIS report, to establish a separate database. As it
did with covered employees, FRA could lower these minimum random
testing rates in the future if the data for MOW employees show
consistently low overall random testing violation rates.
G. MOW Employee Minimum Random Testing Pool Size
As proposed, to maintain the deterrent effect of random testing for
very small railroads and contractors, FRA is requiring each individual
random testing pool established under subpart G to select and randomly
test at least one entry per quarter, even if fewer tests are needed to
meet FRA's minimum random testing rates. Conversely, the requirement to
conduct at least four tests throughout the year does not excuse a
railroad (or contractor to a railroad, or a C/TPA) from complying with
FRA's minimum random testing rates. For example, a railroad that
maintains a pool of 16 MOW employees must conduct at least eight, not
four, random drug tests in a year to comply with a minimum random drug
testing rate of 50%.
V. Restructuring of Part 219
A. Division of Reasonable Suspicion and Reasonable Cause Testing Into
Subparts D and E
Previously, the requirements for both reasonable suspicion and
reasonable cause testing were found in subpart D. Because of their
similar names and their location in the same subpart, railroads and
employees often confused the two types of testing, even though
reasonable suspicion and reasonable cause testing have very different
requirements. To clarify the substantive differences between the two,
the requirements for reasonable suspicion testing will remain in
subpart D, while the requirements for reasonable cause testing have
been moved to subpart E, which formerly addressed voluntary referral
and co-
[[Page 37899]]
worker report policies (``Identification of Troubled Employees,'' now
found in subpart K). This differentiation is important since small
railroads are required to conduct reasonable suspicion testing, but not
reasonable cause testing. FRA received no objections to its proposal to
divide reasonable suspicion and reasonable cause testing into two
distinct subparts.
B. Transfer of Revised and Retitled Troubled Employee Requirements to
Subpart K
To accommodate the placement of reasonable cause testing into
subpart E, FRA has transferred a revised and retitled version of the
``Identification of Troubled Employees'' requirements previously in
subpart E to new subpart K. (As noted above, this is in lieu of FRA's
proposal to require peer support programs in subpart K, which, for the
reasons discussed below, FRA is not adopting).
VI. Section-by-Section Analysis
As discussed earlier, throughout most of part 219 FRA is
substituting ``regulated employee'' and ``regulated service'' where the
terms ``covered employee'' and ``covered service'' formerly appeared.
``Regulated employee'' and ``regulated service'' are terms-of-art
encompassing all individuals and duties subject to part 219, including
both covered service and MOW activities. The terms ``covered employee''
and ``covered service,'' however, are retained where necessary, such as
in Sec. 219.12, which addresses issues of overlap between part 219 and
the HOS laws that apply only to covered employees.
Authority Citation
The authority citation for part 219 adds a reference to Section 412
of the RSIA, which mandated the expansion of part 219 to cover all
employees of railroads and contractors or subcontractors to railroads
who perform MOW activities.
Subpart A--General
Section 219.1--Purpose and Scope
This section now includes a reference to the new definition of
``employee'' in Sec. 219.5, which includes any individual (including a
volunteer or a probationary employee) who performs regulated activities
for a railroad or a contractor to a railroad.
Section 219.3--Application
The small railroad exception in Sec. 219.3(b)(2) has provided, in
part, that a railroad with 15 or fewer covered employees that does not
engage in joint operations with another railroad is not subject to the
requirements for reasonable suspicion or reasonable cause testing (both
previously found in subpart D), identification of troubled employees
(previously subpart E), pre-employment drug testing (subpart F), or
random testing (subpart G).
FRA is modifying the small railroad exception so that small
railroads are no longer excepted from the reasonable suspicion testing
requirements of subpart D. Subpart D requires a railroad to conduct
Federal reasonable suspicion testing whenever one or more trained
supervisors reasonably suspects that an employee has violated an FRA
prohibition against the use of alcohol or drugs. See Sec. 219.300(a).
FRA's decision not to authorize small railroads to conduct FRA-
authority reasonable cause testing (moved to subpart E of this rule)
remains unchanged, however.
FRA is also amending the small railroad exception so that small
railroads are no longer excepted from subpart F. As is already required
for larger railroads, a small railroad must conduct a pre-employment
drug test and obtain a negative result before allowing an individual to
perform regulated service for the first time. See Sec. 219.501(a). As
with larger railroads, this requirement applies only to those regulated
employees hired by a small railroad after the effective date of this
final rule, because all regulated employees hired before the effective
date of this rule are exempted from pre-employment drug testing.
FRA received no comments on the clarifications in this section,
which are adopted without further comment.
Section 219.5--Definitions
As proposed, FRA is amending this section by adding, clarifying,
and deleting definitions. Additional or clarified definitions include:
Administrator
FRA is defining ``Administrator'' to include the Administrator of
the FRA or the Administrator's delegate.
Associate Administrator
FRA is clarifying that ``Associate Administrator'' means both the
FRA's Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety and the Associate
Administrator's delegate.
Contractor
As proposed, FRA's new definition of ``contractor'' includes both a
contractor and a subcontractor performing functions for a railroad.
DOT-Regulated Employee
A ``DOT-regulated employee'' means a person who is subject to drug
or alcohol testing, or both, under any DOT agency regulation, including
an individual currently performing DOT safety-sensitive functions and
an applicant for employment subject to DOT pre-employment drug testing.
DOT Safety-Sensitive Duty or DOT Safety-Sensitive Function
The performance of a ``DOT safety-sensitive duty'' or ``DOT safety-
sensitive function'' makes a person subject to the drug testing and/or
alcohol testing requirements of a DOT agency. The performance of
regulated service is a DOT safety-sensitive duty or function under this
part.
Drug and Alcohol Counselor or DAC
FRA is adopting this part's definition for ``Drug and Alcohol
Counselor'' or ``DAC'' from Sec. 242.7 of its conductor certification
rule.
Employee
An ``employee'' is any person, including a volunteer, and a
probationary employee, who performs activities for a railroad or a
contractor to a railroad.
Evacuation
Under Sec. 219.201(a)(1)(ii)(A), one of the criteria for a ``major
train accident'' requiring PAT testing is an evacuation. To qualify as
an evacuation, an event must involve the relocation of at least one
person who is not a railroad employee to a safe area to avoid exposure
to a hazardous material release. This relocation would normally be
ordered by local authorities and could be either mandatory or
voluntary. This definition does not include the closure of public
roadways for hazardous material spill containment purposes, unless that
closure was accompanied by an evacuation order.
Flagman or Flagger
FRA is adopting its proposal to define a ``flagman'' (also known as
a ``flagger'') and ``watchman/lookout'' in Sec. 219.5 as those terms
are currently defined in Sec. 214.7.
Highway-Rail Grade Crossing
FRA is adopting the definition of ``highway-rail grade crossing''
found in Sec. 225.5 of its accident and incident reporting regulation,
which includes all crossing locations within industry and rail yards,
ports, and dock areas.
[[Page 37900]]
Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Accident/Incident
This definition is essentially identical to the description of
highway-rail grade crossing impacts found in the definition for
``accident/incident'' in FRA's accident and incident reporting
regulation. See 49 CFR 225.5.
Joint Operations
The phrase ``rail operations'' in this definition encompasses
dispatching and other types of operations. As examples, even if
Railroad A has fewer than sixteen covered employees, Railroad A is
engaged in joint operations with Railroad B if it either dispatches
trains for Railroad B and/or enters Railroad B's yard to perform
switching operations. Railroad A is also engaged in joint operations
with Railroad B if they operate over the same track at different times
of the day.
Railroad A is not, however, engaged in joint operations with
Railroad B, if they operate over the same track but are physically
separated (e.g., through a split rail derail or the removal of a
section of rail), since this separation prevents Railroad A's
operations from overlapping with those of Railroad B. FRA is also
excluding from joint operations certain minimal operations on the same
track for the purposes of interchange, so long as these operations: (1)
Do not exceed 20 mph; (2) are conducted under restricted speed; (3)
proceed no more than three miles; (4) and, if extending into another
railroad's yard(s), operate into another railroad's yard(s) solely to
set out or pick up cars on a designated interchange track. FRA is
excluding these minimal operations from its new ``joint operations''
definition because of their comparatively lesser safety risk.
On-Track or Fouling Equipment
This new definition includes any railroad equipment positioned on
or over the rails or fouling a track.
Other Impact Accident
An ``other impact accident'' includes any accident/incident
involving contact between on-track or fouling equipment that is not
otherwise classified as another type of collision (e.g., a head-on
collision, rear-end collision, side collision, raking collision, or
derailment collision). This new definition also includes an impact in
which a single car or cut of cars is damaged during operations
involving switching, train makeup, setting out, etc.
Person
As amended, this definition adopts the existing language in Sec.
219.9 and adds an independent contractor who provides goods or services
to a railroad to the scope of whom or what is considered a ``person''
under this part (e.g., a service agent such as a collection site or
laboratory) See 49 CFR part 40, subpart Q--Roles and Responsibilities
of Service Agents. Service agents are already required to comply with
both part 219 and part 40, so this amendment is a clarification that
makes no substantive changes.
Plant Railroad
For clarification, FRA has added language defining when an entity's
operations do not qualify for plant railroad status.
Raking Collision
As newly defined, a ``raking collision'' occurs when there is a
collision between parts, with the lading of a train on an adjacent
track, or with a structure such as a bridge. A collision that occurs at
a turnout is not a raking collision.
Regulated Employee and Regulated Service
A regulated employee is any employee subject to this part: a
covered employee, an MOW employee, and an employee of a railroad or a
contractor to a railroad who performs covered service or MOW
activities. Correspondingly, regulated service is any duty which makes
an employee subject to this part.
Side Collision
A side collision occurs when one consist strikes the side of
another consist at a turnout, including a collision at a switch or at a
railroad crossing at grade.
Tourist, Scenic, Historic, or Excursion Operation That Is Not Part of
the General Railroad System of Transportation
To be considered not part of the general railroad system of
transportation, a tourist, scenic, historic, or excursion operation
must be conducted only on track used exclusively for that purpose
(i.e., there are no freight, intercity passenger, or commuter passenger
railroad operations on the track).
Watchman/Lookout
This definition is identical to that in Sec. 214.7, subpart C of
part 214, roadway worker protection.
Revised definitions include:
Covered Employee
As revised, a ``person'' includes an employee, volunteer, and
probationary employee. FRA has also updated the reference to the hours
of service laws (49 U.S.C. ch. 211). Neither change is substantive.
Covered Service
FRA is adding examples of covered service and a reference to
appendix A to 49 CFR part 228, Requirements of the Hours of Service
Act: Statement of Agency Policy and Interpretation. No substantive
changes are intended.
FRA Representative
As proposed, the definition of ``FRA representative'' is amended to
include the oversight contractor for FRA's Drug and Alcohol Program and
the staff of FRA's Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety.
Impact Accident
In its initial implementation of this part, FRA excepted derailment
and raking collisions from its definition of ``impact accident''
because it formerly believed these types of collisions were not caused
by human factors. (See 50 FR 31539 and 31542, Aug. 2, 1985 and 54 FR
39647, Sep. 27, 1989). FRA is removing these exceptions after learning
that human factors such as fatigue and impairment can and do contribute
to both derailment and raking collisions.
As additional clarification, FRA is excluding the impact of rail
equipment with ``naturally-occurring obstructions such as fallen trees,
rock or snow slides, livestock, etc.'' from its definition of an impact
accident. FRA is also incorporating guidance stating that an impact
with a derail does not qualify as an ``impact with a deliberately-
placed obstruction, such as a bumping post,'' since bumping posts are
usually permanently placed at the end of a line, while derails can
easily be moved from place to place.
Medical Facility
As amended, a ``medical facility'' is an independent (i.e., not
maintained by the railroad) site which is able to collect blood and
urine specimens for PAT testing and, if necessary, treat an employee
who has been injured in a PAT testing event.
Railroad Property Damage or Damage to Railroad Property
As proposed, the amended definition of ``railroad property damage
or damage to railroad property'' means damage to railroad property,
including damage to on-track equipment, signals, track, track
structure, or roadbed; and labor costs, including hourly wages,
transportation costs, and hotel expenses; but excluding damage to
lading and the cost of
[[Page 37901]]
clearing a wreck; except that the cost of contractor services, of
renting and operating machinery, and of any additional damage caused
while clearing the wreck is included when calculating railroad property
damage to determine whether PAT testing is required under FRA's
regulations. These clarifications are meant to enable easier compliance
with this part, and no substantive changes are intended.
Train Accident
As amended, the definition of ``train accident'' refers to rail
equipment accidents under Sec. 225.19(c) which include, but are not
limited to, collisions, derailments, and other events involving the
operation of on-track or fouling equipment.
Train Incident
As amended, a ``train incident'' is defined as an event involving
the operation of on-track or fouling equipment that results in a
casualty, but does not result in damage to railroad property exceeding
the applicable reporting threshold.
Deleted Definitions
As proposed, FRA is deleting the definitions of ``General Railroad
System of Transportation,'' and ``Train,'' since these terms have been
superseded by newly added definitions and amendments in this rule. FRA
received no comments on these deletions.
Section 219.11--General Conditions for Chemical Tests
In its comments, the NCRMA asked FRA to impose conditions on urine
specimen collections conducted under this part (e.g., that FRA require
a railroad to transport an employee to a company owned or contracted
facility, or that drinking water not be used during the urine specimen
collection process). With the exception of its PAT testing program,
which is discussed below, FRA is prohibited from doing so, because the
Department's Procedures for Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs
(49 CFR part 40 or part 40) control the procedures and facilities used
in FRA (non-PAT) and other DOT agency testing. FRA is authorized to
enforce railroad compliance with part 40 requirements, but may not
impose new requirements of its own. Therefore, for example, FRA cannot
specify that only non-drinking water sources be used during random
testing, because part 40 already regulates collection site conditions.
Because it predates part 40, FRA PAT testing is exempt from part
40's requirements. FRA therefore has the authority to set its own PAT
testing protocols, which are found in appendix C to this part. PAT
testing blood and urine specimens must be collected at an independent
medical facility, such as a hospital or physician's office. By
definition an independent medical facility cannot be railroad owned or
controlled, and it meets the NCRMA's requests for privacy, heat, and
sanitation during specimen collection.
New paragraph (a)(2) clarifies that a regulated employee who is
required to participate in Federal testing under part 219 must be on
duty and subject to performing regulated service at the time of a
breath alcohol test or urine specimen collection. This requirement does
not apply to pre-employment drug testing of applicants for regulated
service positions.
Paragraph (b)
Paragraph (b)(1) clarifies that regulated employees must
participate in Federal testing as required by part 219 and as
implemented by a representative of the railroad or an employing
contractor.
As proposed, in paragraph (b)(2), FRA is replacing the phrase ``has
sustained a personal injury'' with ``is suffering a substantiated
medical emergency,'' to allow treatment for medical emergencies that do
not involve a personal injury (e.g., a stroke) to take priority over
required FRA testing. A medical emergency must be an acute medical
condition requiring immediate medical care, and a railroad may require
an employee to submit proof that that he or she had experienced one by
providing, within a reasonable time period after, verifiable
documentation of the emergency from a credible outside professional.
Paragraph (g)
In addition to the PAT testing requirements of subpart C and the
signs and symptoms of drug and alcohol influence, intoxication, and
misuse, paragraph (g) now requires a supervisor to be trained on the
signs and symptoms of certain prescription drugs that can have acute
behavioral and apparent physiological effects. To facilitate this
training, FRA is developing a module for both supervisors and employees
that will cover the required material and be made available on its Web
site. In lieu of the previous minimum of three hours of training, FRA
is requiring a supervisor to be able to demonstrate an understanding of
the course material, usually through a written or oral examination at
the end of the course.
PAT and Reasonable Suspicion Testing
Paragraph (a) adopts FRA's long-established guidance that a
railroad may exceed employee HOS limitations if all three of the
following conditions are met: (1) The excess service was necessary and
solely caused by the railroad's completion of PAT or reasonable
suspicion testing; (2) the railroad used due diligence to minimize the
excess service; and (3) the railroad collected the PAT or reasonable
suspicion specimens within the time limits of Sec. 219.203(d) (for PAT
testing) or Sec. 219.305 (for reasonable suspicion testing). The
railroad must still submit an excess service report, however.
Reasonable Cause Testing
Reasonable cause testing, like PAT and reasonable suspicion
testing, is triggered by the occurrence of a specified but
unpredictable event (in this case, a train accident, train incident, or
rule violation, the cause or severity of which may be linked to a
safety issue involving alcohol or drug use by a regulated employee).
For this reason, FRA will not pursue an HOS violation if any excess
service was caused solely by a railroad's decision to conduct
reasonable cause testing, provided the railroad used reasonable due
diligence to complete the test and did so within the time limitations
of Sec. 219.407 (i.e., within eight hours of the observation, event or
supervisory notification that was the basis for the test). However,
because reasonable cause testing, unlike both PAT and reasonable
suspicion testing, is authorized, but not required by part 219,
paragraph (b) correspondingly authorizes, but does not require, a
railroad to exceed HOS limitations to complete reasonable cause
testing. As with mandatory PAT and reasonable suspicion testing, a
railroad must file an excess service report if it decides to exceed HOS
limitations to conduct optional reasonable cause testing.
Random Testing
As proposed, paragraph (c) adopts FRA's longstanding guidance that
completion of a random test does not excuse compliance with a regulated
employee's HOS limits, unless the circumstances of the employee's test
require the employee to provide a directly observed urine specimen. A
directly observed urine collection must be performed whenever an
employee's previous test results or current behavior indicate the
possibility of specimen tampering (see Sec. 40.67). As with PAT,
reasonable suspicion, and reasonable cause tests, the occurrence of
such
[[Page 37902]]
circumstances is unpredictable. FRA will therefore not pursue an HOS
violation provided the railroad conducts the random test with due
diligence and files an excess service report.
Paragraph (d)
As proposed, paragraph (d) clarifies that because follow-up tests,
like random tests, are scheduled by the railroad, follow-up testing
must be completed within a covered employee's HOS limits. A railroad
may place an employee on duty solely for the purpose of a follow-up
drug test any time the employee is subject to being called for duty; a
railroad may place an employee on duty for a follow-up alcohol test
only if the employee's return-to-duty agreement requires total
abstention from alcohol use, since legitimate alcohol use is allowed so
long as it is in compliance with the prohibitions of Sec. 219.101. A
railroad that chooses to place an employee on duty solely for the
purpose of follow-up testing must document why it did so and provide
the documentation to FRA upon request.
Paragraph (c)
As proposed, a railroad can make this part's required educational
materials available to its regulated employees by posting them
continuously in an easily visible location at a designated reporting
place, provided the railroad also supplies a copy to each labor
organization representing a class or craft of regulated employees (if
applicable). Alternatively, a railroad can make these materials
available by posting them on a Web site accessible to all regulated
employees; any distribution method that can ensure the accessibility of
these materials to all regulated employees is acceptable.
For MOW employees only, however, FRA is initially requiring
distribution of individual hard copies of educational materials, since
these employees are being introduced to the requirements of part 219.
This individual distribution requirement applies for three years after
the effective date of this final rule, although it does not apply to an
applicant for a regulated service position who refuses a pre-employment
test or has a pre-employment test result indicating a part 219
violation.
Section 219.25--Previous Employer Drug and Alcohol Checks
This new section reminds railroads and contractors that they must
comply with Sec. 40.25, which requires an employer to conduct a search
(for non-negative test results, e.g., positives, substitutions, and
adulterations) of a new hire's past two years of drug and alcohol test
records before that individual can perform any DOT safety-sensitive
functions. This requirement applies only to the railroad or
contractor's direct employees (e.g., a railroad has no responsibility
to conduct a background check on a contractor's direct employees, since
that responsibility belongs to the contractor). A railroad must also
comply with the prior drug and alcohol conduct requirements of Sec.
240.119(c) for certified locomotive engineers and Sec. 242.115(e) for
certified conductors.
Subpart B--Prohibitions
Section 219.101--Alcohol and Drug Use Prohibited
Paragraph (a)(1)
In the NPRM, FRA had asked for comment on whether it should remove
part 219.101's prohibitions against the on-duty possession of alcohol
and controlled substances. FRA modeled these prohibitions after those
in Rule G, a longstanding railroad operating rule which originally
prohibited the on-duty use and possession of alcohol, and was later
amended to include controlled substances as well. See 49 FR 24266, June
12, 1984.
Many commonly prescribed drugs, such as muscle relaxants and pain
relievers, are controlled substances. As strictly read, Sec. 219.101
prohibits the on-duty possession of not only illicit drugs but many
prescription drugs with legitimate medical uses (with the exception of
any controlled substance prescribed in accordance with Sec. 219.103).
Similarly, because Sec. 219.101 prohibits the on-duty possession of
alcohol, if strictly read, this section also bans the on-duty
possession of any over-the-counter cough and cold remedy that contains
alcohol. In the NPRM, FRA asked for comment on whether it should remove
Sec. 219.101's prohibitions against on-duty possession of controlled
substances and alcohol because they could be construed to prohibit the
possession of legal drugs and remedies on railroad property. FRA noted
that no other DOT agency prohibits the on-duty possession of both
controlled substances and alcohol, and that a railroad remains free to
impose discipline for such possession under its own authority.
Labor commented that FRA should clarify its policy on prescription
use, as did the NTSB. The NTSB opposed FRA's proposal to remove
219.101's prohibitions against the on-duty possession of controlled
substances and alcohol, without explanation.
As proposed, FRA is therefore retaining but clarifying this
prohibition, which, as amended, prohibits the use or possession of
controlled substances and alcohol by a regulated employee while ``on
duty and subject to performing regulated service for a railroad.'' This
prohibition applies not only when a regulated employee is actually
performing regulated service, but also when the employee is subject to
performing regulated service.
Paragraph (a)(4)
Paragraph (a)(4) prohibits an employee whose Federal test indicates
an alcohol concentration of 0.02 or greater, but less than 0.04, from
performing covered service until the start of his or her next regularly
scheduled duty period, but not less than eight hours from the
administration of the test. However, since an alcohol concentration of
0.02 or greater but less than 0.04 is not a violation of Sec. 219.101,
an alcohol test result in this range may not be used for locomotive
engineer or conductor certification purposes under part 240 or part
242.
As proposed, FRA is adding new paragraph (a)(4)(ii) to clarify that
a railroad is not prohibited from taking further action under its own
authority against an employee whose Federal test result indicates an
alcohol concentration 0.02 or greater but less than 0.04, since a
result in this range indicates the presence of alcohol in the
employee's system. Although Labor opposed allowing a railroad to impose
discipline under its own authority in this circumstance, this is not a
substantive change, since FRA guidance has long allowed this narrow
exception.
Paragraph (a)(5)
Paragraph (a)(5) states that a Federal test result with an alcohol
concentration below 0.02 is a negative result that a railroad may not
use as evidence of alcohol misuse, either as evidence in a company
proceeding or as a basis for subsequent testing under company
authority. A railroad may conduct additional company testing only if it
has an independent basis for doing so.
As proposed, FRA is amending this paragraph to adopt its previously
stated policy that a railroad has an independent basis for a subsequent
company authority alcohol test only when an employee continues to
exhibit signs and symptoms of alcohol use after having had a negative
FRA reasonable suspicion alcohol test result. If a railroad has an
independent basis to conduct a subsequent alcohol test under company
authority, the company test result stands independent of the prior FRA
test result.
[[Page 37903]]
Section 219.103--Use of Prescription and Over-the-Counter Drugs
In the NPRM, FRA asked railroads to submit comments on their 30
years of administering this section, which has been unchanged since the
inception of part 219 in 1985. The NTSB, the sole responder, commented
that this section did not adequately address the safety concerns raised
by the use of prescription and over-the-counter (OTC) drugs,
particularly diphenhydramine and other sedating antihistamines that
could impair performance. In its comment, the NTSB reiterated R-13-01,
in which it recommended that FRA address employees' underlying medical
conditions by developing medical certification regulations, a
recommendation that is beyond the scope of this rule.
In response to the NTSB's other concerns, however, FRA is
developing a training module which will cover the more commonly used
prescription and OTC drugs that could have adverse effects, including
diphenhydramine. This module, which will be downloadable for free on
FRA's Web site, will also contain general information on the best
practices to follow when using prescription and OTC drugs. FRA will
inform its regulated entities when this module is available for
distribution.
Section 219.104--Responsive Action
FRA is amending this section to clarify that: (1) With the
exception of the right to a hearing, an applicant for regulated service
who has refused to take a pre-employment test is entitled to all of the
protections of this part; (2) the notice a railroad must provide to a
regulated employee before removing him or her from regulated service
must be in writing; and (3) a regulated employee is entitled to request
a hearing under this section following an alleged violation of Sec.
219.101 or Sec. 219.102.
Paragraph (a)
Paragraph (a)(2) emphasizes that none of the requirements in this
section apply to tests conducted under company authority. FRA is also
removing the word ``mandatory'' because it is inaccurate, since neither
reasonable cause nor pre-employment alcohol testing are mandated by
part 219. If, however, a railroad does decide to conduct a reasonable
cause or pre-employment alcohol test under FRA authority, a regulated
employee or applicant for regulated service who refuses the test is
subject to the consequences for refusals found in this section.
Paragraph (b)
Previously, paragraph (b) required a railroad, before
``withdrawing'' an employee from covered service, to provide notice to
the employee of the reason for his or her withdrawal. This notice must
be in writing, although a railroad may first notify an employee
verbally, if the railroad provides written notice to the employee as
soon as practicable. In its written removal notice, the railroad must
include a statement prohibiting the employee from performing any DOT
safety-sensitive functions until he or she has successfully completed
the evaluation, referral, and treatment processes required for return-
to-duty under part 40. FRA believes receipt of this information will
discourage an employee from job hopping in an effort to avoid
compliance with part 40's return-to-duty requirements. A railroad may
use this notice to comply with Sec. 40.287's requirement to provide
each employee who violates a DOT drug and alcohol regulation with a
listing of SAPs who are both readily available to the employee and
acceptable to the railroad, by providing the contact information (name,
address, telephone number, and, if applicable, email address) for each
SAP on its list. (Of course, a railroad may also provide this
information separately.)
Paragraph (c)
Previously, paragraph (c)(1) allowed an employee to request a
hearing if the employee denied ``that the test result is valid evidence
of alcohol or drug use prohibited by this subpart.'' FRA has removed
this phrase because the removal from duty and hearing procedures in
this section also apply to violations of Sec. 219.101 or Sec. 219.102
that have not been detected through testing (e.g., a refusal or a
violation of the prohibition against possessing alcohol). An employee
may demand a hearing for any violation of Sec. 219.101 or Sec.
219.102, regardless of whether the alleged violation was based on a
test result.
Similarly, FRA is amending paragraph (c)(4) to clarify that its
statement that part 219 does not limit any procedural rights or
remedies available (e.g., at common law or through an applicable
bargaining agreement) to an employee, applies to all violations of part
219, not just those based on test results.
Paragraph (d)
As stated above, FRA PAT testing pre-dates part 40 and has always
been excepted from DOT's testing procedures. Because the primary
purpose of FRA PAT testing is accident investigation, FRA has always
tested a wider variety of specimens (i.e., blood, post-mortem tissue
specimens) for a wider variety of substances (e.g., barbiturates and
benzodiazepines) than part 40 testing does. A regulated employee can
therefore have a PAT test with a positive result that would not be
detectable or duplicable under DOT procedures (e.g., a positive PAT
blood test result for benzodiazepines). With respect to responsive
action, however, PAT testing follows part 40 requirements, by requiring
a negative return-to-duty test and a minimum of six negative follow-up
tests for the substance of the original positive in the first 12 months
after returning to regulated service (certified locomotive engineers
and conductors have different follow-up testing minimums, see
Sec. Sec. 240.119(d)(2) and 242.115(f)(2)).
To ensure that any regulated employee who has had a positive PAT
test result is in compliance with FRA's return-to-duty and follow-up
requirements, in addition to Part 40 tests, FRA is allowing company
tests to fulfill these requirements where necessary. If and only if,
the substance of the employee's original PAT positive is not a drug
listed in Sec. 40.5's definition of ``Drug,'' a railroad may conduct
return-to-duty and follow-up tests for that substance under its own
authority, provided the railroad's procedures mirror those of part 40
and the substance is on the company test's panel. FRA is allowing
company testing in this limited circumstance because of the important
role return-to-duty and follow-up tests play in maintaining an
employee's abstinence from substance abuse in the first year following
the employee's return to performing regulated service.
Paragraph (e)
FRA is adding new paragraph (e) to clarify when Sec. 219.104's
requirements do not apply.
The language formerly in paragraph (a)(3)(i), which stated that the
requirements of this section do not apply to actions based on alcohol
or drug testing that is not conducted under part 219, can now be found
in paragraph (e)(1).
Paragraph (e)(2) clarifies that this section's requirements do not
apply to Federal alcohol tests with a result less than 0.04. As
mentioned above in FRA's discussion of Sec. 219.101(a)(4), a Federal
test result that is .02 or greater but less than .04 proves that an
employee has recently used alcohol, but not that the employee is
impaired. Because an employee who has a test result in this range is
not in violation of Sec. 219.101,
[[Page 37904]]
the only consequence allowed under this part is the removal of the
employee from regulated service for a minimum of eight hours. All other
actions following an alcohol test result below .04, including the
administration of return-to-duty or follow-up tests, must therefore be
conducted under a railroad's own authority.
Paragraph (e)(3) clarifies that although parts 240 and 242 require
a substance abuse evaluation for a locomotive engineer or conductor who
has had an off-duty conviction for, or a completed state action to,
cancel, revoke, suspend, or deny a motor vehicle-driver's license for
operating while under the influence of or impaired by alcohol or a
controlled substance, an off-duty conviction or completed state action
is not a violation of Sec. 219.101 or Sec. 219.102.
Paragraph (e)(4) clarifies that this section does not apply to an
applicant who declines to participate in pre-employment testing before
the test begins.
Similarly, paragraph (e)(5) clarifies that the hearing procedures
in paragraph (c) of this section do not apply to an applicant who tests
positive or refuses a DOT pre-employment test.
In contrast, paragraph (e)(6) clarifies that an applicant who has
tested positive or refused a DOT pre-employment test must complete the
return-to-duty requirements in paragraph (d) before performing DOT
safety-sensitive functions subject to the drug and alcohol regulation
of any DOT agency. Section 40.25(j) prohibits an employee who has
tested positive or refused a test from performing any DOT safety-
sensitive functions until and unless the employee documents successful
completion of part 40's return-to-duty process.
Section 219.105--Railroad's Duty To Prevent Violations
Paragraph (a)
Paragraph (a) of this section provides that a railroad may not with
``actual knowledge'' permit an employee to remain or go on duty in
covered service in violation of either Sec. 219.101 or Sec. 219.102.
FRA is clarifying that a railroad's ``actual knowledge'' of such a
violation is limited to the knowledge of a railroad manager or
supervisor in the employee's chain of command. A manager or supervisor
is considered to have actual knowledge of a violation when he or she:
(1) Personally observes an employee violating part 219 by either using
or possessing alcohol, or by using drugs (observing potential signs and
symptoms of alcohol/drug use does not by itself constitute actual
knowledge); (2) learns from a Sec. 40.25 background check of a
previous employer's drug and alcohol records that an employee had a
Sec. 219.101 or Sec. 219.102 violation and did not complete
Sec. 219.104's return-to-duty requirements; or (3) receives an
employee's admission of prohibited alcohol possession or misuse or drug
abuse.
Paragraph (b)
FRA is not amending paragraph (b) of this section. Instead, as
guidance FRA is reprinting the 1989 preamble discussion which, in
proposing this section, explained its purpose as:
to describe the limitations on railroad liability with respect to
the prevention of the violations of the Subpart B prohibitions. . .
. In summary, the provisions require the railroad to exercise a high
degree of care to prevent violations, but do not impose liability
where, despite such efforts, an individual employee uses alcohol or
drugs in a manner that is prohibited (and the railroad is not aware
of the conduct).
54 FR 39649, Sep. 27, 1989. While this paragraph places an affirmative
duty on a railroad to use due diligence to prevent violations of Sec.
219.101 or Sec. 219.102, a railroad that can show it has done so has
only limited liability under this part for violations of its
prohibitions by individual employees. Since what constitutes due
diligence under this provision varies on a case-by-case basis, a
railroad that is uncertain about its applicability in a given situation
should contact FRA for guidance.
Paragraph (c)
New paragraph (c) prohibits the design and implementation of any
railroad drug and/or alcohol education, prevention, identification,
intervention, or rehabilitation program or policy that circumvents or
otherwise undermines the requirements of part 219. A railroad must make
all documents, data, or other records related to such programs or
policies available to FRA upon request.
Paragraph (d)
Rule G Observations
In its guidance, FRA required a railroad's supervisors to make and
record each quarter a total number of ``Rule G'' observations
equivalent, at a minimum, to the railroad's total number of covered
employees. Each Rule G observation should be made sufficiently close to
an employee to enable the supervisor to determine whether the employee
was displaying signs and symptoms of impairment requiring a reasonable
suspicion test.
In the NPRM, FRA requested comment on whether Sec. 219.105 should
adopt this guidance by requiring a specific number of Rule G
observations; FRA was particularly interested in the safety benefits
versus the costs and paperwork burdens of such a requirement. In
response, the Associations commented that FRA's requirement for each
supervisor to be trained in signs and symptoms of drug and alcohol
abuse already ensured that railroad supervisors were automatically
aware of what to look for when observing an employee's demeanor and
behavior. Therefore, according to the Associations, requiring a
specific number of what were essentially constant supervisory
observations to be systematically recorded would be a paperwork
exercise that added nothing to safety.
