Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs, 56108-56151 [2020-16432]
Download as PDF
56108
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
42 CFR Chapter I
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs
Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration
(SAMHSA), HHS.
ACTION: Notification of mandatory
guidelines.
AGENCY:
The Department of Health and
Human Services (‘‘HHS’’ or
‘‘Department’’) is proposing to establish
scientific and technical guidelines for
the inclusion of hair specimens in the
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs
(Guidelines).
DATES: Submit comments on or before
November 9, 2020.
ADDRESSES: In commenting, please refer
to file code [SAMHSA–2020–0001].
Because of staff and resource
limitations, SAMHSA cannot accept
comments by facsimile (fax)
transmission.
You may submit comments in one of
four ways (please choose only one of the
ways listed):
•Electronically. You may submit
electronic comments on this regulation
to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow
‘‘Submit a comment’’ instructions.
•By regular mail. You may mail
written comments to the following
address: SAMHSA, Center for Substance
Abuse Prevention (CSAP), Division of
Workplace Programs (DWP), 5600
Fishers Lane, Room 16N02, Rockville,
MD 20857. Please allow sufficient time
for mailed comments to be received
before the close of the comment period.
•By express or overnight mail. You
may send written comments to the
following address: SAMHSA, CSAP,
DWP, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 16N02,
Rockville, MD 20857.
•By hand or courier. You may deliver
your written comments by hand or
courier to the following address prior to
the close of the comment period:
SAMHSA, CSAP, DWP, 5600 Fishers
Lane, Room 16N02, Rockville, MD
20857. If you intend to deliver your
comments to the Rockville address,
please call (240) 276–2600 in advance to
schedule your arrival with one of our
staff members. Because access to the
SAMHSA building is secure, persons
without federal government
identification are encouraged to
schedule their delivery or to leave
comments with the security guard at the
front desk located in the main lobby of
the building.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
All comments received before the
close of the comment period will be
available for viewing by the public.
Please note that all comments are posted
in their entirety, including personal or
confidential business information that is
included in the comment. SAMHSA
will post all comments before the close
of the comment period on the following
website: https://www.regulations.gov.
Use the website’s search function to
view the associated comments.
Comments received before the close of
the comment period will also be
available for public inspection as they
are received, generally beginning
approximately three weeks after
publication of a document, at SAMHSA,
CSAP, DWP, 5600 Fishers Lane,
Rockville, MD 20857, Monday through
Friday of each week, excluding federal
holidays, from 8:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. To
schedule an appointment to view public
comments, please call (240) 276–2600.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Eugene D. Hayes, Ph.D., MBA,
SAMHSA, CSAP, DWP; 5600 Fishers
Lane, Room 16N02, Rockville, MD
20857, by telephone (240) 276–1459 or
by email: Eugene.Hayes@
samhsa.hhs.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
This notice of proposed Mandatory
Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug
Testing Programs using Hair (HMG) will
allow federal executive branch agencies
to collect and test a hair specimen as
part of their drug testing programs with
the limitation that hair specimens be
used for pre-employment (i.e., for
applicants applying for federal testing
designated positions) and random
testing. A federal agency choosing to
test hair specimens must authorize
collection and testing of at least one
other specimen type (e.g., urine or oral
fluid) that is authorized under the
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs, and
provide procedures whereby the
alternate specimen is used in the event
that a donor is unable to provide a
sufficient amount of hair for faith-based
or medical reasons, or due to an
insufficient amount or length of hair.
The proposed HMG require collection of
an alternate authorized drug testing
specimen in addition to the hair
specimen, either simultaneously (i.e., at
the same collection event) or when
directed by the Medical Review Officer
(MRO) after review and verification of
laboratory-reported results for the hair
specimen. This alternate specimen
would be tested and reported in place
of a donor’s positive hair specimen only
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
in certain circumstances, as described
below.
These proposed HMG establish
standards and technical requirements
for hair collection and collection
materials, initial hair drug test analytes
and methods, confirmatory hair drug
test analytes and methods, processes for
review by an MRO, standards for
certification of laboratories engaged in
hair drug testing for federal agencies’
drug-free workplace programs, and
requirements for federal agency actions
that are covered by these Guidelines.
The HMG provide flexibility for federal
agency workplace drug testing programs
to address testing needs by allowing
hair as an alternative specimen type.
The Department of Health and Human
Services, pursuant to the Department’s
authority under Section 503 of Public
Law 100–71, 5 U.S.C. Section 7301, and
Executive Order No. 12564, establishes
the scientific and technical guidelines
for federal workplace drug testing
programs and establishes standards for
certification of laboratories engaged in
drug testing for federal agencies.
Summary of the Major Provisions of the
Proposed HMG
The promulgation of the HMG allows
federal agencies to collect and test hair
specimens in their workplace drug
testing programs. The collection process
provides that the specimen will be
collected by a trained collector under
direct observation. The HMG collection
procedure requires that a single hair
specimen be obtained from the donor’s
head and divided into two specimens (A
and B). The collector places the A and
B specimens into separate specimen
collection containers. Unlike the
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs using
Urine (UrMG), the HMG do not allow
Instrumented Initial Test Facilities
(IITFs), primarily because of the limited
amount of hair collected from the donor.
The Department is proposing that an
alternate authorized drug testing
specimen be collected (i.e.,
simultaneously collected or collected
and tested at the direction of the MRO
after verification of a positive hair test
result). As described in greater detail
below, this two-test approach is
intended to protect federal workers from
issues that have been identified as
limitations of hair testing, and related
legal deficiencies identified in Jones v.
City of Boston, 845 F.3d 28 (1st Cir.
2016) and Thompson v. Civil Service
Com’n, 90 Mass.App.Ct. 462 (Oct. 7,
2016). Both cases indicate that an
employment action taken on the basis of
a positive hair test alone, without other
corroborating evidence, may be
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
vulnerable to legal challenge. The
Department is specifically requesting
comments, including support from
recent peer-reviewed scientific
literature, on advances in the science of
hair testing that adequately address
these limitations and