Because reasonable suspicion and reasonable cause testing share the
same check box on DOT's drug and alcohol chain of custody forms, FRA's
MIS data does not distinguish between tests conducted under mandatory
reasonable suspicion authority and tests conducted under discretionary
reasonable cause. While there is no direct correlation showing that
Rule G observations increase or result in reasonable suspicion tests,
FRA believes that each year's consistently low total of reasonable
suspicion tests indicates the continuing need to focus supervisory
attention on the use and importance of reasonable suspicion testing as
deterrence. To make Rule G observations both more meaningful and less
burdensome, new paragraph (d) adopts FRA's previous guidance
requirements but: (1) Decreases the minimum annual number of
observations supervisors must make and record from four to two times a
railroad's total number of covered employees, and (2) requires each
observation to be sufficiently up close and personal to determine if a
covered employee is displaying signs and symptoms indicative of a
violation of the prohibitions in this part. The latter requirement is
intended to ensure that supervisory observations are of individuals
rather than collective sweeps of multiple employees.
Section 219.107--Consequences of Refusal
This section requires an employee who has refused to provide breath
or body fluid specimens when required by part 219 to be disqualified
from performing covered service for nine months. As suggested by
SAPlist.com, FRA is deleting the word ``unlawful'' from the title of
this section, since it
[[Page 37905]]
implies that there are ``lawful'' refusals. This is not a substantive
change.
Paragraph (b)
Paragraph (b) requires a railroad, before withdrawing an employee
from regulated service, to provide notice to the employee of the reason
for the withdrawal and the procedures in Sec. 219.104(c) under which
the employee may request a hearing. As proposed, FRA is clarifying that
this notice must be in writing, although a railroad may initially
provide an employee with verbal notice if the railroad provides written
notice to the employee as soon as practicable.
Paragraph (c)
This section prohibits a railroad with notice that an employee has
been withdrawn from regulated service from authorizing or permitting
the employee to perform any regulated service on its behalf. The
railroad may, however, authorize or permit the employee to perform non-
regulated service.
Subpart C--Post-Accident Toxicological Testing
Section 219.201--Events for Which Testing Is Required
Paragraph (a)
This section defines the types of accidents or incidents for which
PAT testing is required and states that a railroad must make a good
faith determination as to whether an event meets the criteria for PAT
testing. Specifically, existing paragraph (a) requires a railroad to
conduct PAT testing after the following qualifying events: (1) Major
train accidents; (2) impact accidents; (3) fatal train incidents; and
(4) passenger train accidents. As proposed, FRA is amending the
definitions of these qualifying events and adding a new qualifying
event that requires PAT testing, ``Human-Factor Highway-rail Grade
Crossing Accident/Incident.''
Major Train Accidents
As proposed, FRA is clarifying that the fatality criteria for a
major train accident is met by the death of ``any person,'' including
an individual who is not an employee of the railroad.
Also as proposed, FRA is increasing the property damage threshold
for major train accidents from $1,000,000 to $1,500,000 to account for
inflation since January 1, 1995, when FRA last raised the damages
threshold for major train accidents from $500,000 to $1,000,000. As
noted by the AAR in its comment supporting this amendment, reducing the
number of events qualifying as major train accidents correspondingly
reduces the number of employees subject to PAT testing, which reduces
such railroad costs as lost opportunities and wages.
Impact Accidents
See discussion in Sec. 219.5 above.
Human-Factor Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Accident/Incident
In Sec. 219.201(b), FRA prohibits PAT testing after a highway-rail
grade crossing accident. FRA carved out this PAT testing exception
after concluding that there was no justification for testing members of
the train crew since they could not have played any role in the cause
or severity of the highway-rail grade crossing accident. By the time a
train crew spots a vehicle or other obstruction on the track, the
weight and momentum of the train prevent the crew from stopping in time
to avoid a collision.
FRA continues to believe that the members of a train crew should be
excepted from PAT testing after the occurrence of a highway-rail grade
crossing accident. As proposed, however, FRA is narrowing this blanket
exception by adding a new qualifying event, ``Human-factor highway-rail
grade crossing accident/incident'' in paragraph (a)(5), to allow the
PAT testing of a signal maintainer, flagman, or other employee only if
a railroad's preliminary investigation indicates that the employee may
have played a role in the cause or severity of the accident. This
amendment responds to NTSB Recommendation R-01-17, in which the NTSB
had recommended that FRA narrow its exception for highway-rail grade
crossing accidents to require PAT testing of any railroad signal,
maintenance, or other employee whose actions at or near a grade
crossing may have contributed to the cause or severity of a highway-
rail grade crossing accident.
New paragraph (a)(5)(i) contains the criteria for a ``human-factor
highway-rail grade crossing accident/incident.'' This paragraph
requires PAT testing after a highway-rail grade crossing accident/
incident whenever there is reason to believe that a regulated employee
has interfered with the normal functioning of a grade crossing signal
system, in testing or otherwise, without first providing for the safety
of highway traffic that depends on the normal functioning of such a
system. Because this language is adapted from the prohibition against
such interference in FRA's grade crossing regulation (see 49 CFR
234.209), a grade crossing accident/incident involving a Sec. 234.209
violation qualifies as a human-factor highway-rail grade crossing
accident/incident for purposes of PAT testing.
Under paragraphs (a)(5)(ii) and (iii), PAT testing after a highway-
rail grade crossing accident/incident is also required if the event
involved violations of the flagging duties found in FRA's grade
crossing regulation'. See 49 CFR 234.105(c), 234.106, and
234.107(c)(1)(i). The sections referenced in these paragraphs permit
trains to operate through malfunctioning grade crossings if an
appropriately equipped flagger, law enforcement officer, or crewmember
provides warning for each direction of highway traffic. For example,
when a false activation occurs, Sec. 234.107(c)(1)(i) requires
flagging by an appropriately equipped flagger if one is available.
Under paragraphs (a)(5)(ii) and (iii), an employee who fails to comply
with this flagging requirement is subject to PAT testing if a highway-
rail grade crossing accident/incident then occurs. Under paragraph
(a)(5)(iv), FRA is further narrowing its PAT testing exception for
highway-rail grade crossing accident/incidents by requiring PAT testing
if a fatality of a regulated employee is involved. As with fatal train
incidents, a deceased regulated employee is subject to post-mortem PAT
testing regardless of whether the employee was at fault. For example, a
regulated employee who died while operating an on-rail truck that
collided with a motor vehicle at a highway-rail grade crossing is
subject to post-mortem PAT testing regardless of who was at fault for
the collision.
Similarly, paragraph (a)(5)(v) requires PAT testing after a
highway-rail grade crossing accident/incident if a violation of an FRA
regulation or railroad operating rule by a regulated employee may have
played a role in the cause or severity of the accident/incident. While
paragraphs (a)(5)(i)-(iv) of this section specify the circumstances
under which PAT testing is required for highway-rail grade crossing
accidents/incidents involving human-factor errors, paragraph (a)(5)(v)
serves as a catch-all provision that requires PAT testing for highway-
rail grade crossing accidents/incidents that involve human-factor
errors other than those specified in paragraphs (a)(5)(i)-(iv).
Paragraph (b)
As discussed above, FRA is narrowing this grade crossing exception
to allow PAT testing for human-factor highway-rail grade crossing
accident/incidents, and is amending the language in this paragraph
accordingly.
SEPTA had asked FRA to clarify whether the contributing action of a
[[Page 37906]]
motor vehicle operator within a grade crossing could trigger the PAT
testing of a MOW employee. Any employee involved in a highway-rail
grade crossing accident is excepted from PAT testing unless a
railroad's preliminary investigation indicates that the employee's
actions may have contributed to the occurrence or severity of the
accident; this general exception applies to all regulated employees and
is not affected by the addition of MOW employees to this part.
Section 219.203--Responsibilities of Railroads and Employees
Paragraph (a)(1)
Paragraph (a)(1) requires a regulated employee whose actions may
have played a role in the cause or severity of a PAT testing qualifying
event (e.g., an operator, dispatcher, or signal maintainer) to provide
blood and urine samples for PAT testing, regardless of whether the
employee was present or on-duty at the time or location of the
qualifying event, as required by FRA's amended PAT testing recall
provisions in paragraph (e) of this section.
Paragraph (a)(2)
Paragraph (a)(2) specifies that the remains of an on-duty employee
who has been fatally injured in a qualifying PAT testing event must
undergo post-mortem PAT testing if the employee dies within 12 hours of
the event. This requirement applies regardless of whether the employee
was performing regulated service, was at fault, or was a direct
employee, volunteer, or contractor to a railroad. Part 219 already
requires such fatality testing. See Sec. Sec. 219.11(f) and
219.203(a)(4)(ii).
Paragraph (a)(3)
Paragraph (a)(3) specifies which regulated employees must be tested
for major train accidents. In paragraph (a)(3)(i), FRA requires all
crew members of on-track equipment involved in a major train accident
to be PAT tested, regardless of fault--a requirement that already
applies to all train crew members involved in a major train accident.
See Sec. 219.203(a)(3). In addition, paragraph (a)(3)(ii) requires a
regulated employee who is not an assigned crew member of an involved
train or other on-track equipment to be PAT tested, if it can be
immediately determined that the regulated employee may have played a
role in the cause or severity of the major train accident.
Paragraph (a)(4)
In paragraph (a)(4), which applies specifically to fatal train
incidents, FRA proposed that an individual must die within 12 hours of
the incident to qualify for post-mortem PAT testing. The NTSB suggested
that FRA instead define a PAT testing fatality as one that occurred
within 30 days of the incident, to match its own definition and that of
FMCSA's. FRA's proposed 12-hour time limit applies to the post-mortem
testing of a fatality, however, not to the reporting of its occurrence,
as the NTSB and FMCSA time limits do. The result of a post-mortem PAT
test conducted up to 30 days later would fail to indicate an
individual's condition at the time of an incident, and would have no
probative value because any alcohol and most controlled substances
present in the individual when the accident occurred would have
metabolized long before the test was conducted. FRA is therefore
adopting its proposal that post-mortem PAT testing is required only if
an individual dies within 12 hours of an incident.
Paragraph (a)(5)
Paragraph (a)(5) specifies which regulated employees must be PAT
tested following human-factor highway-rail grade crossing accidents/
incidents. Under Sec. 219.201(a)(5)(i), only a regulated employee who
interfered with the normal functioning of a grade crossing signal
system and whose actions may have contributed to the cause or severity
of the event must be PAT tested. Paragraphs (a)(5)(ii) and (iii)
clarify the testing requirements for human-factor highway-rail grade
crossing accidents/incidents under Sec. 219.201(a)(5)(ii) and (iii).
If a grade crossing activation failure occurs, these paragraphs require
PAT testing of a regulated employee responsible for flagging (either
flagging highway traffic or acting as an appropriately equipped flagger
as defined in Sec. 234.5), if the employee either fails to flag or to
ensure that the required flagging occurs, or if the employee
contributes to the cause or severity of the accident/incident.
Paragraph (a)(5)(iv) states that only the remains of a fatally-
injured regulated employee(s) involved in a human-factor highway-rail
grade crossing accident/incident under Sec. 219.201(a)(5)(iv) must be
post-mortem PAT tested.
Paragraph (a)(5)(v) states that only a regulated employee who has
violated an FRA regulation or railroad operating rule and whose actions
may have contributed to the cause or severity of the event must be PAT
tested in the event of a human-factor highway-rail grade crossing
accident/incident.
Paragraph (a)(6)
Paragraph 219.203(a)(3) requires a railroad to exclude from PAT
testing an employee involved in an impact accident or passenger train
accident with injury, or a surviving employee involved in a fatal train
incident, if the railroad can immediately determine that the employee
had no role in the cause or severity of the event. If a railroad
determines that an event qualifies for PAT testing, the railroad must
consider the same immediately available information to determine
whether an employee should be subject to or excluded from PAT testing.
Correspondingly, paragraph (a)(6) requires a railroad to make a PAT
testing determination when an employee survives a human-factor highway-
rail grade crossing accident/incident. There is no determination to be
made, however, when a regulated employee has been involved in a major
train accident or an employee has been fatally injured in a qualifying
event while on-duty; in these circumstances the employee must be post-
mortem PAT tested, as specified in paragraphs (a)(6)(i) and (ii).
Paragraph (b)--Railroad Responsibility
Paragraph (b)(1) requires a railroad to take all practicable steps
to ensure that each regulated employee subject to PAT testing provides
the required specimens. This includes a regulated employee who may not
have been present or on-duty at the time of the PAT testing event, but
who may have played a role in its cause or severity, since paragraph
(e) of this section amends FRA's recall provisions to allow employee
recall in such circumstances.
Paragraph (b)(3) adopts longstanding FRA guidance that FRA PAT
testing takes precedence over any toxicological testing conducted by
state or local law enforcement officials. See Interpretive Guidance
Manual at 20.
Paragraph (c)--Alcohol Testing
Paragraph (c) allows a railroad to require a regulated employee who
is subject to PAT testing to undergo additional PAT breath alcohol
testing if the employee is still on, and has never left, railroad
property.
Paragraph (d)--Timely Specimen Collection
New paragraph (d)(1) requires a railroad: (1) To make ``every
reasonable effort to assure that specimens are provided as soon as
possible after the accident or incident,'' and, (2) if the railroad was
unable to collect specimens within four hours of the qualifying event,
to prepare and maintain a record
[[Page 37907]]
stating why the test was not promptly administered (the railroad is
still required to collect the specimens as soon thereafter as possible,
however, under Sec. 219.203(b)(1)).
Previously, Sec. 219.209(c) required a railroad to notify FRA's
Drug and Alcohol Program Manager immediately by phone whenever a
specimen collection took longer than four hours, and to prepare a
written explanation for any delay in specimen collection beyond four
hours; submission of that report, however, was required only upon
request by FRA. As amended in Sec. 219.203(d)(1), FRA is reiterating
most of the requirements formerly in Sec. 219.209(c), but is now
requiring a railroad to submit its written report within 30 days after
expiration of the month during which the qualifying event occurred.
Paragraph (e)--Employee Recall
As proposed, FRA eliminated its previous requirement that a
qualifying PAT event had to have occurred during the employee's duty
tour.
FRA has simplified its employee recall provisions by requiring a
regulated employee to be immediately recalled and placed on duty for
PAT testing if only two conditions are met: (1) The railroad could not
retain the employee in duty status because the employee went off duty
under normal carrier procedures before the railroad instructed the
employee to remain on duty pending its testing determination; and (2)
the railroad's preliminary investigation indicates a clear probability
that the employee played a role in the cause or severity of the
accident/incident. An employee who has been transported to receive
medical care is considered to be on-duty for purposes of PAT testing. A
railroad may also PAT test an employee who has failed to remain
available for PAT testing as required.
Paragraph (e)(3) requires an employee to be recalled regardless of
whether the qualifying event occurred while the employee was on duty,
although a railroad is prohibited from recalling an employee if more
than 24 hours has passed since the event. An employee who has been
recalled for PAT testing must be placed on duty before he or she is PAT
tested.
Paragraph (e)(4) specifies that both urine and blood specimens must
be collected from an employee who has been recalled for PAT testing. An
employee who left railroad property before being recalled can be PAT
tested for drugs only, since the employee could have legitimately used
alcohol after leaving. For this reason, a recalled employee can be PAT
tested for alcohol only if the employee never left the railroad's
property and the railroad completely prohibits the use of alcohol on
its property.
Paragraph (e)(5) requires a railroad to document its attempts to
contact an employee who has to be recalled for PAT testing. If a
railroad cannot contact and obtain a specimen from an employee subject
to mandatory recall within 24 hours of a qualifying event, the railroad
must notify and submit a narrative report to FRA as required by
paragraph (d)(1). In its report, the railroad must show that it made a
good faith effort to contact the employee, recall the employee, place
the employee on duty, and obtain specimens from the employee.
Paragraph (f)--Place of Specimen Collection
Paragraph (f) states that an independent medical facility is
required only for the mandatory collection of PAT urine and blood
specimens since a breath alcohol PAT test (which is authorized, but not
required) is not an invasive procedure. Section 219.203(c) authorizes a
railroad to conduct FRA breath alcohol testing following a qualifying
event, provided this testing does not interfere with the timely
collection of urine and blood specimens (as specified in the PAT
testing specimen collection procedures in appendix C to this part.
Although FRA still considers it a best practice for a railroad to
pre-designate medical facilities for PAT testing, FRA has removed this
requirement, which is impracticable for several reasons. First, because
the prompt treatment of injured employees must take precedence over any
railroad pre-designation, an emergency responder may take an injured
employee to a closer but non-designated medical facility. Second, even
if a railroad has pre-designated a medical facility, the facility's
responding employees may not be aware of or honor this designation.
Paragraph (f)(1) states that a phlebotomist (a certified technician
trained and qualified to draw blood in accordance with state
requirements) is a ``qualified medical professional'' who may draw
blood specimens for PAT testing. (A qualified medical professional does
not need to meet the requirements of part 40, since part 40 does not
apply to FRA PAT testing.) A qualified railroad or hospital contracted
collector may also collect or assist in the collection of specimens,
provided the medical facility has no objections.
Paragraph (f)(2) clarifies that employees who are subject to
performing regulated service are deemed to have consented to PAT
testing under Sec. 219.11(a), just as employees who perform covered
service already are. For PAT testing only, FRA allows urine to be
collected from an injured regulated employee who has already been
catheterized for medical purposes, regardless of whether the employee
is conscious. PAT testing is not subject to part 40's prohibition
against collecting urine from an unconscious person.
Paragraph (g)--Obtaining Cooperation of Facility
In the NPRM, FRA had proposed replacing 1-800-424-8801 with 1-800-
424-8802 as the contact number for the National Response Center (NRC).
A railroad must contact the NRC when a treating medical facility
refuses to collect blood specimens because an employee is unable to
provide consent. A commenter suggested that FRA instead replace both 1-
800-424-8801 and 1-800-424-8802 with 1-800-424-0201, a toll-free phone
number specific to FRA. As the commenter noted, listing 1-800-424-0201
as the contact number for the NRC would make this part consistent with
Sec. Sec. 229.17, 230.22 and 234.7 of this chapter (respectively,
Locomotive Safety Standards, Steam Locomotive Inspection and
Maintenance Standards, and Grade Crossing Safety). FRA agrees, and is
listing 1-800-424-0201 as its sole NRC contact number, in this
paragraph, and in Sec. Sec. 219.207(b) and 219.209(a)(1) of this part.
Section 219.205--Specimen Collection and Handling
Paragraph (c)
A railroad may no longer order a PAT testing kit directly from the
designated FRA PAT testing laboratory (the laboratory specified in
appendix B to part 219); the railroad must instead contact FRA's Drug
and Alcohol Program Manager to request an order form to obtain a PAT
testing kit from the laboratory. FRA will continue to follow its
standard practice of making fatality PAT testing kits available only to
Class I, Class II, and commuter railroads. If a small railroad has a
PAT testing event involving a fatality to an on-duty employee, the
small railroad should contact the National Railroad Response Center.
FRA will then provide a fatality kit to a medical examiner or assist
the small railroad in obtaining one from a larger railroad.
As proposed, FRA is removing paragraph (c)(3), which states that a
limited number of shipping kits are
[[Page 37908]]
available at FRA's field offices, since FRA field offices no longer
have these kits.
Paragraph (d)
For greater flexibility, FRA has amended this paragraph to allow a
railroad to use other shipment methods besides air freight, provided
the 24-hour delivery requirement is met. FRA is also allowing a
railroad to hold specimens in a secure refrigerator for a maximum of 72
hours if a specimen's delivery cannot be ensured within 24 hours due to
a suspension in delivery services.
Paragraph (e)
To ensure greater specimen security, FRA is prohibiting a railroad
or medical facility from opening a specimen kit or a transport box
after it has been sealed, even if it is later discovered that an error
had been made either with the specimens or the chain of custody form.
If such an error is discovered, the railroad or medical facility must
make a contemporaneous written record of it and send that record to the
laboratory, preferably with the transport box.
Section 219.207--Fatality
As discussed above, FRA is replacing 1-800-424-8801 and 1-800-424-
8802, the phone numbers for the NRC previously listed in paragraph (b),
with 1-800-424-0201. A railroad supervisor who is having difficulty
obtaining post-mortem specimens from the local authority or custodian
should call 1-800-424-0201 to notify the NRC duty officer.
In paragraph (d), FRA is clarifying that the information in
``Appendix C to this part [which] specifies body fluid and tissue
specimens for toxicological analysis in the case of a fatality,'' is
also available in the ``instructions included inside the shipping
kits.''
Section 219.209--Reports of Tests and Refusals
Paragraph (a)(1)
As discussed above, FRA is replacing 1-800-424-8802, the phone
number previously listed in this paragraph for the NRC, with 1-800-424-
0201. A railroad should call the latter number to notify the NRC of the
occurrence of a qualifying post-accident event. The railroad must also
notify the FRA Drug and Alcohol Manager; the contact number for doing
so, 202-493-6313, is unchanged.
Previously, paragraph (a)(2)(v) of this section required a railroad
reporting PAT tests and refusals to include the number, names, and
occupations of the involved employees. To protect employee privacy
interests and reduce railroads, reporting burdens, FRA is requiring
railroads to report only the number of employees tested.
Paragraph (b) required a railroad to provide a ``concise narrative
report'' to FRA if, as a result of the non-cooperation of an employee
or any other reason, the railroad was unable to obtain PAT testing
specimens from an employee subject to PAT testing. As amended, a
railroad must also notify FRA's Drug and Alcohol Program Manager
immediately by phone of the failure. If a railroad representative is
unable to speak directly to the FRA Drug and Alcohol Program Manager,
the representative must leave a detailed voicemail explaining the
circumstances and reasons for the railroad's failure to obtain PAT
specimens. The purpose of this telephonic report is to assist both
railroads and FRA in determining whether a refusal has occurred.
Paragraph (c) previously required a railroad to maintain records
explaining why PAT testing was not performed within four hours of a
qualifying event. FRA is deleting this requirement from Sec. 219.209
because it is already addressed in Sec. 219.203(d)(1), as discussed
above in the section-by-section analysis for that section.
Section 219.211--Analysis and Follow-Up
Since part 40 does not apply to FRA PAT testing, FRA is amending
paragraph (b) of this section to adopt part 40's prohibition on
standing down (temporarily removing from service) an employee based
solely upon a laboratory's confirmation of a non-negative test result,
before the railroad's Medical Review Officer (MRO) has completed the
result's verification. See Sec. 40.21(a). As in part 40, a railroad
may remove an employee from regulated service only after an MRO has
verified that the employee has had a confirmed positive test, an
adulterated test, or a substituted test.
As amended, paragraph (c) now provides the address of the FRA
Associate Administrator for Railroad Safety.
For consistency throughout this part, in paragraph (e), FRA is
substituting ``Drug and Alcohol Program Manager'' for ``Alcohol/Drug
Program Manager.'' Also, to enable employees to respond to their test
results more easily, FRA is allowing responses to be sent by email.
Paragraph (g)(3) previously provided that FRA's PAT testing program
does not authorize railroads to hold an employee out of service pending
the receipt of the test results, ``nor does it restrict a railroad from
taking such action in an appropriate case.'' As clarification, FRA is
adding that a railroad must have additional information regarding an
employee's actions or inaction, independent of the employee's
involvement in a qualifying event, to justify holding the employee out
of service under company authority. As with paragraph (b)'s prohibition
against standing down an employee based solely on a confirmed
laboratory test result, reports, an employee's involvement in a PAT
testing event is not in itself a basis for a railroad's holding the
employee out of regulated service.
Section 219.213--Refusals; Consequences
Paragraph (b) now requires a railroad to provide written notice to
an employee who is being withdrawn from service under this part for
refusing to provide a specimen for PAT testing. As with Sec. 219.107,
FRA is adopting SAPlist.com's suggestion to delete the term
``unlawful'' from this section's heading, since it implies that there
are ``lawful'' refusals. This is not a substantive change.
Subpart D--Reasonable Suspicion Testing
As proposed, reasonable suspicion testing remains in subpart D
while reasonable cause testing is now in subpart E; this division
underscores the importance of the differences between these types of
tests, despite their similarity in names. (To accommodate this
restructuring, the Identification of Troubled Employees requirements
previously in subpart E have been moved to new subpart K.)
Section 219.301--Mandatory Reasonable Suspicion Testing
Paragraph (a) clarifies that a reasonable suspicion alcohol test is
not required to confirm an on-duty employee's possession of alcohol.
Paragraph (c) requires all reasonable suspicion tests to comply
with Sec. 219.303 (which is generally consistent with the requirements
previously found in Sec. 219.300(b) and is discussed in more detail
below).
Paragraph (d) requires a regulated employee to undergo reasonable
suspicion testing if the employee's condition has stabilized within
eight hours.
Section 219.303--Reasonable Suspicion Observations
This section contains the requirements for reasonable suspicion
observations that were formerly in Sec. 219.300(b).
[[Page 37909]]
Paragraph (b)
In paragraph (b), FRA clarifies that although two supervisors are
required to make the required observations for reasonable suspicion
drug testing, only one of these supervisors must be on-site and trained
in accordance with Sec. 219.11(g). This amendment incorporates long-
standing FRA guidance, since two on-site trained supervisors are rarely
available.
Before a reasonable suspicion drug test can take place, a trained
on-site supervisor must describe the signs and symptoms that the on-
site supervisor has observed of an employee's appearance and behavior
to an off-site supervisor, who must confirm that these observations
provide a reasonable basis to suspect the employee of drug abuse.
Because of privacy concerns, this communication between supervisors may
be made by telephone, but not by radio or email.
Paragraph (c)
New paragraph (c) prohibits a railroad from holding a regulated
employee out of service from the time of the employee's reasonable
suspicion test to the time of the railroad's receipt of the employee's
verified test result (a practice known as ``stand down''). A railroad
may, however, use its own authority to hold an employee out of service
during this period if the railroad has an independent basis for doing
so (e.g., the employee is continuing to exhibit signs and symptoms of
alcohol use).
Paragraph (d)
Paragraph (d) requires an on-site supervisor to document as soon as
practicable the observed signs and symptoms that were the basis for the
supervisor's decision to reasonable suspicion test a regulated
employee. FRA is not adopting Labor's suggested alternate language,
which essentially restates FRA's own without adding any clarification.
Section 219.305--Prompt Specimen Collection; Time Limits
Paragraph (a)
Paragraph (a) reiterates language formerly in Sec. 219.302(a),
which states consistent with the need to protect life and property,
reasonable suspicion testing must be promptly conducted following the
observations upon which the reasonable suspicion determination was
based.
Paragraph (b)
Paragraph (b) requires a railroad to prepare and maintain a record
explaining the reasons for the delay whenever the railroad does not
collect reasonable suspicion breath and/or urine specimens within two
hours of the determination to test. If, however, a railroad has failed
to collect reasonable suspicion testing specimens within eight hours of
its determination to test, the railroad must discontinue its collection
attempts and record why the test could not be conducted. The eight-hour
deadline is met when the railroad has delivered the employee to a
collection site where a collector is present and asked the collector to
begin specimen collection.
Paragraph (b) also requires a railroad to submit its reasonable
suspicion testing records upon request of the FRA Drug and Alcohol
Program Manager.
Paragraph (c)
Subpart E--Reasonable Cause Testing
As discussed above, FRA is dividing reasonable suspicion and
reasonable cause testing into separate subparts to emphasize that
despite the similarity in names, the authority and criteria for
mandatory reasonable suspicion testing is very different from that for
discretionary reasonable cause testing. Formerly, reasonable suspicion
and reasonable cause testing were both located in subpart D; reasonable
suspicion testing remains in subpart D while reasonable cause testing
is moved to subpart E. In addition, subpart E contains new rule
violations tailored to the activities of MOW employees. FRA has re-
designated the provisions of former subpart E as new subpart K.
Section 219.401--Authorization for Reasonable Cause Testing
Previously, a railroad had three options whenever the conditions
for reasonable cause testing were met; the railroad could choose to:
(1) Conduct a reasonable cause test under FRA authority, (2) conduct a
reasonable cause test under its own (company) authority, or (3) not
conduct a reasonable cause test. The railroad could switch among these
choices without advance notice. For example, a railroad could conduct
one employee's reasonable cause test under FRA authority, and another's
under company authority, without any explanation. In many instances, an
employee who had received a reasonable cause test was unsure as to what
authority the test had been conducted under, while the lack of a
consistency requirement led to frequent complaints about disparate
treatment among employees.
FRA is now requiring a railroad to choose between using FRA
authority or company authority for reasonable cause testing. A railroad
that chooses to use FRA authority must announce its choice to its
employees and must use that FRA authority exclusively, by (1) providing
notice of its selection of FRA authority in its educational materials;
(2) specifying that FRA testing is authorized only after ``train
accidents'' and ``train incidents,'' as defined in Sec. 219.5; and (3)
adding new rule violations or other errors to Sec. 219.403 as bases to
test. Once a railroad has announced that it will be using FRA authority
exclusively for reasonable cause testing, the railroad is prohibited
from conducting reasonable cause tests under its own authority after an
event listed in Sec. 219.403. The railroad may always, however, use
its own authority to test for events that are outside of the FRA
criteria for reasonable cause testing listed in this subpart.
Section 219.403--Requirements for Reasonable Cause Testing
This section authorizes FRA reasonable cause testing after ``train
accidents'' and ``train incidents'' as defined in Sec. 219.5, but not
after all part 225 reportable ``accidents/incidents.'' As amended,
railroads are authorized to conduct FRA reasonable cause testing for
additional rule violations or other errors that reflect the expansion
of part 219 to MOW workers, relate to signal systems and highway-rail
grade crossing warning systems, and reflect recent amendments to 49 CFR
part 218, Railroad Operating Practices.
Paragraph (a)
Section 219.301(b)(2) previously authorized reasonable cause
testing following ``an accident or incident reportable under part 225''
when ``a supervisory employee of the railroad has a reasonable belief,
based on specific, articulable facts, that the employee's acts or
omissions contributed to the occurrence or severity of the accident or
incident.'' In this rule, FRA is clarifying that the terms ``accident/
incident'' and ``accident or incident reportable under part 225'' in
Sec. 219.301(b)(2) do not authorize FRA reasonable cause testing after
all part 225 reportable accidents/incidents.
As defined in Sec. 225.5, the term ``accident/incident'' includes
employee injuries and illnesses that conform with OSHA's recordkeeping/
reporting requirements, but do not otherwise fall within FRA's railroad
safety jurisdiction. See Accident Reporting Guide at 1-2 (``FRA's
accident/incident reporting regulations that concern railroad
occupational casualties should be maintained, to the extent
practicable,
[[Page 37910]]
in general conformity with OSHA's recordkeeping and reporting
regulations'').
In its audits, FRA has found numerous instances where this
confusion in terms has resulted in a railroad deciding to conduct an
FRA reasonable cause test after every reportable injury, even if that
injury was unconnected with the movement of on-track equipment (e.g., a
slip, trip, or fall that was not related to the movement of on-track
equipment where the railroad had no basis to believe that the
employee's act or omission contributed to the injury (which is also a
violation of existing Sec. 219.301(b)(2)).
Furthermore, the Sec. 225.5 definition of ``accident/incident''
includes occupational illnesses, such as carpal tunnel syndrome, carbon
monoxide poisoning, noise-induced hearing loss, and dust diseases of
the lungs, as well as circumstances such as a suicide attempt made by
an on-duty employee, that do not authorize FRA reasonable cause
testing. See Accident Reporting Guide at 33, and at Appendix E-2
through E-5.
To correct this confusion, FRA is specifying in Sec. 219.403(a)
that reasonable cause testing is authorized following ``train
accidents'' and ``train incidents,'' as defined by Sec. 219.5, when a
responsible railroad supervisor has a reasonable belief, based on
specific, articulable facts, that the individual employee's acts or
omissions contributed to the occurrence or severity of the train
accident or train incident. By using the terms ``train accident'' and
``train incident,'' FRA is attempting to limit the circumstances under
which FRA reasonable cause testing is authorized to a subset of part
225 reportable accident/incidents. (A railroad may, of course, perform
a reasonable cause test under its own authority for an accident/
incident that does not qualify as a train accident or train incident.)
For consistency with the remainder of this subpart, FRA is also
substituting the term ``responsible railroad supervisor'' for
``supervisory employee.''
Paragraph (b)
Paragraph (b) contains a list of rule violations and other errors
that are grounds for FRA reasonable cause testing whenever a regulated
employee is directly involved. The rule violations and other errors
previously in Sec. 219.301(b)(3) can now be found in paragraphs
(b)(1)-(4), (b)(6)-(8), and (b)(10) of this section, without any
substantive amendments. Paragraphs (b)(5), (b)(9), (b)(11)-(12), and
(b)(13)-(18) contain additional rule violations and other errors that
are new grounds for FRA reasonable cause testing, as discussed below.
Additional Rule Violations or Other Errors Related to Railroad
Operating Practices
In paragraphs (b)(5) and (9), FRA is adding two new categories to
the rule violations or other errors that are grounds for reasonable
cause testing. These additional categories reflect recent amendments to
49 CFR part 218--Railroad Operating Practices.
In 2008, FRA amended part 218 to require railroads to adopt and
comply with operating rules regarding shoving and pushing movements and
the operation of switches. Many of these operating rule requirements
for switches already provided bases for FRA reasonable cause testing,
such as ``[a]lignment of a switch in violation of a railroad rule,
failure to align a switch as required for movement, operation of a
switch under a train, or unauthorized running through a switch'' and
``[e]ntering a crossover before both switches are lined for movement or
restoring either switch to normal position before the crossover
movement is completed.'' Sec. 219.301(b)(3)(iv) and (vii).
Nevertheless, in paragraph (b)(5), FRA is authorizing reasonable cause
testing if a regulated employee fails to restore and secure a main
track switch when required.
Although Sec. 218.99 requires a railroad to adopt specific
operating rules governing shoving and pushing movements, FRA is
authorizing reasonable cause testing only for Sec. 218.99 violations
that can pose significant safety concerns, as discussed below. For
instance, a railroad is authorized to conduct FRA reasonable cause
testing on a regulated employee who fails to provide point protection
in accordance with Sec. 218.99(b)(3), but is not authorized to do so
if a regulated employee fails to conduct a job briefing.
Additional Rule Violations or Other Errors Related to MOW
Employees
Paragraphs (b)(13)-(17) authorize FRA reasonable cause testing for
additional rules violations and errors related to the performance of
MOW activities: Paragraph (b)(13) authorizes testing for the failure of
a machine operator that results in a collision between a roadway
maintenance machine and/or other on-track equipment or a regulated
employee; paragraph (b)(14) authorizes testing for the failure of a
roadway worker-in-charge to notify all affected employees when
releasing working limits; paragraph (b)(15) authorizes testing for the
failure of a flagman or watchman/lookout to notify employees of an
approaching train or other on-track equipment; paragraph (b)(16)
authorizes testing for the failure to ascertain on-track safety before
fouling a track; and paragraph (b)(17) authorizes testing for the
improper use of individual train detection (ITD) in a manual
interlocking or control point.
Additional Rule Violations or Other Errors Related to Covered
Service
As proposed, FRA is authorizing reasonable cause testing for three
additional rule violations or other errors primarily addressing the
actions of covered employees.
First, paragraph (b)(11) authorizes a railroad to conduct FRA
reasonable cause testing if a regulated employee has interfered with
the normal functioning of any grade crossing signal system or any
signal or train control device without first taking measures to provide
for the safety of highway traffic or train operations which depend on
the normal functioning of such a device (e.g., by temporarily
installing a jumper cable and failing to remove it after finishing
repairs or testing). This includes the types of unlawful interference
described in Sec. 234.209 (grade crossing systems) and Sec. 236.4
(signals).
Second, paragraph (b)(12) authorizes a railroad to conduct FRA
reasonable cause testing if a regulated employee has failed to perform
required stop-and-flag duties after a malfunction of a grade crossing
signal system.
Third, paragraph (b)(18) authorizes a railroad to conduct FRA
reasonable cause testing on a regulated employee whose failure to apply
three point protection (by fully applying the locomotive and train
brakes, centering the reverser, and placing the generator field switch
in the off position) results in a reportable injury to a regulated
employee.
A contracting company that performs regulated service for a
railroad is authorized, but not required, to conduct FRA reasonable
cause tests on its regulated employees. Conversely, a railroad is
authorized to conduct FRA reasonable cause testing on its contractors
when they are performing regulated service on the railroad's behalf.
Section 219.405--Documentation Requirements
Although reasonable cause testing remains discretionary, a railroad
must create and maintain written documentation of the basis for a
reasonable cause test if that test is conducted under FRA authority.
[[Page 37911]]
Accordingly, the railroad supervisor who made the determination that
reasonable cause exists must promptly document the observations or
facts (e.g., the amount of property damage, the rule that was violated,
the role of the employee) that were the basis for this determination,
although the documentation does not have to be completed before the FRA
reasonable cause testing has been conducted.
Section 219.407--Prompt Specimen Collection; Time Limitations
This section clarifies that the eight-hour time period for
conducting a reasonable cause test runs from the time a railroad
supervisor is notified of the occurrence of the train accident, train
incident, or rule violation that is the basis for the test.
Section 219.409--Limitations on Authority
Paragraph (a)
This paragraph contains an amended version of language that was
previously in Sec. 219.301(e), As amended, this paragraph states that:
(1) If an event qualifies for mandatory PAT testing, a railroad is
prohibited from conducting FRA reasonable cause tests in lieu of, or in
addition to, the required PAT tests. Second, FRA is removing the word
``compulsory,'' which misleadingly implies that FRA reasonable cause
testing is required, when it is optional but authorized in certain
situations. Third, FRA is removing the second sentence of Sec.
219.301(e), which, in part, stated that ``breath test authority is
authorized in any case where breath test results can be obtained in a
timely manner at the scene of an accident and conduct of such tests
does not materially impede the collection of specimens under Subpart C
of this part.'' FRA believes this sentence is confusing because FRA is
proposing, in Sec. 219.203(c), to allow only PAT breath alcohol
testing, although such testing should be recorded on DOT's alcohol
custody and control form.
Paragraph (b)
For reasons similar to those discussed in Sec. 219.211(b),
paragraph (b) of this section prohibits a railroad from holding a
regulated employee out of service pending the results of an FRA
reasonable cause test. A railroad may, however, hold an employee out of
service under its own authority.
Paragraph (c)
Paragraph (c) requires a supervisor to make a separate reasonable
cause determination for each individual in a train crew, rather than a
collective decision to test the crew as a whole.
Subpart F--Pre-Employment Tests
Section 219.501--Pre-Employment Drug Testing
Paragraph (a)
A regulated railroad employee must have a negative Federal pre-
employment drug test result for each railroad for which the employee
performs regulated service. This requirement does not apply to
contractor employees who perform regulated service for the railroad.
Paragraph (b)
As proposed, FRA is moving language previously in this paragraph to
paragraph (e), where it will be discussed below.
Paragraph (b) now addresses the pre-employment drug testing
requirements for contractor employees. In contrast to the pre-
employment drug testing requirements for regulated employees discussed
in paragraph (a) above, FRA is not requiring a contractor employee who
performs regulated service for multiple railroads to have a negative
Federal pre-employment drug test result for each railroad. Instead,
each railroad only has to verify and document that the contractor
employee has a negative Federal pre-employment drug test result on file
with the contractor who is his or her direct employer. However, a
contractor employee is required to have a new Federal pre-employment
drug test if he or she switches direct employers by working for a
different contractor who provides regulated service to railroads.
Paragraph (c)
A railroad is not required to conduct an FRA pre-employment drug
test on an applicant or first-time transfer to regulated service if the
railroad has already conducted a pre-employment drug test with a
negative test result on the applicant or first-time transfer under the
authority of another DOT agency. In most cases, this agency will be
FMCSA, because railroads often require signal maintainers and MOW
employees to hold a CDL as a condition of their employment, and a
negative FMCSA pre-employment drug test result is one of the
prerequisites to obtaining a CDL. See 49 CFR 382.301. This amendment
increases a railroad's hiring flexibility by allowing the railroad to
transfer a CDL holder to first-time regulated service without having to
conduct an FRA pre-employment drug test or having to wait for a
negative test result (a railroad could, however, choose to perform a
new pre-employment drug test under its own authority). Since many MOW
employees already hold CDLs because their jobs require the operation of
railroad commercial motor vehicles, this limited exception will
substantially lessen the number of pre-employment drug tests railroads
will have to perform after the effective date of this final rule.
This exception applies, however, only when an applicant or first-
time transfer's negative DOT pre-employment drug test result is the
result of a test conducted by the railroad itself. In other words, a
CDL holder who performs regulated service for multiple railroads must
have a separate negative pre-employment drug test result for each
railroad. For example, a CDL holder who already has a negative DOT pre-
employment drug test for Railroad A must still have a negative FRA pre-
employment drug test result for Railroad B before he or she can begin
performing regulated service for Railroad B.
Paragraph (d)
As proposed, new paragraph (d) specifies that an applicant must
withdraw his or her application before the drug testing process begins
if the applicant wants to decline a pre-employment drug test and have
no record kept of that declination.
Paragraph (e)
In new paragraph (e), FRA exempts from pre-employment drug testing:
(1) An employee who began performing MOW activities for a railroad
before the effective date of this final rule; and (2) an employee who
began performing regulated service for a small railroad (as defined in
Sec. 219.3(c)) before the effective date of this final rule. Both
exemptions apply only so long as the employee continues to work for the
same railroad that he or she was working for before the effective date
of the final rule.
Section 219.502--Pre-Employment Alcohol Testing
This section addresses optional pre-employment alcohol testing.
Paragraph (a)(5)
Paragraph (a)(5) prohibits a railroad from permitting a regulated
employee with an alcohol concentration of 0.04 or greater from
performing regulated service until the employee has completed the
return-to-duty process in Sec. 219.104(d).
Paragraph (b)
Paragraph (b) of this section (addressing pre-employment alcohol
[[Page 37912]]
testing) previously contained language identical to Sec. 219.501(b)
(addressing pre-employment drug testing), which provides that, as used
in subpart H, the term covered employee includes an applicant for pre-
employment testing only. It also provided that no record may be
maintained if an applicant declines to be tested and withdraws his or
her application for employment. As discussed above in Sec. 219.501(b),
FRA has amended the language in Sec. 219.502(b) to clarify that an
individual must decline to participate in a pre-employment alcohol test
by withdrawing his or her application before the testing process
begins. As defined by DOT in Sec. 40.243(a), the testing process
begins when an individually wrapped or sealed mouthpiece is selected by
the collector or the employee.
Section 219.503--Notification; Records
The first and second sentences of this section require railroads to
provide medical review of pre-employment drug tests and to ``notify''
an applicant of the ``results of the drug and alcohol test'' as
provided for by subpart H. FRA is amending both of these sentences to
clarify that subpart H adopts the requirements found in part 40. FRA is
also amending the second sentence to clarify that a railroad must
provide written notice to an applicant who has had any type of non-
negative FRA test result (i.e., not just a positive, but also an
adulteration, substitution, or refusal). A railroad is not required,
however, to provide written notification to an applicant who has had a
negative FRA pre-employment alcohol or drug test result.
FRA is also amending the third sentence of this section to clarify
that a railroad must maintain a record of each application it denies
because of the applicant's non-negative FRA pre-employment test. A
railroad must maintain a record for each individual who has had a non-
negative test result on a FRA pre-employment test, even if the railroad
denied the individual's application for employment, because an
individual who has had such a result must comply with the return-to-
service and follow-up testing requirements of part 40 before he or she
can begin performing DOT safety-sensitive functions for any employer
regulated by a DOT agency. A railroad does not have to maintain a
record, however, if an applicant withdraws his or her application to
perform regulated service before the testing process begins.
Section 219.505--Non-Negative Tests and Refusals
Previously, this section prohibited an individual who ``refuses'' a
pre-employment test from performing covered service based upon the
application and examination with respect to which such refusal was
made. As proposed, FRA has amended this section to specifically
prohibit an individual who has refused or who had a non-negative (i.e.,
a positive, adulterated, or substituted test result) pre-employment
test result from performing DOT safety-sensitive functions for any DOT-
regulated employer until the individual has completed the Federal
return-to-duty process in Sec. 219.104(d). As amended, this section
conforms with Sec. 40.25(e), which prohibits an employer who has
information that an individual has violated a DOT agency drug or
alcohol regulation from using that individual to perform DOT safety-
sensitive functions until the employer receives information that the
individual has complied with the return-to-duty requirements of part 40
or any DOT agency.
Subpart G--Random Alcohol and Drug Testing Programs
To achieve deterrence, a random testing program must ensure that
each covered employee (including volunteers and probationary employees
of a railroad or a contractor to a railroad), believes that he or she
is subject to random testing without advance notice each time the
employee is on duty and subject to performing covered service.
FRA received no objections to its proposal to subject an employee
who performs MOW activities to the same random testing requirements as
one who performs covered service. Accordingly, each railroad must
submit for FRA approval a random testing plan that ensures each
regulated employee believes he or she is subject to random testing
without advance warning each time the employee is on-duty and subject
to performing regulated service.
As proposed, FRA is revising and expanding subpart G,-to clarify
and consolidate requirements and to-incorporate longstanding published
FRA guidance. FRA received no comment on the majority of these changes,
which are adopted as proposed without additional discussion.
Subpart H--Drug and Alcohol Testing Procedures
FRA received no comments on its minor editorial changes to this
section, which are adopted as proposed.
Subpart I--Annual Report
Section 219.800--Annual Reports
FRA received no comments on its minor editorial changes to this
section, which are adopted as proposed.
Subpart J--Recordkeeping Requirements
Section 219.901--Retention of Alcohol and Drug Testing Records
FRA received no comments on its proposals to ease recordkeeping
burdens by consolidating requirements, removing others, and allowing
still others to be maintained electronically. Accordingly, FRA is
adopting these proposals without further discussion, except for
proposed paragraph (c)(4)(iv), which contained an incorrect reference
to prescription drug training records under Sec. 219.103 and FRA has
not adopted.
Subpart K--Referral Programs
For a variety of reasons, commenters found FRA's proposal to
replace its self-referral, co-worker report, and alternative policy
requirements with peer support program requirements, to be both
confusing and ill-advised. NCRMA and SMART (from this point forward
collectively referred to as ``Labor,'' unless a comment was submitted
by only one labor organization), in particular, raised objections and
called for clarifications. As Labor noted, the concept of a voluntary
peer referral program arose from ``Operation Redblock,'' a private rail
industry initiative to address alcohol abuse. Labor expressed deep
misgivings, both that FRA's proposed peer support programs could harm
these existing railroad programs, and that FRA's proposal to audit each
program would invade individual privacy and undermine employee trust in
the program. Labor also criticized FRA's proposal to allow an EAP
counselor to function as an alternative to a trained drug and alcohol
counselor, because an EAP counselor rarely has specific expertise in
abuse and addiction issues. (Typically, an EAP program addresses a
broad range of issues, such as marital or financial problems.)
Similarly, Labor objected to using peer counselors, noting that a peer
is usually a volunteer who provides empathy and advice based on his or
her own drug and alcohol problems, without a counseling or medical
degree.
The Associations suggested that FRA use the term ``peer
prevention'' instead of ``peer support'' to emphasize that these
programs should be proactive in nature. The Associations also warned
[[Page 37913]]
that FRA should audit and release aggregate program data only, because
an employee could be discouraged from self-referring if the employee
knew that his or her individual data would be subject to FRA
examination. Like Labor, the Associations noted that a peer support
group is usually composed of selected peers and volunteers rather than
medical professionals; the Associations therefore supported allowing an
employee who self-refers to have the option of receiving counseling and
treatment from a Drug Abuse Counselor (DAC). Overall, the Associations
found FRA's proposed subpart K flawed and redundant of the voluntary
referral provisions already in Sec. 219.403.
After consideration, FRA agrees that its proposal to mandate the
establishment of peer support programs was unnecessary, since privately
run railroad programs and FRA's own subpart E policies have both proven
effective in identifying and helping employees with drug and alcohol
abuse issues. FRA also agrees that its proposed peer support programs
could interfere with, or possibly even be detrimental to, existing
railroad self-referral programs. Therefore, instead of requiring the
adoption of peer prevention programs, FRA is revising and moving its
voluntary referral, co-worker report, and alternative policy
requirements from subpart E (which has been revised to address
reasonable cause testing) to new subpart K.
With the exception of its proposal for non-peer referral programs,
which FRA is authorizing but not requiring under this rule, FRA is not
adopting its proposal to require peer support programs. To correspond
with this decision, FRA is retitling this subpart ``Referral Programs''
instead of the proposed ``Peer Support Programs.'' As explained in the
NPRM, FRA believes subpart E's previous title ``Identification of
Troubled Employees,'' to be outdated since the primary purpose of that
subpart had always been to evaluate and treat, not merely identify,
employees who have substance abuse issues. FRA is also, as proposed,
substituting the more commonly used term ``program'' for ``policy.''
In addition, FRA is adopting the Associations' recommendation to
simplify this rule by requiring all the evaluation, counseling,
treatment, and recommendation required by this part to be performed by
a DAC. As defined in 49 CFR 242.7, a DAC meets all the credentialing
and qualifying requirements of a Substance Abuse Professional (SAP).
Title 49 CFR 40.3 defines an SAP A SAP as an individual who evaluates
an employee who has violated a DOT drug and alcohol regulation and
makes recommendations concerning education, treatment, follow-up
testing, and aftercare. By definition, therefore, a SAP cannot perform
a role in a voluntary referral program. In contrast, a DAC can treat
and evaluate an employee enrolled in a voluntary referral program,
since the DAC's involvement is not triggered by an employee's drug or
alcohol violation. With this caveat, a DAC serves the same function in
part this part as a SAP does in part 40.
As mentioned above, FRA is adding an option for a ``non-peer
referral'' program, which authorizes, but does not require, a railroad
to accept referrals from family members, supervisors, labor
representatives, and other individuals who are not co-workers but who
have knowledge of an employee's drug abuse problems. FRA received no
objections to its proposal of this additional referral program. To
accommodate this third program, FRA is retitling its required ``co-
worker report'' program as a ``co-worker referral'' program so that
henceforth these three programs--voluntary, co-worker, and non-peer--
will collectively be referred to as ``referral programs.''
With the addition of the option for a non-peer program, FRA is
reprinting requirements formerly found in subpart E, in a format that
breaks these requirements down to make them easier to understand and
implement. Both partially excepted small railroads and contractors are
excluded from subpart K. Class III railroads that do not qualify for
the small railroad exception must comply, however.
Section 219.1001--Requirements for Referral Programs
Paragraph (b)
This paragraph generally outlines the purposes of mandatory
voluntary referral and co-worker referral programs. The descriptions of
these programs are reworded from those previously in subpart E, and no
substantive changes are intended.
Paragraph (c)
This paragraph generally outlines the purposes of optional non-peer
referral and alternative programs. The description of an alternate
program is reworded from the one previously in subpart E, and no
substantive change is intended.
Paragraph (c)(1)
Although FRA is not otherwise adopting its proposal to require
``peer support groups,'' FRA is authorizing a railroad to establish a
``non-peer referral'' program if it chooses to do so. A ``non-peer'' is
an individual who is not considered to be an employee's co-worker, such
as a trained supervisor, representative of an employee's collective
bargaining organization, or family member.
Paragraphs (d)(1), (2), and (5)
These paragraphs restate general conditions for referral programs
previously found in subpart E. No substantive changes are intended.
Paragraphs (d)(3)-(4)
These paragraphs prohibit referral programs from interfering with
the return-to-duty requirements in subpart B and the reasonable
suspicion testing requirements in subpart D.
Section 219.1003--Referral Program Conditions
With the exception of the paragraphs discussed below, the required
allowances, conditions, and procedures in this section were previously
contained in subpart E.
Paragraph (g)
As proposed, FRA is removing its previous minimum of 45 days leave
of absence to allow the DAC to determine the period of time an employee
needs.
Paragraph (h)(3)
Formerly, only co-worker referrals allowed railroads to condition
an employee's return to regulated service upon successful completion of
a return-to-service medical evaluation. As proposed, a railroad may
impose this condition on self-referrals and non-peer referrals as well.
Paragraph (h)(4)
As proposed, a railroad must return an employee to regulated
service within five working days of a DAC's recommendation that the
employee is fit to return.
Paragraph (i)
As proposed, this paragraph prohibits a person or entity from
changing a DAC's evaluation of an employee or recommendation for
assistance. Only the DAC who made the initial evaluation may modify
that evaluation and any follow-up recommendations based upon new or
additional information.
Paragraph (j)
As proposed, the confidentiality conditions in this paragraph,
which had previously applied only to candidates
[[Page 37914]]
for locomotive certification and locomotive engineers, have been
expanded to cover candidates for conductor certification and
conductors. Similarly, these requirements no longer apply only to
voluntary referrals; co-worker and non-peer referrals are also covered.
Paragraph (k)
As proposed, a regulated employee who enters a co-worker or non-
peer referral for a verified violation of Sec. 219.101 or Sec.
219.102 must contact a DAC within a reasonable period of time, as
specified by the railroad's programs. If a regulated employee does not
contact a DAC within this time period, the railroad may investigate the
employee's cooperation and compliance with the referral program.
Paragraph (l)
As proposed, paragraph (l) requires a DAC to complete a regulated
employee's evaluation within 10 working days of the employee's entering
a referral program and contacting the DAC. If more than one evaluation
is required, the DAC must complete these evaluations within 20 working
days. These time frames, which had previously applied only to co-worker
referrals, now apply to voluntary and non-peer referrals as well.
Paragraph (m)
As proposed, a referral program may not require follow-up
treatment, care, or testing that exceeds 24 months beyond the regulated
employee's removal from service, unless the regulated employee had
committed a substantiated part 219 violation.
Section 219.1005--Optional Provisions
This section describes provisions that a railroad is authorized,
but not required to, include in its referral program. The inclusion of
any of these provisions may be conditioned on the agreement of an
affected labor organization.
Paragraph (a) permits a referral program to waive confidentiality
if a regulated employee refuses to cooperate in a course of education,
counseling, or treatment recommended by a DAC or if the railroad
determines later, after investigation, that a regulated employee was
involved in an alcohol or drug-related disciplinary offense growing out
of subsequent conduct. This text was previously found in subpart E for
voluntary referrals.
Paragraph (a) specifies that nothing in subpart K prevents a
railroad or labor organization from adopting, publishing, and
implementing referral program policies that offer more favorable
conditions to regulated employees with substance abuse problems,
consistent with the railroad's responsibility to prevent violations of
Sec. Sec. 219.101 and 219.102. This language was previously found in
subpart E.
Paragraph (b) requires an alternate program to have the concurrence
of the recognized representatives of the regulated employees as shown
by a collective bargaining agreement or other document describing the
class or craft of employees to which the alternate program applies.
This agreement must expressly reference subpart K and the intention of
the railroad and the employee representatives that the alternate
program applies in lieu of the programs required by subpart K. This
language is similar to that previously found in subpart E.
Paragraph (c) requires a railroad to submit a copy of the agreement
or other document described in paragraph (b), along with a copy of the
alternate program described in paragraph (a), to the FRA Drug and
Alcohol Program Manager for approval. FRA will review the program to
see if it meets the general standards and intent of Sec. 219.1003. If
an alternate policy is amended or revoked, the railroad must notify FRA
at least 30 days before the amendment or revocation's effective date.
This last requirement was previously in subpart E.
Paragraph (d) specifies that Sec. 219.1007 does not excuse a
railroad from the requirement to adopt, publish, and implement Sec.
219.1003 programs for any group of regulated employees not covered by
an approved alternate program. A virtually identical provision was
previously located in subpart E.
Paragraph (e) references Sec. 219.105(c), which specifies that FRA
has the authority to audit any railroad alcohol and/or drug use
education, prevention, identification, and rehabilitation program
(including, but not limited to, alternate referral programs), to ensure
that the program is not designed or implemented to circumvent or
otherwise undermine Federal requirements.
Appendix A
Appendix A to this part contains a schedule of civil penalties for
use in enforcing this part's requirements. FRA has revised the penalty
schedule to correspond to the restructuring of and addition of new
sections to this part. Because such penalty schedules are statements of
agency policy, notice and comment are not required before their
issuance. See 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(A). Nonetheless, FRA has revised the
penalty schedule consistent with the previous, public schedule.
VII. Regulatory Impact and Notices
A. Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 and DOT Regulatory Policies and
Procedures
This final rule has been evaluated in accordance with existing
policies and procedures and determined to be non-significant, under
both Executive Orders 12866, and 13563, and DOT policies and
procedures. See 44 FR 11034, Feb. 26, 1979. FRA has prepared and placed
in the docket (No. FRA-2009-0039) a regulatory impact analysis (RIA)
addressing the economic impact of this final rule. Document inspection
and copying facilities are available at the DOT Central Docket
Management Facility located in Room W12-140 on the Ground level of the
West Building, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Docket
material is also available for inspection electronically through the
Federal eRulemaking Portal at https://www.regulations.gov. As part of
the RIA, FRA has assessed quantitative measurements of the cost and
benefit streams expected to result from implementation of this final
rule. Overall, the final rule will result in safety benefits and
potential business benefits for the railroad industry. It will also,
however, generate an additional burden on railroads and railroad
contractors, mainly due to the expenses associated with increased drug
and alcohol testing and program administration, particularly regarding
MOW employees.
The costs will primarily be derived from implementation of the
statutory mandate to expand the scope of part 219 to cover MOW
employees. The benefits will primarily accrue from the expected injury,
fatality, and property damage avoidance resulting from the expansion of
part 219 to cover MOW employees, as well as the PAT testing threshold
increase.
Table 1 summarizes the quantified costs and benefits expected to
accrue from implementation of the final rule over a 20-year period. It
presents costs associated with the various types of drug and alcohol
testing in the final rule and details the statutory costs (those
required by the RSIA mandate to expand part 219 to MOW employees),
discretionary costs (those that are due to the non-RSIA requirements),
and the total of the two types of costs. Table 1 also presents the
quantified benefits expected to accrue over a 20-year period and
details the statutory benefits (those that result from implementation
of the
[[Page 37915]]
RSIA mandate to expand part 219 to MOW employees) and the discretionary
benefits (those that are due to the non-RSIA requirements). The
benefits include not only injury, fatality, and property damage
avoidance (accident reduction benefits), but also the savings, or
benefit, that will accrue from fewer PAT tests being conducted due to
FRA's increasing the property damage threshold for major train
accidents.
For the 20-year period analyzed, the estimated quantified cost that
will be imposed on industry totals approximately $24.3 million
(undiscounted), with discounted costs totaling $14.2 million (Present
Value (PV), 7 percent) and $18.9 million (PV, 3 percent). The estimated
quantified benefits for this 20-year period total approximately $115.8
million (undiscounted), with discounted benefits totally $57.4 million
(PV, 7 percent) and $83.6 million (PV, 3 percent).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Statutory Discretionary Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Costs (20 year)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PAT Testing--Adding MOW................................... $52,000 ................ $52,000
PAT Testing--Impact Def + Xing............................ ................ $241,974 241,974
Reasonable Suspicion Testing.............................. 842,398 ................ 842,398
Pre-Employment Testing--Adding MOW........................ 673,897 ................ 673,897
Pre-Employment Testing--Sm, RR............................ ................ 29,904 29,904
Random Testing............................................ 20,863,074 ................ 20,863,074
Annual Reporting.......................................... 160,911 ................ 160,911
Recordkeeping Requirement................................. 1,397,840 ................ 1,397,840
-----------------------------------------------------
Costs Subtotal........................................ 23,990,120 271,878 24,261,998
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits (20 year)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accident Reduction........................................ 115,369,281 ................ 115,369,281
PAT Testing Threshold Reduction........................... ................ 388,295 388,295
-----------------------------------------------------
Benefits Subtotal..................................... 115,369,281 388,295 115,757,576
-----------------------------------------------------
Net Benefits...................................... 91,379,161 116,417 91,495,578
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overall, the RIA demonstrates that the costs, both statutory and
discretionary, associated with implementing the final rule are expected
to be outweighed by the benefits resulting from reduced injuries,
fatalities, and property damage attributable to drug and alcohol misuse
by regulated employees. FRA has also found that the costs will be
outweighed by injury and fatality mitigation alone, and benefits will
further accrue due to reduced property damage. Specifically, the
statutory requirements incur a discounted 20-year cost of $14.1 million
(PV, 7 percent) and $18.6 million (PV, 3 percent). The discretionary
portion of the costs to incur over the next 20-years is $143,665 (PV, 7
percent) and $202,023 (PV, 3 percent), with discounted 20-year benefits
of $205,574 (PV, 7 percent) and $288,776 (PV, 3 percent).
B. Regulatory Flexibility Act and Executive Order 13272; Initial
Regulatory Flexibility Assessment
FRA developed the final rule in accordance with Executive Order
13272 (``Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Agency Rulemaking'')
and DOT's procedures and policies to promote compliance with the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) to ensure potential
impacts of rules on small entities are properly considered.
Furthermore, FRA invited all interested parties to submit data and
information regarding the Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(IRFA) and did receive two comments about it during the public comment
period.
The Regulatory Flexibility Act requires an agency to review
regulations to assess their impact on small entities. An agency must
conduct a regulatory flexibility analysis unless it determines and
certifies that a rule is not expected to have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
The final rule will apply to all employees of railroad carriers,
contractors, or subcontractors to railroad carriers who perform
maintenance-of-way activities. Based on information available, FRA
estimates that less than 14 percent of the total railroad costs
associated with implementing the final rule will be borne by small
entities. This percentage is based directly upon the percentage of
affected employees estimated to be working for small entities. Small
entities were exempt from certain requirements of the prior rule,
continue to be exempt from certain requirements of this final rule, and
otherwise bear proportional burden for the requirements based upon the
number of regulated employees each entity employs. Small entities will
not incur greater costs per employee than the larger entities.
FRA generally uses conservative assumptions in its costing of
rules; based on those assumptions, FRA estimates that the cost for the
final rule will be approximately $24 million for the next 20 years for
the railroad industry. There are 695 railroads that are considered
small for purposes of this analysis, and together they comprise
approximately 93 percent of the railroads impacted directly by this
final regulation. The 14 percent of the burden will be spread amongst
the 695 entities, based proportionally upon the number of employees
each has. Thus, although a substantial number of small entities in this
sector will likely be impacted, the economic impact on them will likely
be insignificant. This RFA is not intended to be a stand-alone
document. To get a better understanding of the total costs for the
railroad industry (which form the basis for the estimates in this RFA),
or more cost detail on any specific requirement, please see the RIA
that FRA has placed in the docket for this rulemaking.
1. Description of Regulated Entities
The ``universe'' of the entities considered in an RFA generally
includes only those small entities that can reasonably expect to be
directly regulated by this final action. The types of small entities
potentially affected by this final rule are: (1) Small railroads;
[[Page 37916]]
(2) small contractors that engage in MOW operations; and (3) small
contractors that provide HOS services (such as dispatching, signal, and
train and engine services).
``Small entity'' is defined in 5 U.S.C. 601(3) as having the same
meaning as ``small business concern'' under Section 3 of the Small
Business Act. This includes any small business concern that is
independently owned and operated, and is not dominant in its field of
operation. Section 601(4) likewise includes within the definition of
``small entities'' not-for-profit enterprises that are independently
owned and operated, and are not dominant in their field of operation.
The U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) stipulates in its size
standards that the largest a railroad business firm that is ``for
profit'' may be and still be classified as a ``small entity'' is 1,500
employees for ``Line Haul Operating Railroads'' and 500 employees for
``Switching and Terminal Establishments.'' Additionally, 5 U.S.C.
601(5) defines as ``small entities'' governments of cities, counties,
towns, townships, villages, school districts, or special districts with
populations less than 50,000.
Federal agencies may adopt their own size standards for small
entities in consultation with SBA and in conjunction with public
comment. Pursuant to that authority, FRA has published a final
statement of agency policy that formally establishes ``small entities''
or ``small businesses'' as being railroads, contractors, and hazardous
materials shippers that meet the revenue requirements of a Class III
railroad as set forth in 49 CFR 1201.1-1, which is $20 million or less
in inflation-adjusted annual revenues, and commuter railroads or small
governmental jurisdictions that serve populations of 50,000 or less.
(See 68 FR 24891; May 9, 2003, codified at appendix C to 49 CFR part
209.) The $20 million limit is based on the STB's revenue threshold for
a Class III railroad. Railroad revenue is adjusted for inflation by
applying a revenue deflator formula in accordance with 49 CFR 1201.1-1.
FRA is using this definition for this rulemaking.
An estimated 1,095 entities will be affected by the rule. FRA
estimates that there are approximately 400 MOW contractor companies and
695 small railroads on the general system. FRA estimates that 86
percent of employees that will be regulated under this rule work for
these 74 railroads and contractors. Most railroads must comply with all
provisions of part 219. However, as previously indicated, FRA has a
``small railroad'' definition associated with part 219 that limits
compliance requirements for railroads with 15 HOS employees or less and
no joint operations to reduce burden on the smallest of railroads.
There are approximately 695 small railroads (as defined by revenue
size). Class II and Class III railroads do not report to the STB, and
although the number of Class II railroads is known, the precise number
of Class III railroads is difficult to ascertain due to conflicting
definitions, conglomerates, and even seasonal operations. Potentially,
all small railroads could be impacted by this final regulation. Part
219 has a small railroad exception for all railroads with 15 or fewer
covered employees, except when these railroads have joint operations
with another railroad, therefore increasing risk. Thus a railroad with
such characteristics shall be called a ``partially excepted small
railroad'' in this analysis, and is a subsection of the ``small
entities'' as defined by the STB and FRA, addressed above. Currently,
there are 288 partially excepted small railroads and, as FRA is not
amending to the substantive criteria of classification, there should be
no change in the number of partially excepted small railroads
associated with the final rule.
All commuter railroad operations in the United States are part of
larger governmental entities whose jurisdictions exceed 50,000 in
population.
As mentioned, all railroads must comply with all or limited
subparts of part 219. For partially excepted small railroads, per FRA's
definition, the significant burden involves the costs of adding MOW
employees to the existing testing programs, and adding reasonable
suspicion and pre-employment drug testing (which they have not needed
to comply with).
A significant portion of the MOW industry consists of contractors.
FRA has determined that risk lies as heavily with contractors as with
railroad employees, so contractors and subcontractors will be subject
to the same provisions of part 219 as the railroads for which they do
contract work. Whether contractors must comply with all or part of the
provisions of part 219 will depend on the size of the largest railroad
(assumed to have the largest risk) for which the contractor works.
FRA discussed with industry representatives how to ascertain the
number of contractors that will be involved with this rulemaking. FRA
is aware that some railroads hire contractors to conduct some or all of
the MOW worker functions on their railroads. Generally, the costs for
the burdens associated with this rulemaking will get passed on from the
contractor to the pertinent railroad. FRA has determined that there are
approximately 400 MOW-related contractor companies who will be covered
by the final rule. Of those, 370 are considered to be a ``small
entity.'' FRA has sought estimates of the number of contractors that
may be fully compliant and how many may be partially excepted,
depending on the size of the largest railroad for which they work.
FRA expects that some HOS small contractors will be impacted based
upon the compliance requirements for part 219 small railroads to now
include reasonable suspicion testing and pre-employment drug testing.
This burden is estimated to be minimal, as reasonable suspicion tests
occur extremely infrequently on small railroads (average less than one
time per year for all small railroads), and pre-employment drug tests,
the least costly of all tests, will only be required for new employees.
No other small businesses (non-railroad related) are expected to be
negatively impacted significantly by this rulemaking. Conversely, this
final regulation will bring business to consortiums, collectors,
testing labs, and other companies involved in the drug and alcohol
program business.
Expanding the program to cover MOW employees will only have a small
effect in terms of testing burden for railroads, based upon the cost of
pre-employment drug testing for new employees and the testing of MOW
employees. FRA estimates that 90 percent of small railroads already
conduct pre-employment drug testing under their own company authority.
Many of these contractors have employees with commercial drivers'
licenses (CDLs), and therefore fall under the drug and alcohol program
requirements of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
(FMCSA). Therefore, an estimated 40 percent of MOW contracted employees
already participate in a DOT drug and alcohol testing program.
Furthermore, FRA estimates that as many as 50-75 percent of all MOW
contractor companies have some form of a drug and alcohol testing
program, and that around 25 percent of these companies currently
complete random testing (the most burdensome type of testing).
Consortia are companies that provide testing, random selection,
collection, policy development, and training services to help employers
stay compliant. Consortia alleviate much of the administrative burden
of a testing
[[Page 37917]]
program and negotiate volume discounts on behalf of their clients. It
is likely that all part 219 small railroads already have a compliant
testing program for employees that have been covered under the
regulation. It should also be noted that approximately 125 of the small
railroads that will be impacted are subsidiaries of large short line
holding companies with resources comparable to larger railroads.
Additionally, many small railroads are members of ASLRRA, which was
consulted throughout the development of this regulation. ASLRRA has
helped create a consortium for its members in the past, and FRA will
work to ensure that small entities, as well as large, have the ability
to adhere to the regulation as easily as possible. The consortium
market will be affected in a positive manner due to new business from
this rulemaking; this is a secondary benefit not discussed in this RFA.
Significant Economic Impact Criteria
Previously, FRA sampled small railroads and found that revenue
averaged approximately $4.7 million (not discounted) in 2006. One
percent of that average annual revenue per small railroad is $47,000.
FRA realizes that some railroads will have lower revenue than $4.7
million. However, FRA estimates that small railroads will not have any
additional expenses over the next ten years to comply with the new
requirements in this final regulation. Based on this, FRA concludes
that the expected burden of this final rule will not have a significant
impact on the competitive position of small entities, or on the small
entity segment of the railroad industry as a whole.
Substantial Number Criteria
This final rule will likely burden all small railroads that are not
exempt from its scope or application (see 49 CFR 219.3). Thus, as noted
above this final rule will impact a substantial number of small
railroads.
2. Certification
Pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 605(b)), FRA
certifies that this final rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. FRA invited all
interested parties to submit data and information regarding the
potential economic impact that will result from adoption of the
proposals in the NPRM. FRA did receive comments concerning the initial
regulatory flexibility analysis in the public comment process. The
final rule addresses these concerns by continuing FRA's longstanding
approach of counting only a railroad's covered employees for purposes
of determining whether the railroad qualifies for the small railroad
exception (the railroad also cannot participate in any joint
operations) because FRA believes this is the best measure of the risks
posed by the railroad's operations. FRA received no objections to this
proposal and adopted in its final rule.
C. Paperwork Reduction Act
FRA is submitting the information collection requirements in this
final rule for review and approval to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501
et seq. The sections that contain the new and current information
collection requirements and the estimated time to fulfill each
requirement are as follows:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total annual Average time per Total annual
CFR Section Respondent universe responses response burden hours
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
219.4--Petition for Recognition 2 Railroads........ 2 petitions........ 40 hours........... 80
of a Foreign Railroad's
Workplace Testing Program.
219.7--Waivers................... 722 railroads + 400 4 waivers.......... 2 hours............ 8
MOW contractors.
219.9--Joint Operating Agreement 722 railroads + 400 525 agreements..... 30 minutes......... 263
between Railroads Assigning MOW contractors.
Responsibility for Compliance
with this Part Amongst
Themselves (Revised Requirement).
--Request to railroad for 722 railroads + 400 2 requests/ 1 hour............. 2
documents by employee MOW contractors. documents.
engaged in joint operation
and subject to adverse
action after being required
to participate in breath/
body fluid testing under
subpart C, D, or E of part
219 (Revised Requirement).
--Document by railroad/ 722 railroads + 400 10 documents....... 2 hours............ 20
contractor delineating MOW contractors.
responsibility for
Compliance with this part
(Revised Requirement).
219.11--Employee consent to 722 railroads + 400 30 consent forms... 2 minutes.......... 1
participate in body fluid MOW contractors.
testing under subpart C.
--Notification to employees 142,000 employees.. 9,508 notices...... 5 seconds.......... 13
for testing (New
Requirement).
--RR Alcohol & Drug Program 722 railroads + 400 722 modified 1 hour............. 722
that provides training to MOW contractors. Programs.
supervisors and information
on criteria for post-
accident toxicological
testing contained in part
219, subpart C, and appendix
C (Revised Requirement).
--Alcohol and Drug Programs -- 5 railroads........ 5 programs......... 3 hours............ 15
New RRs.
--Training of Supervisory 722 railroads + 400 2,462 trained 3 hours............ 7,386
Employees in signs/symptoms MOW contractors. supervisors.
of alcohol/drug influence.
219.12--RR Documentation on need 722 railroads + 400 5 documents........ 30 minutes......... 3
to place employee on duty for MOW contractors.
follow-up tests (New
Requirement).
219.23--Educational materials 722 railroads + 400 1,098 revised 1 hour............. 1,098
concerning the effects of MOW contractors. educational
alcohol/drug misuse on documents.
individual employees.
--Copies of educational 142,000 employees.. 142,000 copies of 2 minutes.......... 4,733
materials to employees. documents.
[[Page 37918]]
219.104--Removal of employee from 722 railroads + 400 500 notices + 500 30 seconds + 2 21
regulated service (Rev. MOW contractors. letters. minutes.
Requirement) Verbal Notice +
Follow-up Written Letter.
--Request for Hearing by 722 railroads + 400 50 requests + 50 2 minutes +........ 202
Employee who Denies Test MOW contractors. hearings. 4 hours............
Result or other Information
is Valid Evidence of part
219 Violation.
--Applicants Declining Pre- 722 railroads + 400 60 notices/ 2 minutes.......... 2
Employment Testing and MOW contractors. communications.
Withdrawing Employment
Application- Communications
(Revised Requirement).
219.105--Revised Requirements RR 722 railroads + 400 2 documents........ 5 minutes.......... .17
Duty to prevent violation-- MOW contractors.
Documents provided to FRA after
agency request regarding RR's
Alcohol and/or Drug Use
Education/Prevention/Etc.
--RR Supervisor Rule G 722 railroads/400 280,000 Rule G 2 seconds + 2 310
observations and records of MOW contractors. observations + seconds.
regulated employees. 280,000 records.
219.201(c)--Report by RR 722 railroads + 400 2 reports.......... 30 minutes......... 1
concerning decision by person MOW contractors.
other than RR representative
about whether an accident/
incident qualifies for testing.
219.203/207--Major train
accidents--Post Accident
Toxicological Testing Forms
--Completion of FRA F 6180.73 142,000 employees.. 240 forms.......... 10 minutes......... 40
--Determination by RR 722 railroads + 400 80 decisions/ 15 minutes......... 20
representative to test non- MOW contractors. determinations.
crew member regulated
employees based on specific
information (New
Requirement).
--Determination by RR 722 railroads + 400 50 decisions/ 5 minutes.......... 4
representative to exclude MOW contractors. determinations.
surviving crewmember from
testing (New Requirement).
--Verbal notification and 722 railroads + 80 notifications + 2 minutes + 30 43
subsequent written report of 400MOW contractors. 80 reports. minutes.
failure to collect urine/
blood specimens within four
hours (New Requirement).
--RR determination after 722 railroads + 400 25 decisions/ 10 minutes......... 4
accident to make crew MOW contractors. determinations.
available for toxicological
testing (New Requirement).
--RR call for train relief 722 railroads + 400 25 calls........... 5 minutes.......... 2
crew (New Requirement). MOW contractors.
--Recall of employees for 722 railroads + 400 4 calls + 4 reports 2 minutes + 30 2
testing and Narrative Report MOW contractors. minutes.
Completion (New Requirement).
--RR Reference to part 219 722 railroads + 400 80 references...... 15 minutes......... 20
requirements and FRA's post- MOW contractors.
accident toxicological kit
in seeking to obtain
facility cooperation (New
Requirement).
--RR Notification to National 722 railroads + 400 2 phone calls...... 10 minutes......... .33
Response Center of injured MOW contractors.
employee unconscious or
otherwise unable to give
testing consent.
219.205--Specimen Handling/ 722 railroads + 400 240 forms.......... 15 minutes......... 60
Collection--Completion of Form MOW contractors.
FRA F 6180.74 by train crew
members after accident.
--RR representative request 722 railroads + 400 80 ph. requests.... 2 minutes.......... 3
to medical facility MOW contractors.
representative to complete
remaining information on FRA
F 6180.74.
--RR representative 722 railroads + 400 80 forms........... 10 minutes......... 13
completion of Form FRA F MOW contractors.
6180.73.
--Request to FRA Alcohol and 722 railroads + 400 5 requests......... 2 minutes.......... .17
Drug Program Manager for MOW contractors.
order form for Standard
Shipping Kits (new
requirement).
--Request to National 722 railroads + 400 1 request.......... 2 minutes.......... .03333
Response Center (NRC) for MOW contractors.
Post-Mortem Shipping Kit
(New Requirement).
--RR Request to Medical 722 railroads + 400 40 ph. requests.... 2 minutes.......... 1
Facility to Transfer Sealed MOW contractors.
Toxicology Kit.
--Documentation of chain of 722 railroads + 400 40 documents....... 2 minutes.......... 1
custody of sealed toxicology MOW contractors.
kit from medical facility to
lab delivery.
--RR/Medical Facility Record 722 RRs + 400 20 written records. 2 minutes.......... 1
of Kit Error (New contr..
Requirement).
[[Page 37919]]
219.209(a)--Notification to NRC 722 railroads + 400 40 phone reports... 2 minutes.......... 1
and FRA of Accident/Incident MOW contractors.
where Samples were Obtained.
219.209(c)--Record of Part 219 722 railroads + 400 40 records......... 30 minutes......... 20
Test not Administered within 4 MOW contractors.
Hours Following Accident/
Incident.
219.211(b)--Results of post- 722 railroads + 400 10 reports......... 15 minutes......... 3
accident toxicological testing MOW contractors.
to RR MRO and RR Employee.
(c)--MRO Report to FRA of 722 railroads + 400 10 reports......... 15 minutes......... 3
positive test for alcohol/ MOW contractors.
drugs of surviving employee.
219.303--Reasonable Suspicion
Observations (Drug Test)
--Communication between On- 722 railroads + 400 50 phone 2 minutes.......... 2
Site and Off-Site MOW contractors. communications.
Supervisors regarding
Reasonable Suspicion
Observation.
--RR Written Documentation of 722 railroads + 400 30 documents....... 5 minutes.......... 3
Observed Signs/Symptoms for MOW contractors.
Reasonable Suspicion
Determination.
219.305--RR Written Record 722 railroads + 400 30 records......... 2 minutes.......... 1
Stating Reasons Test was Not MOW contractors.
Promptly Administered (New
Requirement).
219.401--Notification to Employee 722 railroads + 400 50 notifications... 15 minutes......... 13
regarding Reasonable Cause MOW contractors.
Testing (New Requirement).
219.405--RR Documentation 722 railroads + 400 50 documents....... 15 minutes......... 13
Describing Basis of Reasonable MOW contractors.
Cause Testing (New Requirements).
--RR Documentation of Rule/ 722 railroads + 400 20 documents....... 15 minutes......... 5
Part 225 Violation for Each MOW contractors.
Reasonable Cause Test (New
Requirement).
219.407--Prompt specimen 722 railroads + 400 15 records......... 15 minutes......... 4
collection time limitation MOW contractors.
exceeded--Record (Revised
Requirement).
219.501--RR Documentation of 722 railroads + 400 1,200 tests + 1,200 15 minutes + 5 400
Negative Pre-Employment Drug MOW contractors. documents. minutes.
Tests (New Requirement).
219.605--Submission of random 5 railroads........ 5 plans............ 1 hour............. 5
testing plan (Revised
Requirement): Existing RRs.
--New Railroads submission of 722 railroads + 400 20 amendments...... 1 hour............. 20
random testing plans MOW contractors.
(Revised Requirement).
--Amendments to Currently- 722 railroads + 400 21 resubmitted 15 minutes......... 5
Approved FRA Random Testing MOW contractors. plans.
Plan (Revised Requirement).
--Resubmitted random testing 722 railroads + 400 50 amendments...... 10 minutes......... 8
plans after notice of FRA MOW contractors.
disapproval (New
Requirement).
--Non-Substantive Amendment 722 railroads + 400 20 random testing 15 minutes......... 5
to an Approved Plan (New MOW contractors. plans.
Requirement).
--New/Combined/Amended Random 722 railroads + 400 200 plans.......... 1 hour............. 200
Testing Plans Incorporating MOW contractors.
New Categories of Regulated
Employees (New Requirement).
219.607--RR Requests to 722 railroads + 400 50 requests........ 15 minutes......... 13
Contractor or Service Agent to MOW contractors.
Submit Part 219 Compliant Random
Testing Plan on Its Behalf (New
Requirement).
--Contractor Random Testing 722 MOW contractors 50 plans........... 1 hour............. 50
Plan (New Requirement).
219.609--Inclusion of Regulated 722 railroads + 400 15 plans........... 10 minutes......... 3
Service Contractor Employees/ MOW contractors.
Volunteers in RR Random Testing
Plan (New Requirement).
--Addenda to RR Random 722 railroads + 400 15 addenda......... 10 minutes......... 3
Testing Plan Describing MOW contractors.
Method Used to Test
Contractor/Volunteer
Employees in Non-Random
Testing Plan (New
Requirement).
219.611--Random Alcohol and Drug 722 railroads + 400 25,000 30 seconds + 30 417
Test Pools: Good Faith MOW contractors. determinations + seconds.
Determinations and Evaluations 25,000 evaluations.
of Employee Likelihood of
Performing Regulated Service
(New Requirement).
--Random Testing Pool Updates 722 railroads + 400 13,176 pool updates 5 minutes.......... 1,098
(New Requirement). MOW contractors.
--Documents on RR Multiple 722 railroads + 400 96 documents....... 5 minutes.......... 8
Random Testing Pools (New MOW contractors.
Requirement).
[[Page 37920]]
219.613--RR Identification of 722 railroads + 400 2,196 IDs.......... 2 minutes.......... 73
Total Number of Eligible MOW contractors.
Employees for Random Testing
(New Requirement).
--RR Records/Explanation of 722 railroads + 400 10 records/ 2 minutes.......... .33
Discarded Selection Draws MOW contractors. explanations.
(New Requirement).
--Electronic or Hard Copy of 722 railroads + 400 13,176 snapshots/ 2 minutes.......... 1,098
RR Snapshot of Each Random MOW contractors. records.
Testing Pool (New
Requirement).
219.615--Incomplete Random 722 railroads + 400 2,000 documents.... .5 minute.......... 17
Testing Collections-- MOW contractors.
Documentation (New Requirement).
219.617--Employee Exclusion from 722 railroads + 400 5 documents........ 1 hour............. 5
Random alcohol/drug testing MOW contractors.
after providing verifiable
evidence from credible outside
professional (Revised
Requirement).
219.619--Report by MRO of 722 railroads + 400 88 reports......... 5 minutes.......... 7
Verified Positive Test or by MOW contractors.
Breath Alcohol Technician of
Breath Alcohol Specimen of 0.04
or Greater (New Requirement).
219.623--Random Testing Records 722 railroads + 400 40,000 records..... 1 minute........... 667
(New Requirement). MOW contractors.
219.901--RR Alcohol and Drug 722 railroads + 400 16,960 records..... 5 minutes.......... 1,413
Misuse Prevention Records for MOW contractors.
MOW Employees Kept by FRA--Two
Year Maintenance (Revised
Requirement).
219.1001--RR Change of Service 722 railroads + 400 40 programs........ 3 hours............ 120
Provider or Policy for Referral MOW contractors.
Program.
--New Railroads Adoption of 5 railroads........ 5 programs......... 3 hours............ 15
Referral Program.
--Co-worker Report that 722 railroads + 400 602 reports........ 5 minutes.......... 50
Employee is Unsafe to work MOW contractors.
with/in Violation of Part
219 or Railroad's Drug/
Alcohol Rules.
219.1003--RR Designation of DAC 722 railroads + 400 40 designations/ RR 20 minutes......... 13
and expectations when self- MOW contractors. expectations.
referral is allowed.
--RR Employee Self-Referral.. 722 railroads + 400 602 self-referrals. 10 seconds......... 2
MOW contractors.
--Referral for treatment/ 722 railroads + 400 602 treatment 30 minutes......... 301
evaluation of regulated MOW contractors. referrals/
employee by co-worker as evaluations.
unsafe to work with or in
violation of part 219 or RR
alcohol/drug rules.
--After non-per referral, 722 railroads + 400 3 removal 4 hours............ 12
removal of employee from MOW contractors. confirmations.
service and confirmation by
RR representative that
employee is unsafe to work
with or in violation of part
219 or RR drug/alcohol rule
(New Requirement).
--Regulated employee waiver 722 railroads + 400 3 waivers + 3 DAC 3 hours + 20 10
of investigation on RR rule MOW contractors. contacts. minutes.
charge and contact of DAC
within reasonable time
period (New Requirement).
--Employee evaluation by 722 railroads + 400 602 evaluations.... 2 hours............ 1,204
qualified DAC after self- MOW contractors.
referral, co-worker
referral, or non-peer
referral.
--DAC recommendation of leave 722 railroads + 400 602 mentions/ 1 hour............. 602
of absence for regulated MOW contractors. recommendation.
employee.
--DAC Notification to RR that 722 railroads + 400 602 notices........ 10 minutes......... 100
employee is fit to return to MOW contractors.
regulated service.
--DAC modification of initial 722 railroads + 400 60 modified 10 minutes......... 10
evaluation of regulated MOW contractors. evaluations.
employee.
219.1005--Referral Programs with 722 railroads + 400 10 referral 20 hours........... 200
Labor Organization Approvals MOW contractors. programs.
that Include Optional Provisions
(New Requirement).
219.1007--Filing of Documents/ 722 railroads + 400 10 documents....... 1 hour............. 10
Records with FRA of Labor MOW contractors.
Concurrences for Alternate
Referral Programs (New
Requirement).
--Notice to FRA of Amendment 722 railroads + 400 1 notice/amended 1 hour............. 1
or Revocation of FRA MOW contractors. peer referral
Approved Referral Program program.
(New Requirement).
Appendix C--Completion of Form 722 railroads + 400 10 completed forms. 20 minutes......... 3
FRA F 6180.75 after rail MOW contractors.
accident/incident resulting in
fatality.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 37921]]
All estimates include the time for reviewing instructions;
searching existing data sources; gathering or maintaining the needed
data; and reviewing the information. For information or a copy of the
paperwork package submitted to OMB, contact Mr. Robert Brogan, FRA
Office of Railroad Safety, Information Collection Clearance Officer, at
202-493-6292, or Ms. Kim Toone, FRA Office of Information Technology,
Information Clearance Officer, at 202-493-6132.
Organizations and individuals desiring to submit comments on the
collection of information requirements should send them directly to the
Office of Management and Budget, Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: FRA Desk Officer. Comments
may also be sent via email to the Office of Management and Budget at
the following address: oira_submissions@omb.eop.gov.
OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of
information requirements contained in this final rule between 30 and 60
days after publication of this document in the Federal Register.
Therefore, a comment to OMB is best assured of having its full effect
if OMB receives it within 30 days of publication.
FRA cannot impose a penalty on persons for violating information
collection requirements which do not display a current OMB control
number, if required. FRA intends to obtain current OMB control numbers
for any new information collection requirements resulting from this
rulemaking action before the effective date of the final rule. The OMB
control number, when assigned, will be announced by separate notice in
the Federal Register.
D. Federalism Implications
Executive Order 13132, ``Federalism'' (64 FR 43255, Aug. 4, 1999),
requires FRA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful
and timely input by State and local officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have federalism implications.'' ``Policies
that have federalism implications'' are defined in the Executive Order
to include regulations that have ``substantial direct effects on the
States, on the relationship between the national government and the
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the
various levels of government.'' Under Executive Order 13132, the agency
may not issue a regulation with federalism implications that imposes
substantial direct compliance costs and that is not required by
statute, unless the Federal government provides the funds necessary to
pay the direct compliance costs incurred by State and local
governments, or the agency consults with State and local government
officials early in the process of developing the regulation. Where a
regulation has federalism implications and preempts State law, the
agency seeks to consult with State and local officials in the process
of developing the regulation.
This final rule has been analyzed in accordance with the principles
and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132. FRA has determined
that the rule will not have substantial direct effects on the States,
on the relationship between the national government and the States, or
on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the various
levels of government. In addition, FRA has determined that this rule
will not impose substantial direct compliance costs on State and local
governments. Therefore, the consultation and funding requirements of
Executive Order 13132 do not apply.
This rule complies with a statutory mandate and will not have a
substantial effect on the States, on the relationship between the
Federal government and the States, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities among the various levels of government. In addition,
this rule will not have any federalism implications that impose
substantial direct compliance costs on State and local governments.
However, FRA notes that this part could have preemptive effect by
the operation of law under a provision of the former Federal Railroad
Safety Act of 1970, repealed and codified at 49 U.S.C. 20106 (Sec.
20106). Sec. 20106 provides that States may not adopt or continue in
effect any law, regulation, or order related to railroad safety or
security that covers the subject matter of a regulation prescribed or
order issued by the Secretary of Transportation (with respect to
railroad safety matters) or the Secretary of Homeland Security (with
respect to railroad security matters), except when the State law,
regulation, or order qualifies under the ``essentially local safety or
security hazard'' exception to Sec. 20106.
In sum, FRA has analyzed this rule in accordance with the
principles and criteria contained in Executive Order 13132. As
explained above, FRA has determined that this rule has no federalism
implications, other than the possible preemption of State laws under 49
U.S.C. 20106 and 20119. Accordingly, FRA has determined that
preparation of a federalism summary impact statement for this rule is
not required.
E. Environmental Impact
FRA has evaluated this final rule in accordance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA; 42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.), other
environmental statutes, related regulatory requirements, and its
``Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts'' (FRA's Procedures)
(64 FR 28545, May 26, 1999). FRA has determined that this final rule is
categorically excluded from detailed environmental review pursuant to
section 4(c)(20) of FRA's NEPA Procedures, ``Promulgation of railroad
safety rules and policy statements that do not result in significantly
increased emissions of air or water pollutants or noise or increased
traffic congestion in any mode of transportation.'' See 64 FR 28547,
May 26, 1999. Categorical exclusions (CEs) are actions identified in an
agency's NEPA implementing procedures that do not normally have a
significant impact on the environment and therefore do not require
either an environmental assessment (EA) or environmental impact
statement (EIS). See 40 CFR 1508.4.
In analyzing the applicability of a CE, the agency must also
consider whether extraordinary circumstances are present that would
warrant a more detailed environmental review through the preparation of
an EA or EIS. Id. In accordance with section 4(c) and (e) of FRA's
Procedures, the agency has further concluded that no extraordinary
circumstances exist with respect to this regulation that might trigger
the need for a more detailed environmental review. The purpose of this
rulemaking is to expand the scope of FRA's drug and alcohol regulations
to cover MOW workers as per Congress' mandate in the RSIA.
Specifically, the rule adopts part 214's definition of ``Roadway
Worker'' to define ``MOW employee'' under part 214, contains a revised
version of the troubled employee identification requirements, and
updates and restructures the rule to make it more user-friendly. FRA
does not anticipate any environmental impacts from this or any other
requirement of the final rule. FRA also finds that there are no
extraordinary circumstances present in connection with this final rule.
F. Executive Order 12898 (Environmental Justice)
Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address Environmental
Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations, and DOT
Order 5610.2(a) (91 FR 27534, May 10,
[[Page 37922]]
2012) require DOT agencies to achieve environmental justice as part of
their mission by identifying and addressing, as appropriate,
disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental
effects, including interrelated social and economic effects, of their
programs, policies, and activities on minority populations and low-
income populations. The DOT Order instructs DOT agencies to address
compliance with Executive Order 12898 and requirements within the DOT
Order in rulemaking activities, as appropriate. FRA has evaluated this
final rule under Executive Order 12898 and the DOT Order and determined
it will not cause disproportionately high and adverse human health and
environmental effects on minority populations or low-income
populations.
G. Executive Order 13175 (Tribal Consultation)
FRA has evaluated this final rule in accordance with the principles
and criteria contained in Executive Order 13175, Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments, dated November 6, 2000.
The final rule would not have a substantial direct effect on one or
more Indian tribes, would not impose substantial direct compliance
costs on Indian tribal governments, and would not preempt tribal laws.
Therefore, the funding and consultation requirements of Executive Order
13175 do not apply, and a tribal summary impact statement is not
required.
H. International Trade Impact Assessment
The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 prohibits Federal agencies from
engaging in any standards or related activities that create unnecessary
obstacles to foreign commerce of the United States. Legitimate domestic
objectives, such as safety, are not considered unnecessary obstacles.
The statute also requires consideration of international standards and
where appropriate, that they be the basis for U.S. standards.
This rulemaking is purely domestic in nature and is not expected to
affect trade opportunities for U.S. firms doing business overseas or
for foreign firms doing business in the United States.
I. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
Pursuant to Section 201 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Pub. L. 104-4, 2 U.S.C. 1531), each Federal agency ``shall, unless
otherwise prohibited by law, assess the effects of Federal regulatory
actions on State, local, and tribal governments, and the private sector
(other than to the extent that such regulations incorporate
requirements specifically set forth in law).'' Section 202 of the Act
(2 U.S.C. 1532) further requires that ``before promulgating any general
notice of proposed rulemaking that is likely to result in the
promulgation of any rule that includes any Federal mandate that may
result in expenditure by State, local, and tribal governments, in the
aggregate, or by the private sector, of $100,000,000 or more (adjusted
annually for inflation) in any one year, and before promulgating any
final rule for which a general notice of proposed rulemaking was
published, the agency shall prepare a written statement'' detailing the
effect on State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector.
This rule will not result in the expenditure of more than $100,000,000
(as adjusted annually for inflation) by the public sector in any one
year, and thus preparation of such a statement is not required.
J. Energy Impact
Executive Order 13211 requires Federal agencies to prepare a
Statement of Energy Effects for any ``significant energy action.'' 66
FR 28355 (May 22, 2001). Under the Executive Order, a ``significant
energy action'' is defined as any action by an agency (normally
published in the Federal Register) that promulgates or is expected to
lead to the promulgation of a final rule or regulation, including
notices of inquiry, advance notices of proposed rulemaking, and notices
of proposed rulemaking, that: (1)(i) Is a significant regulatory action
under Executive Order 12866 or any successor order; and (ii) is likely
to have a significant adverse effect on the supply, distribution, or
use of energy; or (2) is designated by the Administrator of the Office
of Information and Regulatory Affairs as a significant energy action.
FRA has evaluated this rule in accordance with Executive Order 13211,
and determined that it will not have a significant adverse effect on
the supply, distribution, or use of energy. Consequently, FRA has
determined that this regulatory action is not a ``significant energy
action'' within the meaning of Executive Order 13211.
K. Privacy Act Information
Anyone is able to search the electronic form of any written
communications and comments received into any of our dockets by the
name of the individual submitting the comment (or signing the document,
if submitted on behalf of an association, business, labor union, etc.).
See https://www.regulations.gov/#!privacyNotice for the privacy notice
of regulations.gov or interested parties may review DOT's complete
Privacy Act Statement in the Federal Register published on April 11,
2000 (65 FR 19477). In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 553(c), DOT solicits
comments from the public to better inform its rulemaking process. DOT
posts these comments, without edit, including any personal information
the commenter provides, to www.regulations.gov, as described in the
system of records notice (DOT/ALL-14 FDMS), which can be reviewed at
www.dot.gov/privacy.
List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 219
Alcohol abuse, Drug abuse, Drug testing, Penalties, Railroad
safety, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Safety,
Transportation.
The Rule
For the reasons stated above, FRA amends part 219 as follows:
PART 219--CONTROL OF ALCOHOL AND DRUG USE
0
1. The authority citation for part 219 is revised to read as follows:
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 20103, 20107, 20140, 21301, 21304, 21311;
28 U.S.C. 2461, note; Sec. 412, Div. A, Pub. L. 110-432, 122 Stat.
4889 (49 U.S.C. 20140, note); and 49 CFR 1.89.
Subpart A--General
0
2. Revise Sec. 219.1(a) to read as follows:
Sec. 219.1 Purpose and scope.
(a) The purpose of this part is to prevent accidents and casualties
in railroad operations that result from impairment of employees by
alcohol or drugs.
* * * * *
0
3. Revise Sec. 219.3 to read as follows:
Sec. 219.3 Application.
(a) General. This part applies to all railroads and contractors,
except as provided in paragraphs (b), (c), and (d) of this section, and
except for:
(1) Railroads that operate only on track inside an installation
that is not part of the general railroad system of transportation
(i.e., plant railroads, as defined in Sec. 219.5);
(2) Tourist, scenic, historic, or excursion operations that are not
part of the general railroad system of transportation, as defined in
Sec. 219.5; or
(3) Rapid transit operations in an urban area that are not
connected to the general railroad system of transportation.
(b) Annual report requirements. (1) Subpart I of this part does not
apply to
[[Page 37923]]
any domestic or foreign railroad that has fewer than 400,000 total
annual employee work hours, including hours worked by all employees of
the railroad, regardless of occupation, not only while in the United
States, but also while outside the United States.
(2) Subpart I of this part does not apply to any contractor that
performs regulated service exclusively for railroads with fewer than
400,000 total annual employee work hours, including hours worked by all
employees of the railroad, regardless of occupation, not only while in
the United States, but also while outside the United States.
(3) When a contractor performs regulated service for at least one
railroad with fewer than 400,000 total annual employee hours, including
hours worked by all employees of the railroad, regardless of
occupation, not only while in the United States, but also while outside
the United States, subpart I of this part applies as follows:
(i) A railroad with more than 400,000 total annual employee work
hours must comply with subpart I regarding any contractor employees it
integrates into its own alcohol and drug testing program under this
part; and
(ii) If a contractor establishes its own independent alcohol and
drug testing program that meets the requirements of this part and is
acceptable to the railroad, the contractor must comply with subpart I
if it has 200 or more regulated employees.
(c) Small railroad exception. (1) Subparts E and G of this part do
not apply to small railroads, and a small railroad may not perform the
Federal alcohol and drug testing authorized by these subparts. For
purposes of this part, a small railroad means a railroad that:
(i) Has a total of 15 or fewer employees who are covered by the
hours of service laws at 49 U.S.C. 21103, 21104, or 21105, or who would
be subject to the hours of service laws at 49 U.S.C. 21103, 21104, or
21105 if their services were performed in the United States; and
(ii) Does not have joint operations, as defined in Sec. 219.5,
with another railroad that operates in the United States, except as
necessary for purposes of interchange.
(2) An employee performing only MOW activities, as defined in Sec.
219.5, does not count towards a railroad's total number of covered
employees for the purpose of determining whether it qualifies for the
small railroad exception.
(3) A contractor performing MOW activities exclusively for small
railroads also qualifies for the small railroad exception (i.e., is
excepted from the requirements of subparts E and G of this part). A
contractor is not excepted if it performs MOW activities for at least
one or more railroads that does not qualify for the small railroad
exception under this section.
(4) If a contractor is subject to all of part 219 of this chapter
because it performs regulated service for multiple railroads, not all
of which qualify for the small railroad exception, the responsibility
for ensuring that the contractor complies with subparts E and G of this
part is shared between the contractor and any railroad using the
contractor that does not qualify for the small railroad exception.
(d) Foreign railroad. (1) This part does not apply to the
operations of a foreign railroad that take place outside the United
States. A foreign railroad is required to conduct post-accident
toxicological testing or reasonable suspicion testing only for
operations that occur within the United States.
(2) Subparts F, G, and K of this part do not apply to an employee
of a foreign railroad whose primary reporting point is outside the
United States if that employee is:
(i) Performing train or dispatching service on that portion of a
rail line in the United States extending up to 10 route miles from the
point that the line crosses into the United States from Canada or
Mexico; or
(ii) Performing signal service in the United States.
0
4. In Sec. 219.4, revise paragraphs (a)(1), (b)(1), and (b)(2) to read
as follows:
Sec. 219.4 Recognition of a foreign railroad's workplace testing
program.
(a) * * *
(1) To be so considered, the petition must document that the
foreign railroad's workplace testing program contains equivalents to
subparts B, F, G, and K of this part:
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(1) Upon FRA's recognition of a foreign railroad's workplace
alcohol and drug use program as compatible with the return-to-service
requirements in subpart B of this part and the requirements of subparts
F, G, and K of this part, the foreign railroad must comply with either
the specified provisions of Sec. 219.4 or with the standards of its
recognized program, and any imposed conditions, with respect to its
employees whose primary reporting point is outside the United States
and who perform train or dispatching service in the United States. The
foreign railroad must also, with respect to its final applicants for,
or its employees seeking to transfer for the first time to, duties
involving such train or dispatching service in the United States,
comply with either subpart F of this part or the standards of its
recognized program.
(2) The foreign railroad must comply with subparts A (general), B
(prohibitions, other than the return-to-service provisions in paragraph
(d) of this section), C (post-accident toxicological testing), D
(reasonable suspicion testing), I (annual report requirements), and J
(recordkeeping requirements) of this part. Drug or alcohol testing
required by these subparts (except for post-accident toxicological
testing required by subpart C) must be conducted in compliance with all
applicable provisions of the DOT Procedures for Workplace Drug and
Alcohol Testing Programs (part 40 of this title).
* * * * *
0
5. Section 219.5 is amended by:
0
a. Revising the introductory text;
0
b. Adding new definitions of ``Administrator'', ``Associate
Administrator'', ``category of regulated employee'', and ``contractor''
in alphabetical order;
0
c. Revising the definitions of ``covered employee'' and ``covered
service'';
0
d. Adding new definitions of ``DOT, The Department, or DOT agency'',
``DOT-regulated employee'', ``DOT safety-sensitive duties or DOT
safety-sensitive functions'', ``Drug and Alcohol Counselor or DAC,''
``employee'', ``evacuation'', ``flagman or flagger'' and ``fouling a
track'' in alphabetical order;
0
e. Revising the definition of ``FRA representative'';
0
f. Removing the definition of ``general railroad system of
transportation'';
0
g. Adding new definitions of ``highway-rail grade crossing'' and
``highway-rail grade crossing accident/incident'' in alphabetical
order;
0
h. Revising the definition of ``impact accident'';
0
i. Adding new definitions of ``joint operations'' and ``maintenance-of-
way employee or MOW employee'' in alphabetical order;
0
j. Revising the definition of ``medical facility'';
0
k. Adding new definitions of ``non-peer'', ``on-track or fouling
equipment'', ``other impact accident'', ``person'', and ``plant
railroad'' in alphabetical order;
0
l. Revising the definition of ``railroad property damage or damage to
railroad property'';
0
m. Adding new definitions of ``raking collision'', ``regulated
employee'', ``regulated service'', ``responsible railroad supervisor'',
``side collision'', and ``tourist, scenic, historic, or
[[Page 37924]]
excursion operations that are not part of the general railroad system
of transportation'' in alphabetical order;
0
n. Removing the definition of ``train'';
0
o. Revising the definitions of ``train accident'' and ``train
incident''; and
0
p. Adding a new definition of ``watchman/lookout'' in alphabetical
order.
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 219.5 Definitions.
As used in this part only--
* * * * *
Administrator means the Administrator of the Federal Railroad
Administration or the Administrator's delegate.
Associate Administrator means the Associate Administrator for
Railroad Safety, Federal Railroad Administration, or the Associate
Administrator's delegate.
Category of regulated employee means a broad class of either
covered service or maintenance-of-way employees (as defined in this
section). For the purpose of determining random testing rates under
Sec. 219.625, if an individual performs both covered service and
maintenance-of-way activities, he or she belongs in the category of
regulated employee that corresponds with the type of regulated service
comprising more than 50 percent of his or her regulated service.
* * * * *
Contractor means a contractor or subcontractor performing functions
for a railroad.
* * * * *
Covered employee means an employee (as defined in this section to
include an employee, volunteer, or probationary employee performing
activities for a railroad or a contractor to a railroad) who is
performing covered service under the hours of service laws at 49 U.S.C.
21101, 21104, or 21105 or who is subject to performing such covered
service, regardless of whether the person has performed or is currently
performing covered service. (An employee is not a ``covered employee''
under this definition exclusively because he or she is an employee for
purposes of 49 U.S.C. 21106.) For the purposes of pre-employment
testing only, the term ``covered employee'' includes a person applying
to perform covered service in the United States.
Covered service means service in the United States as a train
employee, a dispatching service employee, or a signal employee, as
those terms are defined at 49 U.S.C. 21101, but does not include any
period the employee is relieved of all responsibilities and is free to
come and go without restriction.
* * * * *
DOT, The Department, or DOT agency means all DOT agencies,
including, but not limited to, the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA), the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), the Federal Transit
Administration (FTA), the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA), the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHMSA), the United States Coast Guard (USCG) (for
purposes of part 40 coverage only), and the Office of the Secretary
(OST). These terms include any designee of a DOT agency.
DOT-regulated employee means any person who is designated in a DOT
agency regulation as subject to drug testing and/or alcohol testing.
The term includes individuals currently performing DOT safety-sensitive
functions designated in DOT agency regulations and applicants for
employment subject to pre-employment testing. For purposes of drug
testing conducted under the provisions of 49 CFR part 40, the term
employee has the same meaning as the term ``donor'' as found on the
Custody and Control Form and related guidance materials produced by the
Department of Health and Human Services.
DOT safety-sensitive duties or DOT-safety sensitive functions means
functions or duties designated by a DOT agency, the performance of
which makes an individual subject to the drug testing and/or alcohol
testing requirements of that DOT agency. For purposes of this part,
regulated service has been designated by FRA as a DOT safety-sensitive
duty or function.
* * * * *
Drug and Alcohol Counselor or DAC means a person who meets the
credentialing and qualification requirements described in Sec. 242.7
of this chapter.
Employee means any individual (including a volunteer or a
probationary employee) performing activities for a railroad or a
contractor to a railroad.
Evacuation means the mandatory or voluntary relocation of at least
one person who is not a railroad employee for the purpose of avoiding
exposure to a hazardous material release. It does not include the
closure of public transportation roadways for the purpose of containing
a hazardous material release, unless the closure is accompanied by an
evacuation order.
Flagman or Flagger means any person designated by the railroad to
direct or restrict the movement of trains past a point on a track to
provide on-track safety for maintenance-of-way employees, while engaged
solely in performing that function.
* * * * *
Fouling a track means the placement of an individual or an item of
equipment in such proximity to a track that the individual or equipment
could be struck by a moving train or on-track equipment, or in any case
is within four feet of the field side of the near running rail.
* * * * *
FRA representative means the Associate Administrator for Railroad
Safety of FRA and staff, the Associate Administrator's delegate
(including a qualified State inspector acting under part 212 of this
chapter), the Chief Counsel of FRA, the Chief Counsel's delegate, or
FRA's Drug and Alcohol Program oversight contractor.
* * * * *
Highway-rail grade crossing means:
(1) A location where a public highway, road, or street, or a
private roadway, including associated sidewalks, crosses one or more
railroad tracks at grade; or
(2) A location where a pathway explicitly authorized by a public
authority or a railroad carrier that is dedicated for the use of non-
vehicular traffic, including pedestrians, bicyclists, and others that
crosses one or more railroad tracks at grade. The term ``sidewalk''
means that portion of a street between the curb line, or the lateral
line of a roadway, and the adjacent property line or, on easements of
private property, that portion of a street that is paved or improved
and intended for use by pedestrians.
Highway-rail grade crossing accident/incident means any impact
between railroad on-track equipment and a highway user at a highway-
rail grade crossing. The term ``highway user'' includes pedestrians, as
well as automobiles, buses, trucks, motorcycles, bicycles, farm
vehicles, and all other modes of surface transportation motorized and
un-motorized.
Impact accident, (1) Impact accident means a train accident, as
defined in this section, consisting either of--
(i) A head-on or rear-end collision between on-track equipment;
(ii) A side collision, derailment collision, raking collision,
switching collision, or ``other impact accident,'' as defined by this
section;
(iii) Impact with a deliberately-placed obstruction, such as a
bumping post (but not a derail); or
(iv) Impact between on-track equipment and any railroad equipment
[[Page 37925]]
fouling the track, such as an impact between a train and the boom of an
off-rail vehicle.
(2) The definition of ``impact accident'' does not include an
impact with naturally-occurring obstructions such as fallen trees, rock
or snow slides, livestock, etc.
* * * * *
Joint operations means rail operations conducted by more than one
railroad on the same track (except for minimal joint operations
necessary for the purpose of interchange), regardless of whether such
operations are the result of contractual arrangements between the
railroads, order of a governmental agency or a court of law, or any
other legally binding directive. For purposes of this part only,
minimal joint operations are considered necessary for the purpose of
interchange when:
(1) The maximum authorized speed for operations on the shared track
does not exceed 20 mph;
(2) Operations are conducted under operating rules that require
every locomotive and train to proceed at a speed that permits stopping
within one half the range of vision of the locomotive engineer;
(3) The maximum distance for operations on the shared track does
not exceed 3 miles; and
(4) Any operations extending into another railroad's yard are for
the sole purpose of setting out or picking up cars on a designated
interchange track.
Maintenance-of-way employee or MOW employee means a roadway worker
as defined in Sec. 214.7 of this chapter.
Medical facility means a hospital, clinic, physician's office, or
laboratory where post-accident toxicological testing specimens can be
collected according to recognized professional standards, and where an
individual's post-accident medical needs can be attended to.
* * * * *
Non-peer means a supervisor (other than a co-worker), labor
organization representative, or family member of a regulated employee.
On-track or fouling equipment means any railroad equipment that is
positioned on the rails or that is fouling the track, and includes, but
is not limited to, the following: A train, locomotive, cut of cars,
single car, motorcar, yard switching train, work train, inspection
train, track motorcar, highway-rail vehicle, push car, crane, or other
roadway maintenance machine, such as a ballast tamping machine, if the
machine is positioned on or over the rails or is fouling the track.
Other impact accident means an accident or incident, not classified
as a head-on, rear-end, side, derailment, raking, or switching
collision, that involves contact between on-track or fouling equipment.
This includes impacts in which single cars or cuts of cars are damaged
during operations involving switching, train makeup, setting out, etc.
* * * * *
Person means an entity of any type covered under 1 U.S.C. 1,
including but not limited to the following: A railroad; a manager,
supervisor, official, or other employee or agent of a railroad; any
owner, manufacturer, lessor, or lessee of railroad equipment, track, or
facilities; any independent contractor providing goods or services to a
railroad, such as a service agent performing functions under part 40 of
this title; and any employee of such owner, manufacturer, lessor,
lessee, or independent contractor.
Plant railroad means a plant or installation that owns or leases a
locomotive, uses that locomotive to switch cars throughout the plant or
installation, and is moving goods solely for use in the facility's own
industrial processes. The plant or installation could include track
immediately adjacent to the plant or installation if the plant railroad
leases the track from the general system railroad and the lease
provides for (and actual practice entails) the exclusive use of that
trackage by the plant railroad and the general system railroad for
purposes of moving only cars shipped to or from the plant. A plant or
installation that operates a locomotive to switch or move cars for
other entities, even if solely within the confines of the plant or
installation, rather than for its own purposes or industrial processes,
will not be considered a plant railroad because the performance of such
activity makes the operation part of the general railroad system of
transportation.
* * * * *
Railroad property damage or damage to railroad property means
damage to railroad property (specifically, on-track equipment, signals,
track, track structure, or roadbed) and must be calculated according to
the provisions for calculating costs and reportable damage in the FRA
Guide for Preparing Accident/Incident Reports (see Sec. 225.21 of this
chapter for instructions on how to obtain a copy). Generally, railroad
property damage includes labor costs and all other costs to repair or
replace in-kind damaged on-track equipment, signals, track, track
structures (including bridges and tunnels), or roadbed. (Labor costs
that must be accounted for include hourly wages, transportation costs,
and hotel expenses.) It does not include the cost of clearing a wreck;
however, additional damage to the above-listed items caused while
clearing the wreck must be included in the damage estimate. It also
includes the cost of rental and/or operation of machinery such as
cranes and bulldozers, including the services of contractors, to
replace or repair the track right-of-way and associated structures.
Railroad property damage does not include damage to lading. Trailers/
containers on flatcars are considered to be lading and damage to these
is not to be included in on-track equipment damage. Damage to a flat
car carrying a trailer/container, however, is included in railroad
property damage. Railroads should refer directly to the FRA Guide for
Preparing Accident/Incident Reports for additional guidance on what
constitutes railroad property damage.
Raking collision means a collision between parts or lading of a
consist on an adjacent track, or with a structure such as a bridge.
Regulated employee means a covered employee or maintenance-of-way
employee who performs regulated service for a railroad subject to the
requirements of this part.
Regulated service means covered service or maintenance-of-way
activities, the performance of which makes an employee subject to the
requirements of this part.
* * * * *
Responsible railroad supervisor means any responsible line
supervisor (e.g., a trainmaster or road foreman of engines) or superior
official in authority over the regulated employees to be tested.
* * * * *
Side collision means a collision at a turnout where one consist
strikes the side of another consist.
* * * * *
Tourist, scenic, historic, or excursion operations that are not
part of the general railroad system of transportation means a tourist,
scenic, historic, or excursion operation conducted only on track used
exclusively for that purpose (i.e., there is no freight, intercity
passenger, or commuter passenger railroad operation on the track).
Train accident means a rail equipment accident described in Sec.
225.19(c) of this chapter involving damage in excess of the current
reporting threshold (see Sec. 225.19(e) of this chapter), including an
accident involving a switching movement. Rail
[[Page 37926]]
equipment accidents include, but are not limited to, collisions,
derailments, and other events involving the operations of on-track or
fouling equipment (whether standing or moving).
Train incident means an event involving the operation of railroad
on-track or fouling equipment that results in a casualty but in which
railroad property damage does not exceed the reporting threshold.
* * * * *
Watchman/lookout means an employee who has been annually trained
and qualified to provide warning of approaching trains or on-track
equipment. Watchmen/lookouts must be properly equipped to provide
visual and auditory warning by such means as a whistle, air horn, white
disk, red flag, lantern, or fusee. A watchman/lookout's sole duty is to
look out for approaching trains/on-track equipment and provide at least
fifteen seconds advanced warning to employees before the arrival of
trains/on-track equipment.
0
6. Revise Sec. 219.9 to read as follows:
Sec. 219.9 Responsibility for compliance.
(a) General. Although the requirements of this part are stated in
terms of the duty of a railroad, when any person, as defined by Sec.
219.5, performs any function required by this part, that person
(whether or not a railroad) shall perform that function in accordance
with this part.
(b) Joint operations. (1) In the case of joint operations, primary
responsibility for compliance with subparts C, D, and E of this part
rests with the host railroad, and all affected employees must be
responsive to direction from the host railroad that is consistent with
this part. However, nothing in this paragraph restricts railroads
engaged in joint operations from appropriately assigning responsibility
for compliance with this part amongst themselves through a joint
operating agreement or other binding contract. FRA reserves the right
to bring an enforcement action for noncompliance with this part against
the host railroad, the employing railroad, or both.
(2) When an employee of a railroad engaged in joint operations is
required to participate in breath or body fluid testing under subpart
C, D, or E of this part and is subsequently subject to adverse action
alleged to have arisen out of the required test (or alleged refusal
thereof), necessary witnesses and documents available to the other
railroad engaged in the joint operations must be made available to the
employee and his or her employing railroad on a reasonable basis.
(c) Contractor responsibility for compliance. As provided by
paragraph (a) of this section, any independent contractor or other
entity that performs regulated service for a railroad, or any other
services under this part or part 40 of this title, has the same
responsibilities as a railroad under this part with respect to its
employees who perform regulated service or other service required by
this part or part 40 of this title for the railroad. The entity's
responsibility for compliance with this part may be fulfilled either
directly by that entity or by the railroad treating the entity's
regulated employees as if they were the railroad's own employees for
purposes of this part. The responsibility for compliance must be
clearly spelled out in the contract between the railroad and the other
entity or in another document. In the absence of a clear delineation of
responsibility, FRA may hold the railroad and the other entity jointly
and severally liable for compliance.
0
7. Add Sec. 219.10 to read as follows:
Sec. 219.10 Penalties.
Any person, as defined by Sec. 219.5, who violates any requirement
of this part or causes the violation of any such requirement is subject
to a civil penalty of at least $650 and not more than $25,000 per
violation, except that: Penalties may be assessed against individuals
only for willful violations; where a grossly negligent violation or a
pattern of repeated violations has created an imminent hazard of death
or injury, or has caused death or injury, a penalty not to exceed
$105,000 per violation may be assessed; and the standard of liability
for a railroad will vary depending upon the requirement involved. See,
e.g., Sec. 219.105, which is construed to qualify the responsibility
of a railroad for the unauthorized conduct of an employee that violates
Sec. 219.101 or Sec. 219.102 (while imposing a duty of due diligence
to prevent such conduct). Each day a violation continues constitutes a
separate offense. See Appendix A to this part for a statement of agency
civil penalty policy.
0
8. Amend Sec. 219.11 by revising paragraphs (a), (b)(1) and (2), and
(c) through (h) to read as follows:
Sec. 219.11 General conditions for chemical tests.
(a)(1) Any regulated employee who is subject to performing
regulated service for a railroad is deemed to have consented to testing
as required in subparts B, C, D, E, F, G, and K of this part.
(2) A regulated employee required to participate in alcohol and/or
drug testing under this part must be on duty and subject to performing
regulated service when the specimen collection is initiated and the
alcohol testing/urine specimen collection is conducted (with the
exception of pre-employment testing under subpart F of this part).
(b)(1) Each regulated employee must participate in such testing, as
required under the conditions set forth in this part and implemented by
a representative of the railroad or employing contractor.
(2) In any case where an employee is suffering a substantiated
medical emergency and is subject to alcohol or drug testing under this
part, necessary medical treatment must be accorded priority over
provision of the breath or body fluid specimen(s). A medical emergency
is an acute medical condition requiring immediate medical care. A
railroad may require an employee to substantiate a medical emergency by
providing verifiable documentation from a credible outside professional
(e.g., doctor, dentist, hospital, or law enforcement officer)
substantiating the medical emergency within a reasonable period of
time.
* * * * *
(c) A regulated employee who is required to be tested under
subparts C, D, or E of this part and who is taken to a medical facility
for observation or treatment after an accident or incident is deemed to
have consented to the release to FRA of the following:
(1) The remaining portion of any body fluid specimen taken by the
medical facility within 12 hours of the accident or incident that is
not required for medical purposes, together with any normal medical
facility record(s) pertaining to the taking of such specimen;
(2) The results of any laboratory tests for alcohol or any drug
conducted by or for the medical facility on such specimen;
(3) The identity, dosage, and time of administration of any drugs
administered by the medical facility before the time specimens were
taken by the medical facility or before the time specimens were taken
in compliance with this part; and
(4) The results of any breath tests for alcohol conducted by or for
the medical facility.
(d) Any person required to participate in body fluid testing under
subpart C of this part (post-accident toxicological testing) shall, if
requested by a representative of the railroad or the medical facility,
evidence consent to the taking of specimens, their release for
toxicological analysis under pertinent
[[Page 37927]]
provisions of this part, and release of the test results to the
railroad's Medical Review Officer by promptly executing a consent form,
if required by the medical facility. A regulated employee is not
required to execute any document or clause waiving rights that the
employee would otherwise have against the railroad, and any such waiver
is void. The employee may not be required to waive liability with
respect to negligence on the part of any person participating in the
collection, handling or analysis of the specimen or to indemnify any
person for the negligence of others. Any consent provided consistent
with this section may be construed to extend only to those actions
specified in this section.
(e)(1) A regulated employee who is notified of selection for
testing under this part must cease to perform his or her assigned
duties and proceed to the testing site either immediately or as soon as
possible without adversely affecting safety.
(2) A railroad must ensure that the absence of a regulated employee
from his or her assigned duties to report for testing does not
adversely affect safety.
(3) Nothing in this part may be construed to authorize the use of
physical coercion or any other deprivation of liberty to compel breath
or body fluid testing.
(f) Any employee performing duties for a railroad who is involved
in a qualifying accident or incident described in subpart C of this
part, and who dies within 12 hours of that accident or incident as the
result thereof, is deemed to have consented to the removal of body
fluid and/or tissue specimens necessary for toxicological analysis from
the remains of such person, and this consent is implied by the
performance of duties for the railroad (i.e., a consent form is not
required). This consent provision applies to all employees performing
duties for a railroad, and not just regulated employees.
(g) Each supervisor responsible for regulated employees (except a
working supervisor who is a co-worker as defined in Sec. 219.5) must
be trained in the signs and symptoms of alcohol and drug influence,
intoxication, and misuse consistent with a program of instruction to be
made available for inspection upon demand by FRA. Such a program shall,
at a minimum, provide information concerning the acute behavioral and
apparent physiological effects of alcohol, the major drug groups on the
controlled substances list, and other impairing drugs. The program must
also provide training on the qualifying criteria for post-accident
toxicological testing contained in subpart C of this part, and the role
of the supervisor in post-accident collections described in subpart C
and appendix C of this part.
(h) Nothing in this subpart restricts any discretion available to
the railroad to request or require that a regulated employee cooperate
in additional breath or body fluid testing. However, no such testing
may be performed on urine or blood specimens provided under this part.
For purposes of this paragraph (h), all urine from a void constitutes a
single specimen.
* * * * *
0
9. Add Sec. 219.12 to read as follows:
Sec. 219.12 Hours-of-service laws implications.
(a) A railroad is not excused from performing alcohol or drug
testing under subpart C (post-accident toxicological testing) and
subpart D (reasonable suspicion testing) of this part because the
performance of such testing would violate the hours-of-service laws at
49 U.S.C. ch. 211. If a railroad establishes that a violation of the
hours-of-service laws is caused solely because it was required to
conduct post-accident toxicological testing or reasonable suspicion
testing, FRA will not take enforcement action for the violation if the
railroad used reasonable due diligence in completing the collection and
otherwise completed it within the time limitations of Sec. 219.203(d)
(for post-accident toxicological testing) or Sec. 219.305 (for
reasonable suspicion testing), although the railroad must still report
any excess service to FRA.
(b) A railroad may perform alcohol or drug testing authorized under
subpart E (reasonable cause testing) of this part even if the
performance of such testing would violate the hours-of-service laws at
49 U.S.C. ch. 211. If a railroad establishes that a violation of the
hours-of-service laws is caused solely by its decision to conduct
authorized reasonable cause testing, FRA will not take enforcement
action for the violation if the railroad used reasonable due diligence
in completing the collection and otherwise completed it within the time
limitations of Sec. 219.407, although the railroad must still report
any excess service to FRA.
(c) A railroad must schedule random alcohol and drug tests under
subpart G of this part so that sufficient time is provided to complete
the test within a covered employee's hours-of-service limitations under
49 U.S.C. ch. 211. However, if a direct observation collection is
required during a random test per the requirements of part 40 of this
title, then the random test must be completed regardless of the hours-
of-service law limitations, although the railroad must still report any
excess service to FRA. A railroad may not place a regulated employee
on-duty for the sole purpose of conducting a random alcohol or drug
test under subpart G of this part.
(d) A railroad must schedule follow-up tests under Sec. 219.104 so
that sufficient time is provided to complete a test within a covered
employee's hours-of-service limitations under 49 U.S.C. ch. 211. If a
railroad is having a difficult time scheduling the required number of
follow-up tests because a covered employee's work schedule is
unpredictable, there is no prohibition against the railroad placing an
employee (who is subject to being called to perform regulated service)
on duty for the purpose of conducting the follow-up tests; except that
an employee may be placed on duty for a follow-up alcohol test only if
he or she is required to completely abstain from alcohol by a return-
to-duty agreement, as provided by Sec. 40.303(b) of this title. A
railroad must maintain documentation establishing the need to place the
employee on duty for the purpose of conducting the follow-up test and
provide this documentation for review upon request of an FRA
representative.
0
10. Revise Sec. 219.23 to read as follows:
Sec. 219.23 Railroad policies.
(a) Whenever a breath or body fluid test is required of an employee
under this part, the railroad (either through a railroad employee or a
designated agent, such as a contracted collector) must provide clear
and unequivocal written notice to the employee that the test is being
required under FRA regulations and is being conducted under Federal
authority. The railroad must also provide the employee clear and
unequivocal written notice of the type of test that is required (e.g.,
reasonable suspicion, reasonable cause, random selection, follow-up,
etc.). These notice requirements are satisfied if:
(1) For all FRA testing except mandatory post-accident
toxicological testing under subpart C of this part, a railroad uses the
mandated DOT alcohol or drug testing form, circles or checks off the
box corresponding to the type of test, and shows this form to the
employee before testing begins; or
(2) For mandatory post-accident toxicological testing under subpart
C of this part, a railroad uses the approved FRA form and shows this
form to the employee before testing begins.
(b) Use of the mandated DOT alcohol or drug testing forms for non-
Federal
[[Page 37928]]
tests or mandatory post-accident toxicological testing under subpart C
of this part is prohibited (except for post-accident breath alcohol
testing permitted under Sec. 219.203(c)). Use of the approved FRA
post-accident toxicological testing form for any testing other than
that mandated under subpart C is prohibited.
(c) Each railroad must develop and publish educational materials,
specifically designed for regulated employees that clearly explain the
requirements of this part, as well as the railroad's policies and
procedures with respect to meeting those requirements. The railroad
must ensure that a copy of these materials is distributed to each
regulated employee hired for or transferred to a position that requires
alcohol and drug testing under this part. (This requirement does not
apply to an applicant for a regulated service position who either
refuses to provide a specimen for pre-employment testing or who has a
pre-employment test with a result indicating a violation of the alcohol
or drug prohibitions of this part.) A railroad may satisfy this
requirement by either--
(1)(i) Continually posting the materials in a location that is
easily visible to all regulated employees going on duty at their
designated reporting place and, if applicable, providing a copy of the
materials to any employee labor organization representing a class or
craft of regulated employees of the railroad; or
(ii) Providing a copy of the materials in some other manner that
will ensure regulated employees can find and access these materials
explaining the critical aspects of the program (e.g., by posting the
materials on a company Web site that is accessible to all regulated
employees); or
(2) For a minimum of three years after June 12, 2017, also ensuring
that a hard copy of these materials is provided to each maintenance-of-
way employee.
(d) Required content. The materials to be made available to
regulated employees under paragraph (c) of this section must, at a
minimum, include clear and detailed discussion of the following:
(1) The position title, name, and means of contacting the person(s)
the railroad designates to answer employee questions about the
materials;
(2) The specific classes or crafts of employees who are subject to
the provisions of this part, such as engineers, conductors, MOW
employees, signal maintainers, or train dispatchers;
(3) Sufficient information about the regulated service functions
those employees perform to make clear that the period of the work day
the regulated employee is required to be in compliance with the alcohol
prohibitions of this part is that period when the employee is on duty
and is required to perform or is available to perform regulated
service;
(4) Specific information concerning regulated employee conduct that
is prohibited under subpart B of this part (e.g., the minimum
requirements of Sec. Sec. 219.101, 219.102, and 219.103);
(5) The requirement that a railroad utilizing the reasonable cause
testing authority provided by subpart E of this part must give prior
notice to regulated employees of the circumstances under which they
will be subject to reasonable cause testing;
(6) The circumstances under which a regulated employee will be
tested under this part;
(7) The procedures used to test for the presence of alcohol and
controlled substances, protect the regulated employee and the integrity
of the testing processes, safeguard the validity of the test results,
and ensure that those results are attributed to the correct employee;
(8) The requirement that a regulated employee submit to alcohol and
drug tests administered in accordance with this part;
(9) An explanation of what constitutes a refusal to submit to an
alcohol or drug test and the attendant consequences;
(10) The consequences for a regulated employee found to have
violated subpart B of this part, including the requirement that the
employee be removed immediately from regulated service, and the
responsive action requirements of Sec. 219.104;
(11) The consequences for a regulated employee who has a Federal
alcohol test indicating an alcohol concentration of 0.02 or greater but
less than 0.04; and
(12) Information concerning the effects of alcohol and drug misuse
on an individual's health, work, and personal life; signs and symptoms
of an alcohol or drug problem (the employee's or a co-worker's); and
available methods of evaluating and resolving problems associated with
the misuse of alcohol and drugs, and the names, addresses, and
telephone numbers of DACs and counseling and treatment programs.
(e) Optional provisions. The materials supplied to employees may
also include information on additional railroad policies with respect
to the use or possession of alcohol and drugs, including any
consequences for an employee found to have a specific alcohol
concentration that are based on the railroad's company authority
independent of this part. Any such additional policies or consequences
must be clearly and obviously described as being based on the
railroad's independent company authority.
0
11. Add Sec. 219.25 to subpart A to read as follows:
Sec. 219.25 Previous employer drug and alcohol checks.
(a) As required by Sec. 219.701(a) and (b), a railroad must
conduct drug or alcohol testing under this part in compliance with part
40 of this title (except for post-accident toxicological testing under
subpart C of this part). A railroad must therefore comply with Sec.
40.25 of this title by checking the alcohol and drug testing record of
any direct regulated employee (a regulated employee who is not employed
by a contractor to the railroad) it intends to use for regulated
service before the employee performs such service for the first time. A
railroad is not required to check the alcohol and drug testing record
of contractor employees performing regulated service on its behalf (the
alcohol and drug testing record of those contractor employees must be
checked by their direct employers).
(b) When determining whether a person may become or remain
certified as a locomotive engineer or a conductor, a railroad must
comply with the requirements in Sec. 240.119(c) (for engineers) or
Sec. 242.115(e) (for conductors) of this chapter regarding the
consideration of Federal alcohol and drug violations that occurred
within a period of 60 consecutive months before the review of the
person's records.
Subpart B--Prohibitions
0
12. Revise Sec. 219.101(a) to read as follows:
Sec. 219.101 Alcohol and drug use prohibited.
(a) Prohibitions. Except as provided in Sec. 219.103--
(1) No regulated employee may use or possess alcohol or any
controlled substance when the employee is on duty and subject to
performing regulated service for a railroad.
(2) No regulated employee may report for regulated service, or go
or remain on duty in regulated service, while--
(i) Under the influence of or impaired by alcohol;
(ii) Having 0.04 or more alcohol concentration in the breath or
blood; or
(iii) Under the influence of or impaired by any controlled
substance.
(3) No regulated employee may use alcohol for whichever is the
lesser of the following periods:
(i) Within four hours of reporting for regulated service; or
[[Page 37929]]
(ii) After receiving notice to report for regulated service.
(4)(i) No regulated employee tested under the provisions of this
part whose Federal test result indicates an alcohol concentration of
0.02 or greater but less than 0.04 may perform or continue to perform
regulated service for a railroad, nor may a railroad permit the
regulated employee to perform or continue to perform regulated service,
until the start of the regulated employee's next regularly scheduled
duty period, but not less than eight hours following administration of
the test.
(ii) Nothing in this section prohibits a railroad from taking
further action under its own independent company authority when a
regulated employee tested under the provisions of this part has a
Federal test result indicating an alcohol concentration of 0.02 or
greater, but less than 0.04. However, while a Federal test result of
0.02 or greater but less than 0.04 is a positive test and may be a
violation of a railroad's operating rules, it is not a violation of
this section and cannot be used to decertify an engineer under part 240
of this chapter or a conductor under part 242 of this chapter.
(5) If an employee tested under the provisions of this part has a
test result indicating an alcohol concentration below 0.02, the test is
negative and is not evidence of alcohol misuse. A railroad may not use
a Federal test result below 0.02 either as evidence in a company
proceeding or as a basis for subsequent testing under company
authority. A railroad may take further action to compel cooperation in
other breath or body fluid testing only if it has an independent basis
for doing so. An independent basis for subsequent company authority
testing will exist only when, after having a negative Federal
reasonable suspicion alcohol test result, the employee exhibits
additional or continuing signs and symptoms of alcohol use. If a
company authority test then indicates a violation of the railroad's
operating rules, this result is independent of the Federal test result
and must stand on its own merits.
* * * * *
0
13. Revise Sec. 219.102 to read as follows:
Sec. 219.102 Prohibition on abuse of controlled substances.
No regulated employee may use a controlled substance at any time,
whether on duty or off duty, except as permitted by Sec. 219.103.
0
14. Revise Sec. 219.104 to read as follows:
Sec. 219.104 Responsive action.
(a) Removal from regulated service. (1) If a railroad determines
that a regulated employee has violated Sec. 219.101 or Sec. 219.102,
or the alcohol or controlled substances misuse rule of another DOT
agency, the railroad must immediately remove the employee from
regulated service and the procedures described in paragraphs (b)
through (d) of this section apply.
(2) If a regulated employee refuses to provide a breath or body
fluid specimen or specimens when required to by the railroad under a
provision of this part, a railroad must immediately remove the
regulated employee from regulated service, and the procedures described
in paragraphs (b) through (d) of this section apply. This provision
also applies to Federal reasonable cause testing under subpart E of
this part (if the railroad has elected to conduct this testing under
Federal authority).
(b) Notice. Before or upon removing a regulated employee from
regulated service under this section, a railroad must provide written
notice to the employee of the reason for this action. A railroad may
provide a regulated employee with an initial verbal notice so long as
it provides a follow-up written notice to the employee as soon as
possible. In addition to the reason for the employee's withdrawal from
regulated service, the written notice must also inform the regulated
employee that he may not perform any DOT safety-sensitive duties until
he completes the return-to-duty process of part 40.
(c) Hearing procedures. (1) Except as provided in paragraph (e)(5)
of this section, if a regulated employee denies that a test result or
other information is valid evidence of a Sec. 219.101 or Sec. 219.102
violation, the regulated employee may demand and must be provided an
opportunity for a prompt post-suspension hearing before a presiding
officer other than the charging official. This hearing may be
consolidated with any disciplinary hearing arising from the same
accident or incident (or conduct directly related thereto), but the
presiding officer must make separate findings as to compliance with
Sec. Sec. 219.101 and 219.102.
(2) The hearing must be convened within the period specified in the
applicable collective bargaining agreement. In the absence of an
agreement provision, the regulated employee may demand that the hearing
be convened within 10 calendar days of the employee's suspension or, in
the case of a regulated employee who is unavailable due to injury,
illness, or other sufficient cause, within 10 days of the date the
regulated employee becomes available for the hearing.
(3) A post-suspension proceeding conforming to the requirements of
an applicable collective bargaining agreement, together with the
provisions for adjustment of disputes under sec. 3 of the Railway Labor
Act (49 U.S.C. 153), satisfies the procedural requirements of this
paragraph (c).
(4) With respect to a removal or other adverse action taken as a
consequence of a positive test result or refusal in a test authorized
or required by this part, nothing in this part may be deemed to abridge
any procedural rights or remedies consistent with this part that are
available to a regulated employee under a collective bargaining
agreement, the Railway Labor Act, or (with respect to employment at
will) at common law.
(5) Nothing in this part restricts the discretion of a railroad to
treat a regulated employee's denial of prohibited alcohol or drug use
as a waiver of any privilege the regulated employee would otherwise
enjoy to have such prohibited alcohol or drug use treated as a non-
disciplinary matter or to have discipline held in abeyance.
(d) A railroad must comply with the requirements for Substance
Abuse Professional evaluations, the return-to-duty process, and follow-
up testing contained in part 40 of this title.
(1) Post-accident toxicology testing exception. If a regulated
employee has a post-accident toxicology test result under subpart C of
this part that is positive for a drug not listed in Sec. 40.5's
definition of ``Drugs,'' a railroad may conduct the employee's return-
to-duty and follow-up tests under part 40, or may conduct the
employee's return-to-duty and follow-up tests under its own authority
to comply with the requirements of paragraph (d) of this section, so
long as its testing procedures are otherwise identical to those of part
40, and include the specific drug for which the violation occurred, on
an expanded drug testing panel.
(e) Applicability. (1) This section does not apply to actions based
on breath or body fluid tests for alcohol or drugs that are conducted
exclusively under authority other than that provided in this part
(e.g., testing under a company medical policy, testing for cause wholly
independent of the subpart E Federal authority of this part, or testing
under a labor agreement).
(2) This section does not apply to Federal alcohol tests indicating
an alcohol concentration of less than 0.04.
(3) This section does not apply to a locomotive engineer or
conductor who has an off-duty conviction for, or a completed state
action to cancel, revoke,
[[Page 37930]]
suspend, or deny a motor vehicle driver's license for operating while
under the influence of or impaired by alcohol or a controlled
substance. (However, this information remains relevant for the purpose
of locomotive engineer or conductor certification, according to the
requirements of parts 240 or 242 of this chapter.)
(4) This section does not apply to an applicant who declines to be
subject to pre-employment testing and withdraws an application for
employment before the test begins. The determination of when a drug or
alcohol test begins is made according to the provisions found in
subparts E and L of part 40 of this title.
(5) Paragraph (c) of this section does not apply to an applicant
who tests positive or refuses a DOT pre-employment test.
(6) As provided by Sec. 40.25(j) of this title, paragraph (d) of
this section applies to any DOT-regulated employer seeking to hire for
DOT safety-sensitive functions an applicant who tested positive or who
refused a DOT pre-employment test.
0
15. Revise Sec. 219.105 to read as follows:
Sec. 219.105 Railroad's duty to prevent violations.
(a) A railroad may not, with actual knowledge, permit a regulated
employee to go or remain on duty in regulated service in violation of
the prohibitions of Sec. 219.101 or Sec. 219.102. As used in this
section, the actual knowledge imputed to the railroad is limited to
that of a railroad management employee (such as a supervisor deemed an
``officer,'' whether or not such person is a corporate officer) or a
supervisory employee in the offending regulated employee's chain of
command. A railroad management or supervisory employee has actual
knowledge of a violation when he or she:
(1) Personally observes a regulated employee use or possess alcohol
or use drugs in violation of this subpart. It is not sufficient for
actual knowledge if the supervisory or management employee merely
observes the signs and symptoms of alcohol or drug use that require a
reasonable suspicion test under Sec. 219.301;
(2) Receives information regarding a violation of this subpart from
a previous employer of a regulated employee, in response to a
background information request required by Sec. 40.25 of this title;
or
(3) Receives a regulated employee's admission of prohibited alcohol
possession or prohibited alcohol or drug use.
(b) A railroad must exercise due diligence to assure compliance
with Sec. Sec. 219.101 and 219.102 by each regulated employee.
(c) A railroad's alcohol and/or drug use education, prevention,
identification, intervention, and rehabilitation programs and policies
must be designed and implemented in such a way that they do not
circumvent or otherwise undermine the requirements, standards, and
policies of this part. Upon FRA's request, a railroad must make
available for FRA review all documents, data, or other records related
to such programs and policies.
(d) Each year, a railroad's supervisors must conduct and record a
number of ``Rule G'' employee observations at a minimum equal to twice
the railroad's total number of regulated employees. Each ``Rule G''
observation must be made sufficiently close to an individual regulated
employee to determine whether the employee is displaying signs and
symptoms indicative of a violation of the prohibitions of this part.
0
16. Revise Sec. 219.107 to read as follows:
Sec. 219.107 Consequences of refusal.
(a) A regulated employee who refuses to provide a breath or body
fluid specimen or specimens when required to by the railroad under a
provision of this part must be withdrawn from regulated service for a
period of nine (9) months. Per the requirements of part 40 of this
title, a regulated employee who provides an adulterated or substituted
specimen is deemed to have refused to provide the required specimen and
must be withdrawn from regulated service in accordance with this
section.
(b) Notice. Before or upon withdrawing a regulated employee from
regulated service under this section, a railroad must provide written
notice to the employee of the reason for this action, and the
procedures described in Sec. 219.104(c) apply. A railroad may provide
a regulated employee with an initial verbal notice so long as it
provides a follow-up written notice as soon as possible.
(c) The withdrawal required by this section applies only to an
employee's performance of regulated service for any railroad with
notice of such withdrawal. During the period of withdrawal, a railroad
with notice of such withdrawal must not authorize or permit the
employee to perform any regulated service for the railroad.
(d) The requirement of withdrawal for nine (9) months does not
limit any discretion on the part of the railroad to impose additional
sanctions for the same or related conduct.
(e) Upon the expiration of the nine month period described in this
section, a railroad may permit an employee to return to regulated
service only under the conditions specified in Sec. 219.104(d), and
the regulated employee must be subject to return-to-duty and follow-up
tests, as provided by that section.
Subpart C--Post-Accident Toxicological Testing
0
17. In Sec. 219.201, revise paragraphs (a) and (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 219.201 Events for which testing is required.
(a) List of events. Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this
section, FRA post-accident toxicological tests must be conducted after
any event that involves one or more of the circumstances described in
paragraphs (a)(1) through (5) of this section:
(1) Major train accident. Any train accident (i.e., a rail
equipment accident involving damage in excess of the current reporting
threshold) that involves one or more of the following:
(i) A fatality to any person;
(ii) A release of hazardous material lading from railroad equipment
accompanied by--
(A) An evacuation; or
(B) A reportable injury resulting from the hazardous material
release (e.g., from fire, explosion, inhalation, or skin contact with
the material); or
(iii) Damage to railroad property of $1,500,000 or more.
(2) Impact accident. Any impact accident (i.e., a rail equipment
accident defined as an ``impact accident'' in Sec. 219.5) that
involves damage in excess of the current reporting threshold, resulting
in--
(i) A reportable injury; or
(ii) Damage to railroad property of $150,000 or more.
(3) Fatal train incident. Any train incident that involves a
fatality to an on-duty employee (as defined in Sec. 219.5) who dies
within 12 hours of the incident as a result of the operation of on-
track equipment, regardless of whether that employee was performing
regulated service.
(4) Passenger train accident. Any train accident (i.e., a rail
equipment accident involving damage in excess of the current reporting
threshold) involving a passenger train and a reportable injury to any
person.
(5) Human-factor highway-rail grade crossing accident/incident. A
highway-rail grade crossing accident/incident when it involves:
(i) A regulated employee who interfered with the normal functioning
[[Page 37931]]
of a grade crossing signal system, in testing or otherwise, without
first taking measures to provide for the safety of highway traffic that
depends on the normal functioning of such system, as prohibited by
Sec. 234.209 of this chapter;
(ii) A train crewmember who was, or who should have been, flagging
highway traffic to stop due to an activation failure of the grade
crossing system, as provided by Sec. 234.105(c)(3) of this chapter;
(iii) A regulated employee who was performing, or should have been
performing, the duties of an appropriately equipped flagger (as defined
in Sec. 234.5 of this chapter) due to an activation failure, partial
activation, or false activation of the grade crossing signal system, as
provided by Sec. 234.105(c)(1) and (2), Sec. 234.106, or Sec.
234.107(c)(1)(i) of this chapter;
(iv) A fatality to any regulated employee performing duties for the
railroad, regardless of fault; or
(v) A regulated employee who violated an FRA regulation or railroad
operating rule and whose actions may have played a role in the cause or
severity of the accident/incident.
(b) Exceptions. Except for a human-factor highway-rail grade
crossing accident/incident described in paragraph (a)(5) of this
section, no test may be required in the case of a collision between
railroad rolling stock and a motor vehicle or other highway conveyance
at a highway/rail grade crossing. No test may be required for an
accident/incident the cause and severity of which are wholly
attributable to a natural cause (e.g., flood, tornado, or other natural
disaster) or to vandalism or trespasser(s), as determined on the basis
of objective and documented facts by the railroad representative
responding to the scene.
* * * * *
0
18. Revise Sec. 219.203 to read as follows:
Sec. 219.203 Responsibilities of railroads and employees.
(a) Employees tested. A regulated employee subject to post-accident
toxicological testing under this subpart must cooperate in the
provision of specimens as described in this part and appendix C to this
part.
(1) General. Except as otherwise provided for by this section,
following each qualifying event described in Sec. 219.201, a regulated
employee directly involved in a qualifying event under this subpart
must provide blood and urine specimens for toxicological testing by
FRA. This includes any regulated employee who may not have been present
or on-duty at the time or location of the event, but whose actions may
have played a role in its cause or severity, including, but not limited
to, an operator, dispatcher, or signal maintainer.
(2) Fatalities. Testing of the remains of an on-duty employee (as
defined in Sec. 219.5) who is fatally injured in a qualifying event
described in Sec. 219.201 is required, regardless of fault, if the
employee dies within 12 hours of the qualifying event as a result of
such qualifying event.
(3) Major train accidents. For an accident or incident meeting the
criteria of a major train accident in Sec. 219.201(a)(1)--
(i) All assigned crew members of all trains or other on-track
equipment involved in the qualifying event must be subjected to post-
accident toxicological testing, regardless of fault.
(ii) Other surviving regulated employees who are not assigned crew
members of an involved train or other on-track equipment (e.g., a
dispatcher or a signal maintainer) must be tested if a railroad
representative can immediately determine, on the basis of specific
information, that the employee may have had a role in the cause or
severity of the accident/incident. In making this determination, the
railroad representative must consider any such information that is
immediately available at the time the qualifying event determination is
made under Sec. 219.201.
(4) Fatal train incidents. For a fatal train incident under Sec.
219.201(a)(3), the remains of any on-duty employee (as defined in Sec.
219.5) performing duties for a railroad who is fatally injured in the
event are always subject to post-accident toxicological testing,
regardless of fault.
(5) Human-factor highway-rail grade crossing accident/incidents.
(i) For a human-factor highway-rail grade crossing accident/incident
under Sec. 219.201(a)(5)(i), only a regulated employee who interfered
with the normal functioning of a grade crossing signal system and whose
actions may have contributed to the cause or severity of the event is
subject to testing.
(ii) For a human-factor highway-rail grade crossing accident/
incident under Sec. 219.201(a)(5)(ii), only a regulated employee who
was a train crew member responsible for flagging highway traffic to
stop due to an activation failure of a grade crossing system (or who
was on-site and directly responsible for ensuring that flagging was
being performed), but who failed to do so, and whose actions may have
contributed to the cause or severity of the event, is subject to
testing.
(iii) For a human-factor highway-rail grade crossing accident/
incident under Sec. 219.201(a)(5)(iii), only a regulated employee who
was responsible for performing the duties of an appropriately equipped
flagger (as defined in Sec. 234.5 of this chapter), but who failed to
do so, and whose actions may have contributed to the cause or severity
of the event is subject to testing.
(iv) For a human-factor highway-rail grade crossing accident/
incident under Sec. 219.201(a)(5)(iv), only the remains of any
fatally-injured employee(s) (as defined in Sec. 219.5) performing
regulated service for the railroad are subject to testing.
(v) For a human-factor highway-rail grade crossing accident/
incident under Sec. 219.201(a)(5)(v), only a regulated employee who
violated an FRA regulation or railroad operating rule and whose actions
may have contributed to the cause or severity of the event is subject
to testing.
(6) Exception. For a qualifying impact accident, passenger train
accident, fatal train incident, or human-factor highway-rail grade
crossing accident/incident under Sec. 219.201(a)(2) through (5), a
surviving crewmember or other regulated employee must be excluded from
testing if the railroad representative can immediately determine, on
the basis of specific information, that the employee had no role in the
cause or severity of the accident/incident. In making this
determination, the railroad representative must consider any
information that is immediately available at the time the qualifying
event determination is made under Sec. 219.201.
(i) This exception is not available for assigned crew members of
all involved trains if the qualifying event also meets the criteria for
a major train accident under Sec. 219.201(a)(1) (e.g., this exception
is not available for an Impact Accident that also qualifies as a major
train accident because it results in damage to railroad property of
$1,500,000 or more).
(ii) This exception is not available for any on-duty employee who
is fatally-injured in a qualifying event.
(b) Railroad responsibility. (1) A railroad must take all
practicable steps to ensure that all surviving regulated employees of
the railroad who are subject to FRA post-accident toxicological testing
under this subpart provide blood and urine specimens for the
toxicological testing required by FRA. This includes any regulated
employee who may not have been
[[Page 37932]]
present or on-duty at the time or location of the event, but whose
actions may have played a role in its cause or severity, including, but
not limited to, an operator, dispatcher, or signal maintainer.
(2) A railroad must take all practicable steps to ensure that
tissue and fluid specimens taken from fatally injured employees are
subject to FRA post-accident toxicological testing under this subpart.
(3) FRA post-accident toxicological testing under this subpart
takes priority over toxicological testing conducted by state or local
law enforcement officials.
(c) Alcohol testing. Except as provided for in paragraph (e)(4) of
this section, if the conditions for mandatory post-accident
toxicological testing exist, a railroad may also require an employee to
provide breath for testing in accordance with the procedures set forth
in part 40 of this title and in this part, if such testing does not
interfere with timely collection of required urine and blood specimens.
(d) Timely specimen collection. (1) A railroad must make every
reasonable effort to assure that specimens are provided as soon as
possible after the accident or incident, preferably within four hours.
Specimens that are not collected within four hours after a qualifying
accident or incident must be collected as soon thereafter as
practicable. If a specimen is not collected within four hours of a
qualifying event, the railroad must immediately notify the FRA Drug and
Alcohol Program Manager at 202-493-6313 and provide detailed
information regarding the failure (either verbally or via a voicemail).
The railroad must also submit a concise, written narrative report of
the reasons for such a delay to the FRA Drug and Alcohol Program
Manager, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE., Washington, DC 20590. The report
must be submitted within 30 days after the expiration of the month
during which the accident or incident occurred. This report may also be
submitted via email to an email address provided by the FRA Drug and
Alcohol Program Manager.
(2) The requirements of paragraph (d) of this section must not be
construed to inhibit an employee who is required to be post-accident
toxicological tested from performing, in the immediate aftermath of an
accident or incident, any duties that may be necessary for the
preservation of life or property. Where practical, however, a railroad
must utilize other employees to perform such duties.
(3) If a passenger train is in proper condition to continue to the
next station or its destination after an accident or incident, the
railroad must consider the safety and convenience of passengers in
determining whether the crew should be made immediately available for
post-accident toxicological testing. A relief crew must be called to
relieve the train crew as soon as possible.
(4) A regulated employee who may be subject to post-accident
toxicological testing under this subpart must be retained in duty
status for the period necessary to make the determinations required by
Sec. 219.201 and this section and (as appropriate) to complete
specimen collection.
(e) Recall of employees for testing. (1) Except as otherwise
provided for in paragraph (e)(2) of this section, a regulated employee
may not be recalled for testing under this subpart if that employee has
been released from duty under the normal procedures of the railroad. An
employee who has been transported to receive medical care is not
released from duty for purposes of this section. Furthermore, nothing
in this section prohibits the subsequent testing of an employee who has
failed to remain available for testing as required (e.g., an employee
who is absent without leave). However, subsequent testing does not
excuse a refusal by the employee to provide the specimens in a timely
manner.
(2) A railroad must immediately recall and place on duty a
regulated employee for post-accident drug testing, if--
(i) The employee could not be retained in duty status because the
employee went off duty under normal railroad procedures before being
contacted by a railroad supervisor and instructed to remain on duty
pending completion of the required determinations (e.g., in the case of
a dispatcher or signal maintainer remote from the scene of an accident
who was unaware of the occurrence at the time he or she went off duty);
and
(ii) The railroad's preliminary investigation (contemporaneous with
the determination required by Sec. 219.201) indicates a clear
probability that the employee played a role in the cause or severity of
the accident/incident.
(3) If the criteria in paragraph (e)(2) of this section are met, a
regulated employee must be recalled for post-accident drug testing
regardless of whether the qualifying event happened or did not happen
during the employee's tour of duty. However, an employee may not be
recalled for testing if more than 24 hours have passed since the
qualifying event. An employee who has been recalled must be placed on
duty for the purpose of accomplishing the required post-accident drug
testing.
(4) Urine and blood specimens must be collected from an employee
who is recalled for testing in accordance with this section. If the
employee left railroad property before being recalled, however, the
specimens must be tested for drugs only. A railroad is prohibited from
requiring a recalled employee to provide breath specimens for alcohol
testing, unless the regulated employee has remained on railroad
property since the time of the qualifying event and the railroad has a
company policy completely prohibiting the use of alcohol on railroad
property.
(5) A railroad must document its attempts to contact an employee
subject to the recall provisions of this section. If a railroad is
unable, as a result of the non-cooperation of an employee or for any
other reason, to obtain specimen(s) from an employee subject to
mandatory recall within the 24-hour period after a qualifying event and
to submit specimen(s) to FRA as required by this subpart, the railroad
must contact FRA and prepare a concise narrative report according to
the requirements of paragraph (d)(1) of this section. The report must
also document the railroad's good faith attempts to contact and recall
the employee.
(f) Place of specimen collection. (1) With the exception of Federal
breath testing for alcohol (when conducted as authorized under this
subpart), an employee must be transported to an independent medical
facility for specimen collection. In all cases, blood may be drawn only
by a qualified medical professional or by a qualified technician
subject to the supervision of a qualified medical professional (e.g., a
phlebotomist). A collector contracted by a railroad or medical facility
may collect and/or assist in the collection of specimens at the medical
facility if the medical facility does not object and the collector is
qualified to do so.
(2) If an employee has been injured, a railroad must ask the
treating medical facility to obtain the specimens. Urine may be
collected from an injured employee (conscious or unconscious) who has
already been catheterized for medical purposes, but an employee may not
be catheterized solely for the purpose of providing a specimen under
this subpart. Under Sec. 219.11(a), an employee is deemed to have
consented to FRA post-accident toxicological testing by the act of
being subject to performing regulated service for a railroad.
(g) Obtaining cooperation of facility. (1) In seeking the
cooperation of a medical facility in obtaining a specimen
[[Page 37933]]
under this subpart, a railroad must, as necessary, make specific
reference to the requirements of this subpart and the instructions in
FRA's post-accident toxicological shipping kit.
(2) If an injured employee is unconscious or otherwise unable to
evidence consent to the procedure and the treating medical facility
declines to obtain blood and/or urine specimens after having been
informed of the requirements of this subpart, the railroad must
immediately notify the duty officer at the National Response Center
(NRC) at (800) 424-8802, stating the employee's name, the name and
location of the medical facility, the name of the appropriate
decisional authority at the medical facility, and the telephone number
at which that person can be reached. FRA will then take appropriate
measures to assist in obtaining the required specimens.
(h) Discretion of physician. Nothing in this subpart may be
construed to limit the discretion of a medical professional to
determine whether drawing a blood specimen is consistent with the
health of an injured employee or an employee afflicted by any other
condition that may preclude drawing the specified quantity of blood.
0
19. Revise Sec. 219.205 to read as follows:
Sec. 219.205 Specimen collection and handling.
(a) General. Urine and blood specimens must be obtained, marked,
preserved, handled, and made available to FRA consistent with the
requirements of this subpart, the instructions provided inside the FRA
post-accident toxicological shipping kit, and the technical
specifications set forth in appendix C to this part.
(b) Information requirements. Basic information concerning the
accident/incident and any treatment administered after the accident/
incident is necessary to process specimens, analyze the significance of
laboratory findings, and notify railroads and employees of test
results. Accordingly, the railroad representative must complete the
information required by Form FRA 6180.73 (revised) for shipping with
the specimens. Each employee subject to testing must cooperate in
completion of the required information on Form FRA F 6180.74 (revised)
for inclusion in the shipping kit and processing of the specimens. The
railroad representative must ask an appropriate representative of the
medical facility to complete the remaining portion of the information
on each Form 6180.74. A Form 6180.73 must be forwarded in the shipping
kit with each group of specimens. A Form 6180.74 must be forwarded in
the shipping kit for each employee who provides specimens. A Form
6180.73 and either a Form 6180.74 or a Form 6180.75 (for fatalities)
are included in the shipping kit. (See paragraph (c) of this section.)
(c) Shipping kits. (1) FRA and the laboratory designated in
appendix B to this part make available for purchase a limited number of
standard shipping kits for the purpose of routine handling of post-
accident toxicological specimens under this subpart. Specimens must be
placed in the shipping kit and prepared for shipment according to the
instructions provided in the kit and appendix C to this part.
(2) Standard shipping kits may be ordered directly from the
laboratory designated in appendix B to this part by first requesting an
order form from FRA's Drug and Alcohol Program Manager at 202-493-6313.
In addition to the standard kit for surviving employees, FRA also has
distributed a post-mortem shipping kit to Class I, II, and commuter
railroads. The post-mortem kit may not be ordered by other railroads.
If a smaller railroad has a qualifying event involving a fatality to an
on-duty employee, the railroad should advise the NRC at 1-800-424-8802
of the need for a post-mortem kit, and FRA will send one overnight to
the medical examiner's office or assist the railroad in obtaining one
from a nearby railroad.
(d) Shipment. Specimens must be shipped as soon as possible by pre-
paid air express (or other means adequate to ensure delivery within 24
hours from time of shipment) to the laboratory designated in appendix B
to this part. However, if delivery cannot be ensured within 24 hours
due to a suspension in air express delivery services, the specimens
must be held in a secure refrigerator until delivery can be
accomplished. In no circumstances may specimens be held for more than
72 hours. Where express courier pickup is available, the railroad must
ask the medical facility to transfer the sealed toxicology kit directly
to the express courier for transportation. If courier pickup is not
available at the medical facility where the specimens are collected or
if for any other reason a prompt transfer by the medical facility
cannot be assured, the railroad must promptly transport the sealed
shipping kit holding the specimens to the most expeditious point of
shipment via air express. The railroad must maintain and document a
secure chain of custody of the kit(s) from its release by the medical
facility to its delivery for transportation, as described in appendix C
to this part.
(e) Specimen security. After a specimen kit or transportation box
has been sealed, no entity other than the laboratory designated in
appendix B to this part may open it. If the railroad or medical
facility discovers an error with either the specimens or the chain of
custody form after the kit or transportation box has been sealed, the
railroad or medical facility must make a contemporaneous written record
of that error and send it to the laboratory, preferably with the
transportation box.
Sec. 219.207--[Amended]
0
20. Section 219.207 is amended by--
0
a. In paragraph (a), removing the word ``and/or'' and adding, in its
place, the word ``and''; removing the words ``timely collected'' and
adding, in their place, ``collected in a timely fashion''; removing the
word ``shipping'' and adding, in its place, ``post-mortem shipping'';
and removing the words ``if a person'' and adding, in their place, ``if
the custodian is someone'';
0
b. In the introductory text of paragraph (b), removing ``(800) 424-8801
or'';
0
c. In paragraph (c), removing the word ``and/or'' and adding, in its
place, the word ``and''; and
0
d. In paragraph (d), removing the word ``specifies'' and adding, in its
place, the words ``and the instructions included inside the shipping
kits specify''.
0
21. In Sec. 219.209, revise paragraphs (a)(2)(iv), (a)(2)(v), and (b),
and remove paragraph (c), to read as follows:
Sec. 219.209 Reports of tests and refusals.
(a) * * *
(2) * * *
(iv) Brief summary of the circumstances of the accident/incident,
including basis for testing (e.g., impact accident with a reportable
injury); and
(v) Number of employees tested.
(b) If a railroad is unable, as a result of non-cooperation of an
employee or for any other reason, to obtain a specimen and provide it
to FRA as required by this subpart, the railroad must immediately
notify the FRA Drug and Alcohol Program Manager at 202-493-6313 and
provide detailed information regarding the failure (either verbally or
via a voicemail). The railroad must also provide a concise narrative
written report of the reason for such failure and, if appropriate, any
action taken in response to the cause of such failure. This report must
be appended to the report of the accident/incident required to be
submitted under part 225 of this chapter and must also
[[Page 37934]]
be mailed to the FRA Drug and Alcohol Program Manager at 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
0
22. Section 219.211 is amended by--
0
a. Adding a sentence at the end of paragraph (b);
0
b. Revising the second sentence of paragraph (c) and the second
sentence of paragraph (e); and
0
c. Revising paragraph (g)(3).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 219.211 Analysis and follow-up.
* * * * *
(b) * * * An employer is prohibited from temporarily removing an
employee from the performance of regulated service based only on a
report from the laboratory to the MRO of a confirmed positive test for
a drug or drug metabolite, an adulterated test, or a substituted test,
before the MRO has completed verification of the test result.
(c) * * * The Medical Review Officer must promptly report the
results of each review to the Associate Administrator for Railroad
Safety, FRA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. * * *
(e) * * * An employee wishing to respond may do so by email or
letter addressed to the Drug and Alcohol Program Manager, Office of
Railroad Safety, FRA, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590
within 45 days of receipt of the test results. * * *
* * * * *
(g) * * *
(3) This provision does not authorize holding any employee out of
service pending receipt of PAT testing results. It also does not
restrict a railroad from taking such action based on the employee's
underlying conduct, so long as it is consistent with the railroad's
disciplinary policy and is taken under the railroad's own authority.
* * * * *
Sec. 219.213 [Amended]
0
23. In Sec. 219.213, paragraphs (a) and (b), revise all references to
``covered service'' to read ``regulated service,'' and in paragraph
(b), add ``written'' in front of the word ``notice''.
0
24. Revise subpart D to read as follows:
Subpart D--Reasonable Suspicion Testing
Sec.
219.301 Mandatory reasonable suspicion testing.
219.303 Reasonable suspicion observations.
219.305 Prompt specimen collection; time limitations.
Subpart D--Reasonable Suspicion Testing
Sec. 219.301 Mandatory reasonable suspicion testing.
(a) Each railroad must require a regulated employee to submit to a
breath alcohol test when the railroad has reasonable suspicion to
believe that the regulated employee has violated any prohibition of
subpart B of this part concerning use of alcohol. The railroad's
determination that reasonable suspicion exists to require the regulated
employee to undergo an alcohol test must be based on specific,
contemporaneous, articulable observations concerning the appearance,
behavior, speech, or body odors of the employee. A Federal reasonable
suspicion alcohol test is not required to confirm the on-duty
possession of alcohol.
(b) Each railroad must require a regulated employee to submit to a
drug test when the railroad has reasonable suspicion to believe that
the regulated employee has violated the prohibitions of subpart B of
this part concerning use of controlled substances. The railroad's
determination that reasonable suspicion exists to require the regulated
employee to undergo a drug test must be based on specific,
contemporaneous, articulable observations concerning the appearance,
behavior, speech, or body odors of the employee. Such observations may
include indications of the chronic and withdrawal effects of drugs.
(c) Reasonable suspicion observations made under this section must
comply with the requirements of Sec. 219.303.
(d) As provided by Sec. 219.11(b)(2), in any case where an
employee is suffering a substantiated medical emergency and is subject
to alcohol or drug testing under this subpart, necessary medical
treatment must be accorded priority over provision of the breath or
body fluid specimens. However, when the employee's condition is
stabilized, reasonable suspicion testing must be completed if within
the eight-hour limit provided for in Sec. 219.305.
Sec. 219.303 Reasonable suspicion observations.
(a) With respect to an alcohol test, the required observations must
be made by a responsible railroad supervisor (defined by Sec. 219.5)
trained in accordance with Sec. 219.11(g). The supervisor who makes
the determination that reasonable suspicion exists may not conduct the
reasonable suspicion testing on that regulated employee.
(b) With respect to a drug test, the required observations must be
made by two responsible railroad supervisors (defined by Sec. 219.5),
at least one of whom must be both on site and trained in accordance
with Sec. 219.11(g). If one of the supervisors is off site, the on-
site supervisor must communicate with the off-site supervisor, as
necessary, to provide him or her the information needed to make the
required observation. This communication may be performed via
telephone, but not via radio or any other form of electronic
communication.
(c) This subpart does not authorize holding any employee out of
service pending receipt of toxicological analysis for reasonable
suspicion testing, nor does it restrict a railroad from taking such
action based on the employee's underlying conduct, provided it is
consistent with the railroad's policy and taken under the railroad's
own authority.
(d) The railroad must maintain written documentation that
specifically describes the observed signs and symptoms upon which the
determination that reasonable suspicion exists is based. This
documentation must be completed promptly by the trained supervisor.
Sec. 219.305 Prompt specimen collection; time limitations.
(a) Consistent with the need to protect life and property, testing
under this subpart must be conducted promptly following the
observations upon which the testing decision is based.
(b) If a test required by this subpart is not administered within
two hours following a determination made under this section, the
railroad must prepare and maintain on file a record stating the reasons
the test was not administered within that time period. If an alcohol or
drug test required by this subpart is not administered within eight
hours of a determination made under this subpart, the railroad must
cease attempts to administer the test and must record the reasons for
not administering the test. The eight-hour requirement is satisfied if
the individual has been delivered to the collection site (where the
collector is present) and the request has been made to commence
collection of the specimens within that period. The records required by
this section must be submitted to FRA upon request of the FRA Drug and
Alcohol Program Manager.
(c) A regulated employee may not be tested under this subpart if
that individual has been released from duty under the normal procedures
of a railroad. An individual who has been transported to receive
medical care is not released from duty for purposes of
[[Page 37935]]
this section. Nothing in this section prohibits the subsequent testing
of an employee who has failed to remain available for testing as
required (i.e., who is absent without leave).
0
25. Revise subpart E to read as follows:
Subpart E--Reasonable Cause Testing
Sec.
219.401 Authorization for reasonable cause testing.
219.403 Requirements for reasonable cause testing.
219.405 Documentation requirements.
219.407 Prompt specimen collection; time limitations.
219.409 Limitations on authority.
Subpart E--Reasonable Cause Testing
Sec. 219.401 Authorization for reasonable cause testing.
(a) Each railroad may, at its own discretion, elect to conduct
Federal reasonable cause testing authorized by this subpart. If a
railroad chooses to do so, the railroad must use only Federal authority
for all reasonable cause testing that meets the criteria of Sec.
219.403. In addition, the railroad must notify its regulated employees
of its decision to use Federal reasonable cause testing authority in
the employee educational policy required by Sec. 219.23(e)(5). The
railroad must also provide written notification of its decision to
FRA's Drug and Alcohol Program Manager, 1200 New Jersey Ave. SE.,
Washington, DC 20590.
(b) If a railroad elects to conduct reasonable cause testing under
the authority of this subpart, the railroad may, under the conditions
specified in this subpart, require any regulated employee, as a
condition of employment in regulated service, to cooperate with breath
or body fluid testing, or both, to determine compliance with Sec. Sec.
219.101 and 219.102 or a railroad rule implementing the requirements of
Sec. Sec. 219.101 and 219.102. This authority is limited to testing
after observations or events that occur during duty hours (including
any period of overtime or emergency service). The provisions of this
subpart apply only when, and to the extent that, the test in question
is conducted in reliance upon the authority conferred by this section.
A railroad may not require an employee to be tested under the authority
of this subpart unless reasonable cause, as defined in this section,
exists with respect to that employee.
Sec. 219.403 Requirements for reasonable cause testing.
Each railroad's decision process regarding whether reasonable cause
testing is authorized must be completed before the reasonable cause
testing is performed and documented according to the requirements of
Sec. 219.405. The following circumstances constitute reasonable cause
for the administration of alcohol and/or drug tests under the authority
of this subpart.
(a) Train accident or train incident. A regulated employee has been
involved in a train accident or train incident (as defined in Sec.
219.5) reportable under part 225 of this chapter, and a responsible
railroad supervisor (as defined in Sec. 219.5) has a reasonable
belief, based on specific, articulable facts, that the individual
employee's acts or omissions contributed to the occurrence or severity
of the accident; or
(b) Rule violation. A regulated employee has been directly involved
in one or more of the following railroad or FRA rule violations or
other errors:
(1) Noncompliance with a train order, track warrant, track
bulletin, track permit, stop and flag order, timetable, signal
indication, special instruction or other directive with respect to
movement of railroad on-track equipment that involves--
(i) Occupancy of a block or other segment of track to which entry
was not authorized;
(ii) Failure to clear a track to permit opposing or following
movements to pass;
(iii) Moving across a railroad crossing at grade without
authorization; or
(iv) Passing an absolute restrictive signal or passing a
restrictive signal without stopping (if required);
(2) Failure to protect on-track equipment, including leaving on-
track equipment fouling an adjacent track;
(3) Operation of a train or other speedometer-equipped on-track
equipment at a speed that exceeds the maximum authorized speed by at
least 10 miles per hour or by 50% of such maximum authorized speed,
whichever is less;
(4) Alignment of a switch in violation of a railroad rule, failure
to align a switch as required for movement, operation of a switch under
on-track equipment, or unauthorized running through a switch;
(5) Failure to restore and secure a main track switch as required;
(6) Failure to apply brakes or stop short of a derail as required;
(7) Failure to secure a hand brake or failure to secure sufficient
hand brakes, as required;
(8) Entering a crossover before both switches are lined for
movement or restoring either switch to normal position before the
crossover movement is completed;
(9) Failure to provide point protection by visually determining
that the track is clear and giving the signals or instructions
necessary to control the movement of on-track equipment when engaged in
a shoving or pushing movement;
(10) In the case of a person performing a dispatching function or
block operator function, issuance of a mandatory directive or
establishment of a route that fails to provide proper protection for
on-track equipment;
(11) Interference with the normal functioning of any grade crossing
signal system or any signal or train control device without first
taking measures to provide for the safety of highway traffic or train
operations which depend on the normal functioning of such a device.
Such interference includes, but is not limited to, failure to provide
alternative methods of maintaining safety for highway traffic or train
operations while testing or performing work on the devices or on track
and other railroad systems or structures which may affect the integrity
of the system;
(12) Failure to perform stop-and-flag duties necessary as a result
of a malfunction of a grade crossing signal system;
(13) Failure of a machine operator that results in a collision
between a roadway maintenance machine and on-track equipment or a
regulated employee;
(14) Failure of a roadway worker-in-charge to notify all affected
employees when releasing working limits;
(15) Failure of a flagman or watchman/lookout to notify employees
of an approaching train or other on-track equipment;
(16) Failure to ascertain that provision was made for on-track
safety before fouling a track;
(17) Improper use of individual train detection in a manual
interlocking or control point; or
(18) Failure to apply three point protection (fully apply the
locomotive and train brakes, center the reverser, and place the
generator field switch in the off position) that results in a
reportable injury to a regulated employee.
Sec. 219.405 Documentation requirements.
(a) Each railroad must maintain written documentation that
specifically describes the basis for each reasonable cause test it
performs under Federal authority. This documentation must be completed
promptly by the responsible railroad supervisor; although it does not
need to be completed before the reasonable cause testing is conducted.
(b) For a rule violation, the documentation must include the type
of
[[Page 37936]]
rule violation and the involvement of each tested regulated employee.
For a train accident or train incident reportable under part 225 of
this chapter, a railroad must describe either the amount of railroad
property damage or the reportable casualty and the basis for the
supervisor's belief that the employee's acts or omissions contributed
to the occurrence or severity of the train accident or train incident.
Sec. 219.407 Prompt specimen collection; time limitations.
(a) Consistent with the need to protect life and property, testing
under this subpart must be conducted promptly following the
observations upon which the testing decision is based.
(b) If a test conducted pursuant to the authority of this subpart
is not administered within two hours following the observations upon
which the testing decision is based, the railroad must prepare and
maintain on file a record stating the reasons the test was not
conducted within that time period. If an alcohol or drug test
authorized by this subpart is not administered within eight hours of
the event under this subpart, the railroad must cease attempts to
administer the test and must record the reasons for not administering
the test. The eight-hour time period begins at the time a responsible
railroad supervisor receives notice of the train accident, train
incident, or rule violation. The eight-hour requirement is satisfied if
the employee has been delivered to the collection site (where the
collector is present) and the request has been made to commence
collection of specimen(s) within that period. The records required by
this section must be submitted to FRA upon request of the FRA Drug and
Alcohol Program Manager.
(c) A regulated employee may not be tested under this subpart if
that individual has been released from duty under the normal procedures
of the railroad. An individual who has been transported to receive
medical care is not released from duty for purposes of this section.
Nothing in this section prohibits the subsequent testing of a regulated
employee who has failed to remain available for testing as required
(i.e., who is absent without leave).
Sec. 219.409 Limitations on authority.
(a) The alcohol and/or drug testing authority conferred by this
subpart does not apply with respect to any event that meets the
criteria for post-accident toxicological testing required under subpart
C of this part.
(b) This subpart does not authorize holding an employee out of
service pending receipt of toxicological analysis for reasonable cause
testing because meeting the testing criteria is only a basis to inquire
whether alcohol or drugs may have played a role in the accident or rule
violation. However, this subpart does not restrict a railroad from
holding an employee out of service based on the employee's underlying
conduct, so long as it is consistent with the railroad's policy and the
action is taken under the railroad's own authority.
(c) When determining whether reasonable cause testing is justified,
a railroad must consider the involvement of each crewmember in the
qualifying event, not the involvement of the crew as a whole.
Subpart F--Pre-Employment Tests
0
26. Revise Sec. 219.501 to read as follows:
Sec. 219.501 Pre-employment drug testing.
(a) Before an individual performs regulated service the first time
for a railroad, the railroad must ensure that the individual undergoes
testing for drugs in accordance with the regulations of a DOT agency.
No railroad may allow a direct employee (a railroad employee who is not
employed by a contractor to the railroad) to perform regulated service,
unless that railroad has conducted a DOT pre-employment test for drugs
on that individual with a result that did not indicate the misuse of
controlled substance. This requirement applies both to a final
applicant for direct employment and to a direct employee seeking to
transfer for the first time from non-regulated service to duties
involving regulated service. A regulated employee must have a negative
DOT pre-employment drug test for each railroad for which he or she
performs regulated service as the result of a direct employment
relationship.
(b) Each railroad must ensure that each employee of a contractor
who performs regulated service on the railroad's behalf has a negative
DOT pre-employment drug test on file with his or her employer. The
railroad must also maintain documentation indicating that it had
verified that the contractor employee had a negative DOT pre-employment
drug test on file with his or her direct employer. A contractor
employee who performs regulated service for more than one railroad does
not need to have a DOT pre-employment drug test for each railroad for
which he or she provides service.
(c) If a railroad has already conducted a DOT pre-employment test
resulting in a negative for a regulated service applicant under the
rules and regulations of another DOT agency (such as the Federal Motor
Carrier Safety Administration), FRA will accept the result of that
negative DOT pre-employment test for purposes of the requirements of
this subpart.
(d) As used in subpart H of this part with respect to a test
required under this subpart, the term regulated employee includes an
applicant for pre-employment testing only. If an applicant declines to
be tested and withdraws an application for employment before the pre-
employment testing process commences, no record may be maintained of
the declination.
(e) The pre-employment drug testing requirements of this section do
not apply to covered employees of railroads qualifying for the small
railroad exception (see Sec. 219.3(c)) or maintenance-of-way employees
who were performing duties for a railroad before June 12, 2017.
However, a grandfathered employee must have a negative pre-employment
drug test before performing regulated service for a new employing
railroad after June 12, 2017.
0
27. In Sec. 219.502, revise paragraph (a) introductory text, (a)(1),
(a)(2), (a)(5), and (b) to read as follows:
Sec. 219.502 Pre-employment alcohol testing.
(a) A railroad may, but is not required to, conduct pre-employment
alcohol testing under this part. If a railroad chooses to conduct pre-
employment alcohol testing, the railroad must comply with the following
requirements:
(1) The railroad must conduct a pre-employment alcohol test before
the first performance of regulated service by an employee, regardless
of whether he or she is a new employee or a first-time transfer to a
position involving the performance of regulated service.
(2) The railroad must treat all employees performing regulated
service the same for the purpose of pre-employment alcohol testing
(i.e., a railroad must not test some regulated employees and not
others.)
* * * * *
(5) If a regulated employee's Federal pre-employment test indicates
an alcohol concentration of 0.04 or greater, a railroad may not allow
him or her to begin performing regulated service until he or she has
completed the Federal return-to-duty process under Sec. 219.104(d).
(b) As used in subpart H of this part with respect to a test
authorized under this subpart, the term regulated
[[Page 37937]]
employee includes an applicant for pre-employment testing only. If an
applicant declines to be tested before the testing process commences,
no record may be maintained of the declination. The determination of
when an alcohol test commences must be made according to the provisions
of Sec. 40.243(a) of this title.
0
28. Revise Sec. 219.503 to read as follows:
Sec. 219.503 Notification; records.
Each railroad must provide for medical review of drug test results
according to the requirements of part 40 of this title, as provided in
subpart H of this part. The railroad must also notify the applicant in
writing of the results of any Federal drug and/or alcohol test that is
a positive, adulteration, substitution, or refusal in the same manner
as provided for employees in part 40 of this title and subpart H of
this part. Records must be maintained confidentially and be retained in
the same manner as required under subpart J of this part for employee
test records, except that such records need not reflect the identity of
an applicant who withdrew an application to perform regulated service
before the commencement of the testing process.
0
29. Revise Sec. 219.505 to read as follows:
Sec. 219.505 Non-negative tests and refusals.
An applicant who has tested positive or refused to submit to pre-
employment testing under this section may not perform regulated service
for any railroad until he or she has completed the Federal return-to-
duty process under Sec. 219.104(d). An applicant may also not perform
DOT safety-sensitive functions for any other employer regulated by a
DOT agency until he or she has completed the Federal return-to-duty
process under Sec. 219.104(d). This section does not create any right
on the part of the applicant to have a subsequent application
considered; nor does it restrict the discretion of the railroad to
entertain a subsequent application for employment from the same person.
0
30. Revise subpart G to read as follows:
Subpart G--Random Alcohol and Drug Testing Programs
Sec.
219.601 Purpose and scope of random testing programs.
219.603 General requirements for random testing programs.
219.605 Submission and approval of random testing plans.
219.607 Requirements for random testing plans.
219.609 Inclusion of contractor employees and volunteers in random
testing plans.
219.611 Random alcohol and drug testing pools.
219.613 Random testing selections.
219.615 Random testing collections.
219.617 Participation in random alcohol and drug testing.
219.619 Positive alcohol and drug test results and refusals;
procedures.
219.621 Use of service agents.
219.623 Records.
219.625 FRA Administrator's determination of random alcohol and drug
testing rates.
Subpart G--Random Alcohol and Drug Testing Programs
Sec. 219.601 Purpose and scope of random testing programs.
(a) Purpose. The purpose of random alcohol and drug testing is to
promote safety by deterring regulated employees from misusing drugs and
abusing alcohol.
(b) Regulated employees. Each railroad must ensure that a regulated
employee is subject to being selected for random testing as required by
this subpart whenever the employee performs regulated service on the
railroad's behalf.
(c) Contractor employees and volunteers. A regulated employee who
is a volunteer or an employee of a contractor to a railroad may be
incorporated into the random testing program of more than one railroad
if:
(1) The contractor employee or volunteer is not already part of a
random testing program that meets the requirements of this subpart and
has been accepted by the railroad for which he or she performs
regulated service (as described in Sec. 219.609); or
(2) The railroad for which the contractor employee or volunteer
performs regulated service is unable to verify that the individual is
part of a random testing program acceptable to the railroad that meets
the requirements of this subpart.
(d) Multiple DOT agencies. (1) If a regulated employee performs
functions subject to the random testing requirements of more than one
DOT agency, a railroad must ensure that the employee is subject to
selection for random drug and alcohol testing at or above the current
minimum annual testing rate set by the DOT agency that regulates more
than 50 percent of the employee's DOT-regulated functions.
(2) A railroad may not include a regulated employee in more than
one DOT random testing pool for regulated service performed on its
behalf, even if the regulated employee is subject to the random testing
requirements of more than one DOT agency.
Sec. 219.603 General requirements for random testing programs.
(a) General. To the extent possible, each railroad must ensure that
its FRA random testing program is designed and implemented so that each
employee performing regulated service on its behalf should reasonably
anticipate that he or she may be called for a random test without
advance warning at any time while on duty and subject to performing
regulated service.
(b) Prohibited selection bias. A random testing program may not
have a selection bias or an appearance of selection bias, or appear to
provide an opportunity for a regulated employee to avoid complying with
this section.
(c) Plans. As required by Sec. Sec. 219.603 through 219.609, each
railroad must submit for FRA approval a random testing plan meeting the
requirements of this subpart. The plan must address all regulated
employees, as defined in Sec. 219.5.
(d) Pools. Each railroad must construct and maintain random testing
pools in accordance with Sec. 219.611.
(e) Selections. Each railroad must conduct random testing
selections in accordance with Sec. 219.613.
(f) Collections. Each railroad must perform random testing
collections in accordance with Sec. 219.615.
(g) Cooperation. Each railroad and its regulated employees must
cooperate with and participate in random testing in accordance with
Sec. 219.617.
(h) Responsive action. Each railroad must handle positive random
tests and verified refusals to test in accordance with Sec. 219.619.
(i) Service agents. Each railroad may use a service agent to
perform its random testing responsibilities in accordance with Sec.
219.621.
(j) Records. Each railroad must maintain records required by this
subpart in accordance with Sec. 219.623.
Sec. 219.605 Submission and approval of random testing plans.
(a) Plan submission. (1) Each railroad must submit for review and
approval a random testing plan meeting the requirements of Sec. Sec.
219.607 and 219.609 to the FRA Drug and Alcohol Program Manager, 1200
New Jersey Ave. SE., Washington, DC 20590. A railroad commencing start-
up operations must submit its plan no later than 30 days before its
date of commencing operations. A railroad that must comply with this
subpart because it no longer qualifies for the small railroad exception
under Sec. 219.3 (due to a change in operations or its number of
covered employees) must submit its plan no later than 30 days after it
becomes
[[Page 37938]]
subject to the requirements of this subpart. A railroad may not
implement a Federal random testing plan or any substantive amendment to
that plan before FRA approval.
(2) A railroad may submit separate random testing plans for each
category of regulated employees (as defined in Sec. 219.5), combine
all categories into a single plan, or amend its current FRA-approved
plan to add additional categories of regulated employees, as defined by
this part.
(b) Plan approval notification. FRA will notify a railroad in
writing whether its plan is approved. If the plan is not approved
because it does not meet the requirements of this subpart, FRA will
inform the railroad of its non-approval, with specific explanations of
any required revisions. The railroad must resubmit its plan with the
required revisions within 30 days of the date of FRA's written notice.
Failure to resubmit the plan with the necessary revisions will be a
failure to submit a plan under this part.
(c) Plan implementation. Each railroad must implement its random
testing plan no later than 30 days from the date of FRA approval.
(d) Plan amendments. (1) Each railroad must submit to FRA a
substantive amendment to an approved plan at least 30 days before its
intended effective date. A railroad may not implement any substantive
amendment before FRA approval.
(2) Each railroad must provide a non-substantive amendment to an
approved plan (such as the replacement or addition of service
providers) to the FRA Drug and Alcohol Program Manager in writing (by
letter or email) before its effective date. However, FRA pre-approval
is not required.
(e) Previously approved plans. A railroad is not required to
resubmit a random testing plan that FRA had approved before June 12,
2017, unless the railroad must amend the plan to comply with the
requirements of this subpart. A railroad must submit new plans,
combined plans, or amended plans incorporating new categories of
regulated employees (i.e., maintenance-of-way employees) for FRA
approval at least 30 days before June 12, 2017.
Sec. 219.607 Requirements for random testing plans.
(a) General. A random testing plan that a railroad submits under
this subpart must address and comply with the requirements of this
subpart. The railroad must also comply with these requirements in
implementing the plan.
(b) Model random testing plan. A railroad (or a contractor or
service agent that submits a part 219-compliant random testing plan to
a railroad for submission as a part of the railroad's random testing
plan) may complete, modify if necessary, and submit a plan based on the
FRA model random testing plan that can be downloaded from FRA's Drug
and Alcohol Program Web site.
(c) Specific plan requirements. Each random testing plan must
contain the following items of information, each of which must be
contained in a separate, clearly identified section:
(1) Total number of covered employees, including covered service
contractor employees and volunteers;
(2) Total number of maintenance-of-way employees, including
maintenance-of-way contractor employees and volunteers;
(3) Names of any contractors who perform regulated service for the
railroad, with contact information;
(4) Method used to ensure that any regulated service contractor
employees and volunteers are subject to the requirements of this
subpart, as required by Sec. 219.609;
(5) Name, address, and contact information for the railroad's
Designated Employer Representative (DER) and any alternates (if
applicable);
(6) Name, address, and contact information for any service
providers, including the railroad's Medical Review Officers (MROs),
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)
certified drug testing laboratory(ies), Drug and Alcohol Counselors
(DACs), Substance Abuse Professionals (SAPs), and C/TPA or collection
site management companies. Individual collection sites do not have to
be identified;
(7) Number of random testing pools and the proposed general pool
entry assignments for each pool. If using a C/TPA, a railroad must
identify whether its regulated employees are combined into one pool,
contained in separate pools, or combined in a larger pool with other
FRA or other DOT agency regulated employees, or both.
(8) Target random testing rates;
(9) Method used to make random selections, including a detailed
description of the computer program or random number table selection
process employed;
(10) Selection unit(s) for each random pool (e.g., employee name or
ID number, job assignment, train symbol) and whether the individual
selection unit(s) will be selected for drugs, alcohol, or both;
(11) If a railroad makes alternate selections, under what limited
circumstances these alternate selections will be tested (see Sec.
219.613);
(12) Frequency of random selections (e.g., monthly);
(13) Designated testing window. A designated testing window extends
from the beginning to the end of the designated testing period
established in the railroad's FRA-approved random plan (see Sec.
219.603), after which time any individual selections for that
designated testing window that have not been collected are no longer
active (valid); and
(14) Description of how the railroad will notify a regulated
employee that he or she has been selected for random testing.
Sec. 219.609 Inclusion of contractor employees and volunteers in
random testing plans.
(a) Each railroad's random testing plan must demonstrate that all
of its regulated service contractor employees and volunteers are
subject to random testing that meets the requirements of this subpart.
A railroad can demonstrate that its regulated service contractor
employees and volunteers are in compliance with this subpart by either:
(1) Directly including regulated service contractor employees and
volunteers in its own random testing plan and ensuring that they are
tested according to that plan; or
(2) Indicating in its random testing plan that its regulated
service contractor employees and volunteers are part of a random
testing program which is compliant with the requirements of this
subpart, e.g., conducted by a contractor or C/TPA (``non-railroad
random testing program''). If a railroad chooses this option, the
railroad must append to its own random testing plan one or more addenda
describing the method it will use to ensure that the non-railroad
random testing program is testing its regulated service contractor
employees and volunteers according to the requirements of this subpart.
A railroad may comply with this requirement by appending the non-
railroad random testing program or a detailed description of the
program and how it complies with this subpart.
(b) Each railroad's random testing plan(s) and any addenda must
contain sufficient detail to fully document that the railroad is
meeting the requirements of this subpart for all personnel performing
regulated service on its behalf.
(c) If a railroad chooses to use regulated service contractor
employees and volunteers who are part of a non-railroad random testing
program, the railroad remains responsible for
[[Page 37939]]
ensuring that the non-railroad program is testing the regulated service
contractor employees and volunteers according to the requirements of
this subpart.
(d) FRA does not pre-approve contractor or service agent random
testing plans, but may accept them as part of its approval process of a
railroad's plan.
Sec. 219.611 Random alcohol and drug testing pools.
(a) General. Each railroad must ensure that its random testing
pools include all regulated employees who perform regulated service on
its behalf, except that a railroad's random testing pools do not have
to include regulated employees who are part of a non-railroad random
testing program that is compliant with the requirements of this subpart
and that has been accepted by the railroad.
(b) Pool entries. Each railroad must clearly indicate who will be
tested when a specific pool entry is selected.
(1) Pool entries may be employee names or identification numbers,
train symbols, or specific job assignments, although all the entries in
a single pool must be of generally consistent sizes and types.
(2) Pool entries must not allow a field manager or field supervisor
to have discretion over which employee is to be tested when an entry is
selected.
(3) Pool entries must be constructed and maintained so that all
regulated employees have an equal chance of being selected for random
testing for each selection draw.
(c) Minimum number of pool entries. A railroad (including a service
agent used by a railroad to carry out its responsibilities under this
subpart) may not maintain a random testing pool with less than four
pool entries. Placeholder pool entries (entries that do not represent
legitimate selections of regulated employees) are not permitted. A
railroad or contractor with less than four regulated employees can
comply with this requirement by having its regulated employees
incorporated into a railroad or non-railroad random testing pool that
contains more than four entries.
(d) Pool construction. (1) An individual who is not subject to the
random testing requirements of FRA or another DOT agency may not be
placed in the same pool as a regulated employee.
(2) A railroad may not include a regulated employee in more than
one random testing pool established under the regulations of a DOT
agency.
(3) A regulated employee may be placed in a random testing pool
with employees subject to the random testing requirements of another
DOT agency, only if all entries in the pool are subject to testing at
the highest minimum random testing rate required by the regulations of
a DOT agency for any single member in the pool.
(4) A regulated employee does not have to be placed in separate
pools for random drug and random alcohol testing selection.
(5) A regulated employee must be incorporated into a random testing
pool as soon as possible after his or her hire or first transfer into
regulated service.
(e) Frequency of regulated service. (1) A railroad may not place a
person in a random testing pool for any selection period in which he or
she is not expected to perform regulated service.
(2) A railroad employee who performs regulated service on average
less than once a quarter is a de minimis safety concern for random
testing purposes, and does not have to be in a random testing program.
A railroad that chooses to random test de minimis employees must place
them in a separate random testing pool from employees who perform
regulated service on a regular basis (e.g., engineers, conductors,
dispatchers, and signal maintainers).
(3) A railroad must make a good faith effort to determine the
frequency of an employee's performance of regulated service and must
evaluate the employee's likelihood of performing regulated service in
each upcoming selection period.
(f) Pool maintenance. Pool entries must be updated at least
monthly, regardless of how often selections are made, and a railroad
must ensure that each of its random testing pools is complete and does
not contain outdated or inappropriate entries.
(g) Multiple random testing pools. A railroad may maintain more
than one random testing pool if it can demonstrate that its random
testing program is not adversely impacted by the number and types of
pools or the construction of pool entries, and that selections from
each pool will meet the requirements of this subpart.
Sec. 219.613 Random testing selections.
(a) General. Each railroad must ensure that each regulated employee
has an equal chance of being selected for random testing whenever
selections are made. A railroad may not increase or decrease an
employee's chance of being selected by weighting an entry or pool.
(b) Method of selection. (1) Each railroad must use a selection
method that is acceptable to FRA and meets the requirements of this
subpart, such as a computer selection program, proper use of a random
number table, or an alternative method which FRA has approved as part
of the railroad's random testing plan.
(2) A selection method must be free of bias or apparent bias and
employ objective, neutral criteria to ensure that every regulated
employee has an equal statistical chance of being selected within a
specified time frame. The selection method may not utilize subjective
factors that permit a railroad to manipulate or control selections in
an effort to either target or protect any employee, job, or operational
unit from testing.
(3) The randomness of a selection method must be verifiable, and,
as required by Sec. 219.623, any records necessary to document the
randomness of a selection must be retained for not less than two years
from the date the designated testing window for that selection expired.
(c) Minimum random testing rate. (1) Each railroad must distribute
random tests reasonably throughout the calendar year and make
sufficient selections to ensure that each random testing pool meets the
Administrator's minimum annual random testing rates as established
according to Sec. 219.625.
(2) Each railroad must continually monitor changes in its workforce
to ensure that the required number of selections and tests are
conducted each year.
(d) Selection frequency. Each railroad must select at least one
entry from each of its random testing pools every three months.
(e) Discarded selection draws. Each selection draw must identify
who will be subject to random testing. A railroad cannot discard a
selection draw without an acceptable explanation (e.g., the selection
was drawn from an incomplete or inaccurate pool). A railroad must
document and retain records for all discarded selection draws,
including the specific reason the selection draw was not used, as
required by Sec. 219.623.
(f) Increasing random selections. A railroad that is unable to
complete a collection for each selection made during a designated
testing period may increase the number of selections in a subsequent
selection period to ensure that it meets the annual minimum random
testing rate for the calendar year.
(g) Selection snapshots. Each railroad must capture and maintain an
electronic or hard copy snapshot of each random testing pool at the
time it makes a testing selection. A railroad must not re-create pool
entries from records after the time of the original selection. The
railroad must maintain this snapshot for
[[Page 37940]]
a period of two years, as required by subpart J of this part.
(h) Multiple DOT agencies. Each railroad must ensure that each
regulated employee who performs functions subject to the random testing
requirements of more than one DOT agency is subject to random selection
at or above the current minimum annual testing rate set by the DOT
agency that regulates more than 50 percent of the employee's DOT-
regulated functions.
Sec. 219.615 Random testing collections.
(a) Minimum random testing rates. Each railroad must complete a
sufficient number of random alcohol and drug testing collections from
each of its random testing pools to meet the Administrator's minimum
annual testing rates established in accordance with Sec. 219.625.
(b) Designated testing window. Each railroad must complete the
collection for a selected pool entry within the FRA-approved designated
testing window for that selection. Once a designated testing window has
closed, any selections not collected during that window are no longer
valid and may not be subject to random testing.
(c) Collection timing. (1) A regulated employee may be subject to
random testing only while on duty and subject to performing regulated
service.
(2) Each railroad's random alcohol and drug testing collections
must be unannounced and spread reasonably throughout the calendar year.
Collections must also be distributed unpredictably throughout the
designated testing window and must reasonably cover all operating days
of the week (including operating weekends and holidays), shifts, and
locations.
(3) Random alcohol test collections must be performed unpredictably
and in sufficient numbers at either end of an operating shift to attain
an acceptable level of deterrence throughout the entire shift. At a
minimum, a railroad must perform 10% of its random alcohol tests at the
beginning of shifts and 10% of its random alcohol tests at the end of
shifts.
(4) If a regulated employee has been selected for both random drug
and alcohol testing, a railroad may conduct these tests separately, so
long as both required collections can be completed by the end of the
employee's shift and the railroad does not inform the employee that an
additional collection will occur later.
(d) Collection scheduling. While pool entries must be selected
randomly, a railroad may schedule each random test collection during a
designated testing window according to its approved plan.
(1) A railroad may schedule a collection based on the availability
of the selected pool entry, the logistics of performing the collection,
and any other requirements of this subpart.
(2) If a selected pool entry does not identify the selection by
name (i.e., train crews or job functions), a railroad may not use its
scheduling discretion to deliberately target or protect a particular
employee or work crew. Unless otherwise approved in a random testing
plan, railroad field supervisors or field management personnel may not
use discretion to choose or to change collection dates or times if that
choice could intentionally alter who is to be tested.
(e) Notification requirements. (1) A railroad may notify a
regulated employee that he or she has been selected for random testing
only during the duty tour in which the collection is to be conducted,
and only so far in advance as is reasonably necessary to ensure the
employee's presence at the scheduled collection time and place.
(2) A railroad must make collections as soon as possible. Each
collection must begin within two hours after the railroad has notified
the employee of his or her selection for random testing, unless the
railroad has an acceptable reason for the delay. A railroad should
monitor each employee after notification and, whenever possible,
arrange for the employee to be immediately escorted by supervisory or
management personnel to the collection location.
(3) A railroad must inform an regulated employee that he or she has
been selected for random testing at the time the employee is notified.
Completion of the Federal Drug Testing Custody and Control Form (CCF)
or the DOT Alcohol Testing Form (ATF) indicating the basis of the test
satisfies this requirement, so long as the employee has been shown and
directed to sign the CCF or ATF as required by Sec. Sec. 40.73 and
40.241 of this title.
(f) Incomplete collections. A railroad must use due diligence to
ensure that a random testing collection is completed for each selected
pool entry, unless it has an acceptable explanation for not conducting
the collection. All reasons for incomplete collections must be fully
documented and are subject to inspection by FRA upon request.
(g) Hours-of-service limitations. (1) Except as provided by
paragraph (g)(2) of this section, a railroad must immediately terminate
a random collection and may not reschedule it if the collection is not
completed within a covered employee's hours-of-service limitations.
(2) If a random collection requires a direct observation collection
under Sec. 40.67 of this title, the directly observed collection must
immediately proceed until completed. A railroad must submit an excess
service report, as required by part 228 of this chapter, if completion
of the directly observed collection causes the covered employee to
exceed his or her hours-of-service limitations.
Sec. 219.617 Participation in random alcohol and drug testing.
(a) Railroad responsibility. (1) A railroad must, under the
conditions specified in this subpart and subpart H of this part,
require a regulated employee selected for random testing to cooperate
in alcohol and/or drug testing.
(2) If an employee is performing regulated service at the time he
or she is notified of his or her selection for random testing, the
railroad must ensure that the employee immediately ceases to perform
regulated service and proceeds to the collection site without adversely
affecting safety. A railroad must also ensure that the absence of an
employee from his or her assigned duties to report for testing does not
adversely affect safety. Once an employee begins the testing process,
he or she may not be returned to regulated service until the testing
process is complete.
(3) A railroad may excuse an employee who has been notified of or
her selection for random testing only if the employee can substantiate
that a medical emergency involving the employee or an immediate family
member (e.g., birth, death, or medical emergency) supersedes the
requirement to complete the test. A medical emergency is defined in
this part as an acute medical condition requiring immediate emergency
care. To be eligible for exclusion from random testing, the employee
must provide verifiable documentation of the emergency situation from a
credible outside professional within a reasonable period of time (e.g.,
a doctor, dentist, hospital, law enforcement officer, or school
authority). A railroad may not test an employee who has been excused
from testing under the same random selection.
(b) Employee responsibility. (1) A regulated employee subject to
the random testing requirements of this subpart must cooperate with the
selection and testing process, and must proceed to the testing site
upon notification that he or she has been selected for random testing.
(2) A regulated employee must fully cooperate and comply with the
urine drug collection and/or breath alcohol
[[Page 37941]]
testing procedures required by subpart H of this part, and provide the
required specimen(s), and must, upon request, complete the required
paperwork and certifications.
Sec. 219.619 Positive alcohol and drug test results and refusals;
procedures.
Section 219.104 contains the procedures for administrative handling
by the railroad or contractor in the event a urine specimen provided
under this subpart is reported as a verified positive by the Medical
Review Officer, a breath alcohol specimen is reported at 0.04 or
greater by the Breath Alcohol Technician, or a refusal to test has
occurred. The responsive action required in Sec. 219.104 is not stayed
pending the result of the testing of a split urine specimen or a
challenge to any part of the testing process or procedure.
Sec. 219.621 Use of service agents.
(a) A railroad may use a service agent (such as a consortium/third
party administrator (C/TPA)) to act as its agent to carry out any role
in random testing specifically permitted under subpart Q of part 40 of
this title, such as maintaining random pools, conducting random
selections, and performing random urine drug collections and breath
alcohol tests.
(b) A railroad may not use a service agent to notify a regulated
employee that he or she has been selected for random testing. A
regulated employee who has been selected for random testing must
otherwise be notified of the selection by his or her employer. A
service agent may also not perform any role that Sec. 40.355 of this
title specifically reserves to an employer, which, for purposes of this
subpart, is defined as a railroad or a contractor performing railroad-
accepted testing.
(c) A railroad is primarily responsible for compliance with the
random alcohol and drug testing of this subpart, but FRA reserves the
right to bring an enforcement action for noncompliance against the
railroad, its service agents, its contractors, and/or its employees.
(d) If a railroad conducts random drug and/or alcohol testing
through a C/TPA, the number of employees required to be tested may be
calculated for each individual railroad belonging to the C/TPA, or may
be based on the total number of regulated employees covered by the C/
TPA in a larger combined railroad or DOT agency random pool. Selections
from combined railroad random pools must meet or exceed the highest
minimum annual percentage rate established under this subpart or any
DOT agency drug testing rule that applies to any member of that pool.
Sec. 219.623 Records.
(a) As provided by Sec. 219.901, each railroad is required to
maintain records related to random testing for a minimum of two years.
(b) Contractors and service agents performing random testing
responsibilities under this subpart must provide records required by
this subpart whenever requested by the contracting railroad or by FRA.
A railroad remains responsible for maintaining records demonstrating
that it is in compliance with the requirements of this subpart.
Sec. 219.625 FRA Administrator's determination of random alcohol and
drug testing rates.
(a) Notice. Each year, the Administrator publishes a Federal
Register notice announcing the minimum annual random alcohol and drug
testing rates which take effect on January 1 of the following calendar
year. These rates are based on the railroad industry's random testing
violation rates for the preceding two consecutive calendar years, which
are determined using annual railroad alcohol and drug program data
required to be submitted to the FRA's Management Information System
(MIS) under Sec. 219.800.
(b) Information. Data from MIS reports provide the information used
for this determination. In order to ensure reliability of the data, the
Administrator may consider the quality and completeness of the reported
data, obtain additional information or reports from railroads, or make
appropriate modifications in calculating the industry positive rate.
(c) Initial minimum annual random testing rates. The Administrator
has established an initial minimum annual random testing rate of 50
percent for drugs and 25 percent for alcohol for any new category of
regulated employees added to those already being tested under this
part.
(1) These initial testing rates are subject to amendment by the
Administrator in accordance with paragraphs (d) and (e) of this section
after at least 18 months of MIS data have been compiled for the new
category of regulated employees.
(2) The Administrator will determine separate minimum annual random
testing rates for each added category of regulated employees for a
minimum of three calendar years after that category is incorporated
into random testing under this part.
(3) The Administrator may move to combine categories of regulated
employees requiring separate determinations into a single determination
once the categories' testing rates are identical for two consecutive
years.
(d) Drug testing rate. The Administrator may set the minimum annual
random drug testing rate for the railroad industry at either 50 percent
or 25 percent.
(1) When the minimum annual percentage rate for random drug testing
is 50 percent, the Administrator may lower the rate to 25 percent if
the Administrator determines that the MIS data for two consecutive
calendar years show that the reported random testing positive rate is
less than 1.0 percent.
(2) When the minimum annual percentage rate for random drug testing
is 25 percent, and the MIS data for any calendar year show that the
reported random testing positive rate is equal to or greater than 1.0
percent, the Administrator will increase the minimum annual percentage
rate for random drug testing to 50 percent.
(e) Alcohol testing rate. The Administrator may set the minimum
annual random alcohol testing rate for the railroad industry at 50
percent, 25 percent, or 10 percent.
(1) When the minimum annual percentage rate for random alcohol
testing is 50 percent or 25 percent, the Administrator may lower this
rate to 10 percent if the Administrator determines that the MIS data
for two consecutive calendar years show that the random testing
violation rate is less than 0.5 percent.
(2) When the minimum annual percentage rate for random alcohol
testing is 50 percent, the Administrator may lower the rate to 25
percent if the Administrator determines that the MIS data for two
consecutive calendar years show that the random testing violation rate
is less than 1.0 percent but equal to or greater than 0.5 percent.
(3) When the minimum annual percentage rate for random alcohol
testing is 25 percent, and the MIS data for that calendar year show
that the random testing violation rate for drugs is equal to or greater
than 0.5 percent but less than 1.0 percent, the Administrator will
increase the minimum annual percentage rate for random drug testing to
50 percent.
(4) When the minimum annual percentage rate for random alcohol
testing is 10 percent or 25 percent, and the MIS data for any calendar
year show that the random testing violation rate is equal to or greater
than 1.0 percent, the Administrator will increase the minimum annual
percentage rate for random alcohol testing to 50 percent.
[[Page 37942]]
Subpart H--Drug and Alcohol Testing Procedures
Sec. 219.701 [Amended]
0
31. Revise Sec. 219.701 by:
0
a. In paragraphs (a) and (b), removing the phrase ``B, D, F, and G''
wherever it appears and adding, in its place, ``B, D, E, F, G, and K
(but only for co-worker or non-peer referrals that involve a violation
of the prohibitions of this subpart)''; and
0
b. Removing paragraph (c).
Subpart I--Annual Report
0
32. In Sec. 219.800, revise the last sentence of paragraph (b) and the
first sentence of paragraph (d) and add a new paragraph (f) to read as
follows:
Sec. 219.800 Annual reports.
* * * * *
(b) * * * For information on where to submit MIS forms and for the
electronic version of the form, see: https://www.fra.dot.gov/eLib/details/L02639.
* * * * *
(d) As a railroad, if you have a regulated employee who performs
multi-DOT agency functions (e.g., an employee drives a commercial motor
vehicle and performs switchman duties for you), count the employee only
on the MIS report for the DOT agency under which he or she is random
tested. * * *
* * * * *
(f) A railroad required to submit an MIS report under this section
must submit separate reports for covered employees and MOW employees.
Subpart J--Recordkeeping Requirements
0
33. Revise Sec. 219.901 to read as follows:
Sec. 219.901 Retention of alcohol and drug testing records.
(a) General. (1) In addition to the records part 40 of this title
requires keeping, a railroad must also maintain alcohol and drug misuse
prevention program records in a secure location with controlled access
under this section's requirements.
(2) A railroad must maintain for two years, rather than one year,
the records to which Sec. 40.333(a)(4) of this title applies (i.e.,
records of negative and cancelled drug test results and alcohol test
results with a concentration of less than 0.02). A railroad may
maintain legible and accessible scanned or electronic copies of these
records for the second year.
(b) Records maintained for a minimum of five years. Each railroad
must maintain the following records for a minimum of five years:
(1) A summary record or the individual files of each regulated
employee's test results; and
(2) A copy of the annual report summarizing the results of its
alcohol and drug misuse prevention program (if required to submit the
report under Sec. 219.800(a)).
(c) Records maintained for a minimum of two years. Each railroad
must maintain the following records for a minimum of two years:
(1) Records related to the collection process:
(i) Collection logbooks, if used;
(ii) Documents relating to the random selection process, including
the railroad's approved random testing plan and FRA's approval letter
for that plan;
(iii) Documents generated in connection with decisions to
administer Federal reasonable suspicion or reasonable cause alcohol or
drug tests;
(iv) Documents generated in connection with decisions on post-
accident testing; and
(v) Documents verifying the existence of a medical explanation for
the inability of a regulated employee to provide an adequate specimen;
(2) Records related to test results:
(i) The railroad's copy of the alcohol test form, including the
results of the test;
(ii) The railroad's copy of the drug test custody and control form,
including the results of the test;
(iii) Documents related to any regulated employee's refusal to
submit to an alcohol or drug test required under this part; and
(iv) Documents a regulated employee presented to dispute the result
of an alcohol or drug test administered under this part;
(3) Records related to other violations of this part; and
(4) Records related to employee training:
(i) Materials on alcohol and drug abuse awareness, including a copy
of the railroad's policy on alcohol and drug abuse;
(ii) Documentation of compliance with the requirements of Sec.
219.23; and
(iii) Documentation of training (including attendance records and
training materials) the railroad provided to supervisors for the
purpose of qualifying the supervisors to make a determination
concerning the need for reasonable suspicion or post-accident alcohol
and drug testing.
0
34. Revise Sec. 219.903 to read as follows:
Sec. 219.903 Access to facilities and records.
(a) Release of regulated employee information contained in records
required to be maintained under Sec. 219.901 must be in accordance
with part 40 of this title and with this section. (For purposes of this
section only, urine drug testing records are considered equivalent to
breath alcohol testing records.)
(b) Each railroad must grant access to all facilities used to
comply with this part to the Secretary of Transportation, United States
Department of Transportation, or any DOT agency with regulatory
authority over the railroad or any of its regulated employees.
(c) Each railroad must make available copies of all results for its
drug and alcohol testing programs conducted under this part and any
other information pertaining to the railroad's alcohol and drug misuse
prevention program, when requested by the Secretary of Transportation
or any DOT agency with regulatory authority over the railroad or
regulated employee.
Sec. 219.905 [Removed and Reserved]
0
35. Remove and reserve Sec. 219.905.
0
36. Add a new subpart K to read as follows:
Subpart K--Referral Programs
Sec.
219.1001 Requirement for referral programs.
219.1003 Referral program conditions.
219.1005 Optional provisions.
219.1007 Alternate programs.
Subpart K--Referral Programs
Sec. 219.1001 Requirement for referral programs.
(a) The purpose of this subpart is to help prevent the adverse
effects of drug and alcohol abuse in connection with regulated
employees.
(b) A railroad must adopt, publish, and implement the following
programs:
(1) Self-referral program. A program designed to encourage and
facilitate the identification of a regulated employee who abuses drugs
or alcohol by providing the employee the opportunity to obtain
counseling or treatment before the employee's drug or alcohol abuse
manifests itself in a detected violation of this part; and
(2) Co-worker referral program. A program designed to encourage co-
worker participation in preventing violations of this part.
(c) A railroad may adopt, publish, and implement the following
programs:
(1) Non-peer referral program. A program designed to encourage non-
peer participation in preventing violations of this part; and
[[Page 37943]]
(2) Alternate program(s). An alternate program or programs meeting
the specific requirements of Sec. 219.1003 or complying with Sec.
219.1007, or both.
(d) Nothing in this subpart may be construed to:
(1) Require payment of compensation for any period a regulated
employee is restricted from performing regulated service under a
voluntary, co-worker, or non-peer referral program;
(2) Require a railroad to adhere to a voluntary, co-worker, or non-
peer referral program when the referral is made for the purpose, or
with the effect, of anticipating or avoiding the imminent and probable
detection of a rule violation by a supervising employee;
(3) Interfere with the subpart D requirement for Federal reasonable
suspicion testing when a regulated employee is on duty and a supervisor
determines the employee is exhibiting signs and symptoms of alcohol
and/or drug use;
(4) Interfere with the requirements in Sec. 219.104(d) for
responsive action when a violation of Sec. 219.101 or Sec. 219.102 is
substantiated; or
(5) Limit the discretion of a railroad to dismiss or otherwise
discipline a regulated employee for specific rule violations or
criminal offenses, except as this subpart specifically provides.
Sec. 219.1003 Referral program conditions.
(a) General. A referral program must specify the allowances,
conditions, and procedures under which a self-referral, co-worker
referral, and, if adopted, a non-peer referral, can occur, as follows:
(1) For a self-referral, a railroad must identify one or more
designated DAC contacts (including telephone number and email (if
available)) and any expectations regarding when the referral is allowed
to take place (such as during non-duty hours, or while the employee is
unimpaired, or both, as Sec. 219.1005 permits);
(2) For a co-worker referral, a railroad may accept a referral
under this subpart only if it alleges that the regulated employee was
apparently unsafe to work with or in violation of this part or the
railroad's drug and alcohol abuse rules. The employee must waive
investigation of the rule charge and must contact the DAC within a
reasonable period of time;
(3) For a non-peer referral, a railroad may remove a regulated
employee from service only if a railroad representative confirms that
the employee is unsafe to work with or in violation of this part or the
railroad's drug and alcohol abuse rules. The employee must waive
investigation of the rule charge and must contact the DAC within a
reasonable period of time.
(b) Employment maintained. A regulated employee who is affected by
a drug or alcohol abuse problem may maintain an employment relationship
with a railroad if:
(1) The employee seeks assistance through the railroad's voluntary
referral program for his or her drug or alcohol abuse problem or a co-
worker or a non-peer refers the employee for such assistance; and
(2) The employee successfully completes the education, counseling,
or treatment program a DAC specifies under this subpart.
(c) Employment action. If a regulated employee does not choose to
seek assistance through a referral program, or fails to cooperate with
a DAC's recommended program, the disposition of the employee's
relationship with the railroad is subject to normal employment action.
(d) Qualified DAC evaluation. (1) A DAC acceptable to the railroad
must evaluate a regulated employee entering a self-referral, co-worker
referral, or non-peer referral program;
(2) The DAC must meet any applicable state standards and comply
with this subpart; and
(3) The DAC must determine the appropriate level of care
(education, counseling, or treatment, or all three) necessary to
resolve any identified drug or alcohol abuse problems.
(e) Removal from regulated service. A referral program must
stipulate that a regulated employee a DAC has evaluated as having an
active drug abuse disorder may not perform regulated service until the
DAC can report that safety is no longer affected.
(f) Confidentiality maintained. Except as provided under paragraph
(l) of this section, a railroad must treat a regulated employee's
referral and subsequent handling (including education, counseling, and
treatment) as confidential. Only personnel who administer the
railroad's referral programs may have access to the identities of the
individuals in these programs.
(g) Leave of absence. A railroad must grant a regulated employee
the minimum leave of absence the DAC recommends to complete a primary
education, counseling, or treatment program and to establish control
over the employee's drug or alcohol abuse problem.
(h) Return to regulated service. (1) Except as Sec. Sec.
219.1001(d)(4) and 219.1005 may provide, a railroad must return an
regulated employee to regulated service upon the DAC's recommendation
that the employee has established control over his or her drug or
alcohol abuse problem, has a low risk to return to drug or alcohol
abuse, and has complied with any recommended return-to-service
requirements.
(2) The DAC determines the appropriate number and frequency of
required follow-up tests. The railroad determines the dates of testing.
(3) The railroad may condition an employee's return to regulated
service on successful completion of a return-to-service medical
evaluation.
(4) A railroad must return an employee to regulated service within
five working days of the DAC's notification to the railroad that the
employee is fit to return to regulated service, unless the employee has
a disqualifying medical condition. (i.e., the employee is at a low risk
to return to drug or alcohol abuse).
(i) Rehabilitation plan. No person--whether an employing railroad,
managed care provider, service agent, individual, or any person other
than the DAC who conducted the initial evaluation--may change in any
way the DAC's evaluation or recommendations for assistance. The DAC who
made the initial evaluation may modify the employee's initial
evaluation and follow-up recommendation(s) based on new or additional
information.
(j) Locomotive engineers and conductors. Consistent with Sec. Sec.
240.119(e) and 242.115(g) of this chapter, for a certified locomotive
engineer, certified conductor, or a candidate for engineer or conductor
certification, the referral program must state that confidentiality is
waived (to the extent the railroad receives from a DAC official notice
of the active drug abuse disorder and suspends or revokes the
certification, as appropriate) if the employee at any time refuses to
cooperate in a recommended course of counseling or treatment.
(k) Contacting a DAC. If a regulated employee does not contact a
DAC within the railroad's specified time limits, the railroad may begin
an investigation to assess the employee's cooperation and compliance
with its referral program.
(l) Time requirements for DAC evaluations. Once a regulated
employee has contacted the designated DAC, the DAC's evaluation must be
completed within 10 working days. If the employee needs more than one
evaluation, the evaluations must be completed within 20 working days.
(m) Time limitations on follow-up treatment, care, or testing. Any
follow-up treatment, care, or testing established under a referral
program must not
[[Page 37944]]
exceed 24 months beyond an regulated employee's initial removal from
regulated service, unless the regulated employee's entry into the
program involved a substantiated part 219 violation.
Sec. 219.1005 Optional provisions.
A railroad's referral program may include any of the following
provisions at the option of the railroad and with the approval of the
labor organization(s) affected:
(a) The program may provide that the rule of confidentiality is
waived if:
(1) The regulated employee at any time refuses to cooperate in a
DAC's recommended course of education, counseling, or treatment; or
(2) The railroad determines, after investigation, that the
regulated employee has been involved in a drug- or alcohol-related
disciplinary offense growing out of subsequent conduct.
(b) The program may require successful completion of a return-to-
service medical examination as a further condition of reinstatement in
regulated service.
(c) The program may provide that it does not apply to a regulated
employee whom the railroad has previously assisted under a program
substantially consistent with this section.
(d) The program may provide that, in order to invoke its benefits,
the regulated employee must report to the railroad's designated contact
either:
(1) During non-duty hours (i.e., at a time when the regulated
employee is off duty); or
(2) While unimpaired and otherwise in compliance with the
railroad's drug and alcohol rules consistent with this subpart.
Sec. 219.1007 Alternate programs.
(a) Instead of the referral programs required under Sec. 219.1001,
a railroad is permitted to develop, publish, and implement alternate
programs that meet the standards established in Sec. 219.1001. Such
programs must have the written concurrence of the recognized
representatives of the regulated employees. Nothing in this subpart
restricts a railroad or labor organization from adopting, publishing,
and implementing programs that afford more favorable conditions to
regulated employees troubled by drug or alcohol abuse problems,
consistent with a railroad's responsibility to prevent violations of
Sec. Sec. 219.101, 219.102, and 219.103.
(b) The concurrence of the recognized representatives of the
regulated employees in an alternate program may be evidenced by a
collective bargaining agreement or any other document describing the
class or craft of employees to which the alternate program applies. The
agreement or other document must make express reference to this subpart
and to the intention of the railroad and employee representatives that
the alternate program applies instead of the program required by this
subpart.
(c) The railroad must file the agreement or other document
described in paragraph (b) of this section along with the requested
alternate program it submits for approval with the FRA Drug and Alcohol
Program Manager. FRA will base its approval on whether the alternative
program meets the Sec. 219.1001 objectives. The alternative program
does not have to include each Sec. 219.1001 component, but must meet
the general standards and intent of Sec. 219.1001. If a railroad
amends or revokes an approved alternate policy, the railroad must file
a notice with FRA of such amendment or revocation at least 30 days
before the effective date of such action.
(d) This section does not excuse a railroad from adopting,
publishing, and implementing the programs Sec. 219.1001 requires for
any group of regulated employees not falling within the coverage of an
appropriate, approved alternate program.
(e) Consistent with Sec. 219.105(c), FRA has the authority to
inspect the aggregate data of any railroad alcohol and/or drug use
education, prevention, identification, and rehabilitation program or
policy, including alternate peer support programs, to ensure that they
are not designed or implemented in such a way that they circumvent or
otherwise undermine Federal requirements, including the requirements in
this part regarding peer support programs.
0
37. Revise appendix A to read as follows:
Appendix A to Part 219--Schedule of Penalties
The following chart lists the schedule of civil penalties:
Penalty Schedule \1\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Willful
Section \2\ Violation violation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart A--General
------------------------------------------------------------------------
219.3 Application:
(a) Railroad or contractor does not $5,000 $7,500
have required program..............
(c) Railroad or contractor 2,500 5,000
improperly tests under subpart E or
G of this part.....................
219.9 Responsibility for compliance:
(b)(1) Host railroad failed to take 5,000 7,500
responsibility for compliance or
other railroad or contractor did
not take responsive action of
direction of host railroad during
joint operations...................
219.11 General conditions for chemical
tests:
(b)(1) Employee unlawfully refuses 2,500 5,000
to participate in testing..........
(b)(2) Employer fails to give 3,000 8,000
priority to medical treatment......
(b)(3) Employee fails to remain 2,500 5,000
available..........................
(d) Employee unlawfully required to 2,500 5,000
execute a waiver of rights.........
(e)(1) Failure to direct employee to 2,500 5,000
proceed to collection site as soon
as possible without affecting
safety.............................
(e)(3) Railroad used or authorized 5,000 7,500
the use of coercion to obtain
specimens..........................
(g) Failure to meet supervisory 2,500 5,000
training requirements or program of
instruction not available or
program not complete...............
(h) Urine or blood specimens 2,500 5,000
provided for Federal testing were
used for non-authorized testing....
219.12 Hours-of-service laws
implications:
(a)-(d) Failure to exceed Hours of 2,500 5,000
Service to conduct required testing
or exceeding HOS when not
authorized to conduct testing......
219.23 Railroad policies:
(a) Failure to provide written 1,000 4,000
notice of FRA test.................
(a)(1) Failure to provide written 1,000 4,000
notice of basis for FRA test.......
[[Page 37945]]
(a)(2) Use of a non-approved FRA 1,000 4,000
form for mandatory post-accident
toxicological testing..............
(b) Improper use of Federal drug or 1,000 4,000
alcohol testing form or use of
Subpart C form for other test......
(c) Failure to make required 2,500 5,000
educational materials available....
(d) Failure to provide required 2,500 5,000
minimum educational content........
(e) Non-Federal provisions are not 2,500 5,000
clearly described as independent
authority..........................
219.25 Previous employer drug and
alcohol checks:
(a)(1)Failure to conduct previous 2,500 5,000
employer drug and alcohol check or
failure to provide response to
previous employer when requested...
(a)(2) Failure to perform and 2,500 5,000
complete FRA and DOT-required
background checks in a timely
manner.............................
(a)(3) Failure to document due 2,500 5,000
diligence in completing FRA and DOT-
required background checks.........
(b) Failure to comply with Sec. 2,500 5,000
240.119(c) (for engineers) or Sec.
242.115(e) (for conductors) of
this chapter regarding the
consideration of Federal alcohol
and drug violations that occurred
within a period of 60 consecutive
months prior to the review of the
person's records...................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart B--Prohibitions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
219.101 Alcohol and drug use prohibited:
(a) Railroad with actual knowledge .............. 10,000
of use, possession or impairment
from alcohol or controlled
substances permits employee to go
on duty or remain on duty..........
219.103 Prescribed and over-the-counter
drugs:
(a) Failure to train employee 2,500 5,000
properly on requirements...........
219.104 Responsive action:
(a) Failure to remove employee from 5,000 7,500
regulated service immediately......
(b) Failure to provide written 2,500 5,000
notice for removal.................
(c) Failure to provide prompt 2,500 5,000
hearing within 10 calendar days....
(d) Employee improperly returned to 5,000 7,500
regulated service..................
(e) Failure to ensure certified 2,500 5,000
locomotive engineers and conductors
received required follow-up testing
minimums as per Sec.
240.119(d)(2) and Sec.
242.115(f)(2) of this chapter......
219.105 Railroad's duty to prevent
violations:
(a) Employee improperly permitted to 7,500 10,000
remain in regulated service........
(b) Failure to exercise due 5,000 7,500
diligence to assure compliance with
prohibition........................
(d) Failure to conduct and record 2,500 5,000
minimum number of Rule G
observations.......................
219.107 Consequences of unlawful
refusal:
(a) Failure to disqualify an 5,000 7,500
employee for nine months following
a refusal..........................
(b) Fail to provide written notice 2,500 5,000
of withdrawal to employee..........
(c) Employee unlawfully returned to 5,000 7,500
service............................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart C--Post-Accident Toxicological Testing
------------------------------------------------------------------------
219.201 Events for which testing is
required:
(a) Failure to test after qualifying 5,000 7,500
event (each regulated employee not
tested is a violation).............
(c)(1)(i) Failure to make good faith 5,000 7,500
determination......................
(c)(1)(ii) Failure to provide 2,500 5,000
requested decision report to FRA...
(c)(2) Testing performed after non- 5,000 10,000
qualifying event...................
219.203 Responsibilities of railroads
and employees:
(a)(1)(i) and (a)(2)(i) Failure to 5,000 7,500
properly test/exclude from testing.
(a)(1)(ii) and (a)(2)(ii) Non- 5,000 7,500
regulated service employee tested..
(b)(1) Delay in obtaining specimens 2,500 5,000
due to failure to make every
reasonable effort..................
(c) Independent medical facility not 2,500 5,000
utilized...........................
(d) Failure to report event or 1,000 3,000
contact FRA when intervention
required...........................
(d)(1) Failure to collect specimens 2,500 5,000
in a timely manner.................
(e)(2) Failure to recall employee 2,500 5,000
for testing when conditions met....
(e)(5) Failure to document why 2,500 5,000
employee could not be recalled.....
(f)(1) Specimen collection not 2,500 5,000
completed at an independent medical
facility...........................
219.205 Specimen collection and
handling:
(a) Failure to observe requirements 2,500 5,000
with respect to specimen
collection, marking and handling...
(b) Failure to provide properly 2,500 5,000
prepared forms with specimens......
(d) Failure to promptly or properly 2,500 5,000
forward specimens..................
219.207 Fatality:
(a) Failure to collect specimens.... 5,000 7,500
(a)(1) Failure to ensure timely 2,500 5,000
collection and shipment of required
specimens..........................
(b) Failure to request assistance 2,500 5,000
when necessary.....................
219.209 Reports of tests and refusals:
(a)(1) Failure to provide telephonic 1,000 2,000
report.............................
(b) Failure to provide written 1,000 2,000
report of refusal to test..........
(c) Failure to maintain report 1,000 2,000
explaining why test not conducted
within 4 hours.....................
219.211 Analysis and follow-up:
(c) Failure of the MRO to report MRO 2,500 5,000
downgrades and/or verified non-
negative results to FRA in a timely
manner.............................
(g)(3) Unauthorized withholding of 2,500 5,000
regulated employee out of regulated
service pending receipt of PAT
testing results....................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 37946]]
Subpart D--Reasonable Suspicion Testing
------------------------------------------------------------------------
219.301 Mandatory reasonable suspicion
testing:
(a) Failure to conduct breath 5,000 7,500
alcohol test when reasonable
suspicion testing criteria met or
conduct breath alcohol test under
reasonable suspicion when criteria
not met............................
(b) Failure to conduct drug test 5,000 7,500
when reasonable suspicion testing
criteria met or conduct drug test
under reasonable suspicion when
criteria not met...................
219.303 Testing when reasonable
suspicion criteria not met:
(a) Failure to use a trained 2,500 5,000
supervisor when conducting a
reasonable suspicion determination
for alcohol........................
(b) Failure to use two supervisors, 2,500 5,000
one of which must have been
trained, when conducting a
reasonable suspicion determination
for drugs..........................
(c) Improperly holding employee out 2,500 5,000
of service.........................
(d) Failure to provide adequate 2,500 5,000
written documentation for the
reasons for a reasonable suspicion
test...............................
219.305 Prompt specimen collections;
time limitations:
(a) Fail to promptly conduct test... 2,500 5,000
(b) Failure to document why test not 2,500 5,000
administered within time limits....
(c) Improper recall of employee..... 2,500 5,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart E--Reasonable Cause Testing
------------------------------------------------------------------------
219.401 Authorization for reasonable
cause testing:
(a) Failure to declare which 2,500 5,000
authority (Federal or company) is
being used for reasonable cause
testing............................
(b) Testing conducted after 2,500 5,000
regulated employee is released from
duty...............................
219.403 Requirements for reasonable
cause testing:
(a) Testing when event did not meet 2,500 5,000
the criteria for train accident or
train incident.....................
(b) Testing when event did not meet 2,500 5,000
the criteria for rule violation....
219.405 Documentation requirements:
(a) Failure to provide adequate 1,000 2,500
written documentation for the
reasons for a reasonable cause test
(b) Failure to document specific 1,000 2,500
type of rule violation and the
involvement of each tested
regulated employee.................
219.407 Prompt Specimen Collection; Time
Limitations:
(a) Failure to perform a test in a 2,500 5,000
timely.............................
(b) Failure to document why test not 1,000 2,500
administered within time limits....
(c) Improper recall of employee..... 2,500 5,000
219.409 Limitations on authority:
(b) Improper withholding of 2,500 5,000
regulated employee from regulated
service pending test results.......
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart F--Pre-Employment Tests
------------------------------------------------------------------------
219.501 Pre-employment drug testing:
(a) Failure to conduct a Federal pre- 2,500 5,000
employment test before a final
applicant or employee transfer
performs regulated service.........
(b) Failure to conduct a Federal pre- 2,500 5,000
employment test before an employee
of a contractor performs regulated
service............................
(e) Pre-employment testing of 1,000 2,500
grandfathered regulated employee...
219.502 Pre-employment alcohol testing:
(a)(1) Failure to conduct alcohol 2,500 5,000
testing of a regulated employee
after choosing to perform Federal
pre-employment alcohol testing.....
(a)(2) Failure to treat all 2,500 5,000
regulated employees the same for
purposes of Federal pre-employment
alcohol testing....................
219.503 Notification; records:
Failure to notify the applicant in 1,000 2,500
writing of non-negative test
results or refusal.................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart G--Random Alcohol and Drug Testing Programs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
219.601 Purpose and scope of random
testing programs:
(b) Failure to ensure regulated 2,500 5,000
employee is subject to random
testing............................
(c) Contractor or volunteer not 2,500 5,000
included in random testing while
subject to performing regulated
service............................
(d)(1) Regulated employee not 2,500 5,000
subject to random testing at
minimum rate set by agency covering
more than 50% of employee's
regulated functions................
219.605 Submission and approval of
random testing plans:
(a)(1) Failure to obtain FRA 2,500 5,000
approval of random testing program.
(c) Failure to implement random 2,500 5,000
testing plan within 30 days of
notification of FRA approval.......
(d)(1) Failure to implement 2,500 5,000
substantive plan amendment within
30 days of notification of FRA
approval, or failure to obtain FRA
approval before implementing
substantive plan amendment before
implementation.....................
(d)(2) Failure to submit non- 2,500 5,000
substantive plan amendment before
implementation.....................
219.607 Requirements for random testing
plans:
(a) Railroad implementation failed 2,500 5,000
to comply with approved plan.......
(c) Failure to contain required plan 2,500 5,000
elements...........................
219.609 Inclusion of contractor
employees and volunteers in random
testing plans:
(a) Failure to demonstrate that 2,500 5,000
regulated service contractor
employees and volunteers are
subject to random testing..........
[[Page 37947]]
(c) Failure to ensure regulated 2,500 5,000
service contractor and volunteers
are tested in accordance with this
subpart............................
219.611 Random drug and alcohol and drug
testing pools:
(a) Failure of railroad to ensure 2,500 5,000
that all regulated employees
including contractors and
volunteers are included in random
testing pools......................
(b)(2) Improper criteria for pool 2,500 5,000
entries which allows for employer
discretion over who is to be tested
(b)(3) Failure to construct and 2,500 5,000
maintain pool entries that will
ensure regulated employees have an
equal chance of being selected
randomly for each draw.............
(c) Maintaining a random testing 2,500 5,000
pool with less than four pool
entries............................
(d)(1) Failure to ensure that pools 2,500 5,000
do not contain non-regulated
employees..........................
(d)(2) Regulated employee included 2,500 5,000
in more than one DOT random pool...
(d)(3) Failure to maintain pools and/ 2,500 5,000
or pool entries that meet FRA/DOT
regulations........................
(d)(5) Failure to add or remove 2,500 5,000
regulated employees to or from the
proper random pool in a timely
manner.............................
(e)(2) Failure to remove employees 2,500 5,000
who perform de minimis service from
pools which include employees who
perform regulated service on a
regular basis......................
(f) Failure to have an effective 2,500 5,000
mechanism to update and maintain
pools..............................
219.613 Random testing selections:
(b)(1) Failure to use an FRA- 2,500 5,000
acceptable selection procedure.....
(b)(2) Failure to ensure every 2,500 5,000
regulated employee has an equal
chance at being selected at each
draw...............................
(b)(3) Failure to have necessary 2,500 5,000
documentation verifying the
selection process for testing
window.............................
(c)(1) Failure to select pool 2,500 5,000
entries at a rate which ensures
compliance with FRA required random
rates or fail to reasonably
distribute selections throughout
the selection year.................
(d) Railroad failed to select at 2,500 5,000
least one entry from each of its
random testing pools every three
months.............................
(e) Railroad discarded selection 2,500 5,000
draws without an acceptable
explanation........................
(g) Failure to capture and maintain 2,500 5,000
electronic or hard copy snapshot of
each random testing pool at the
time it makes a testing selection..
219.615 Random testing collections:
(a) Failure to comply with minimum 2,500 5,000
annual random collection testing
rates..............................
(b) Failure to test selections 2,500 5,000
within the approved testing window.
(c)(1) Testing a regulated employee 2,500 5,000
while not on duty or testing a
regulated employee not randomly
selected or testing a non-regulated
employee...........................
(c)(2) Failure to distribute 2,500 5,000
collections reasonably throughout
all shifts, days of the week, weeks
of the month, and months of the
year...............................
(c)(3) Failure to perform at least 2,500 5,000
10% of its random alcohol tests at
the beginning of shifts and at
least 10% of random alcohol tests
at the end of shifts...............
(e)(1) Advance notification given to 2,500 5,000
employees selected for testing.....
(e)(2) Fail to begin collection 2,500 5,000
within two hours of notice of
random selection without an
acceptable reason for the delay....
(f) Failure to test a selection 2,500 5,000
without an FRA-acceptable reason...
(g)(1) Fail to immediately terminate 2,500 5,000
random collection due to hours of
service expiration.................
219.617 Participation in random alcohol
and drug testing:
(a)(1) Failure to test regulated 2,500 5,000
employee when properly selected for
random test........................
(a)(2) Failure to restrict regulated 2,500 5,000
employee from performing regulated
service prior to completion of
random testing.....................
(a)(3) Improperly excused without 2,500 5,000
substantiated medical emergency....
219.621 Use of Service Agents:
(g) Improper use a service agent to 2,500 5,000
notify a regulated employee that
they have been selected for random
testing............................
219.623 Records
(a) Failure of railroads to meet 2,500 5,000
recordkeeping requirements.........
(g) Failure of contractors and 2,500 5,000
service agents to provide required
random testing records when
requested by the contracting
railroad or FRA....................
219.625 FRA Administrator's
determination of random alcohol and
drug rates
(d) Failure to meet the required FRA 2,500 5,000
random testing rate for drugs......
(e) Failure to meet the required FRA 2,500 5,000
random testing rate for alcohol....
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart H--Drug and Alcohol Testing Procedures
------------------------------------------------------------------------
219.701 Standards for drug and alcohol
testing:
(a) Failure to comply with part 40 5,000 7,500
procedures in subpart B, D, E, F, G
and K testing......................
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart I--Annual Report
------------------------------------------------------------------------
219.800 Annual Reports:
(a) Failure to submit MIS report on 2,500 5,000
time...............................
(c) Failure to submit accurate MIS 2,500 5,000
report.............................
(d) Failure to include required data 2,500 5,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart J--Recordkeeping Requirements
------------------------------------------------------------------------
219.901 Retention of alcohol and drug
testing records:
[[Page 37948]]
(a) Failure to maintain records 2,500 5,000
required to be kept by part 40 of
this chapter.......................
(b) Failure to maintain records 2,500 5,000
required to be kept for five years.
(c) Failure to maintain records 2,500 5,000
required to be kept for two years..
219.903 Access to facilities and
records:
(a) Failure to release records in 2,500 5,000
this subpart in accordance with
part 40 of this chapter............
(b) Failure to permit access to 2,500 5,000
facilities.........................
(c) Failure to provide access to 2,500 5,000
results of railroad alcohol and
drug testing programs..............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subpart K--Referral Programs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
219.1001 Requirement for referral
programs:
(b)(1) Failure to adopt or implement 2,500 5,000
required self-referral program or
alternate program that meets the
requirements of this subpart.......
(b)(2) Failure to adopt or implement 2,500 5,000
required co-worker referral program
or alternate program that meets the
requirements of subpart K of this
part...............................
(d) Violation of referral program 2,500 5,000
prohibitions.......................
219.1003 Referral program conditions:
(a) Failure to comply with referral 2,500 5,000
program conditions.................
(b) Failure to maintain employment.. 2,500 5,000
(c) Failure to disqualify regulated 2,500 5,000
employee when referral conditions
not met............................
(d) Use of unqualified DAC.......... 2,500 5,000
(e) Allowing person evaluated as 2,500 5,000
having active substance abuse
disorder to perform regulated
service............................
(f) Breach of confidentiality 2,500 5,000
(g) Failure to allow recommended 2,500 5,000
leave of absence...................
(h)(1)-(3) Failure to meet return to 2,500 5,000
service conditions.................
(h)(4) Failure to return to service 2,500 5,000
when conditions met................
(i) Improper modification to 2,500 5,000
rehabilitation plan................
(l) Failure to complete DAC 2,500 5,000
evaluation within time limit.......
(m) Exceeding 24 month time limit on 2,500 5,000
aftercare when not associated with
a substantiated part 219 violation.
219.1007 Alternate programs:
(c) Failure to obtain FRA approval 2,500 5,000
of alternate program...............
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ A penalty may be assessed against an individual only for a willful
violation. The FRA Administrator reserves the right to assess a
penalty of up to $105,000 for any violation, including ones not listed
in this penalty schedule, where circumstances warrant. See 49 CFR part
209, appendix A.
\2\ The penalty schedule uses section numbers from 49 CFR part 219; and
if more than one item is listed as a type of violation of a given
section, each item is also designated by a ``penalty code,'' which is
used to facilitate assessment of civil penalties. For convenience,
penalty citations will cite the CFR section and the penalty code, if
any. FRA reserves the right, should litigation become necessary, to
substitute in its complaint the CFR citation in place of the combined
CFR and penalty code citation.
Issued in Washington, DC, on May 27, 2016.
Amitabha Bose,
Acting Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2016-13058 Filed 6-6-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-06-P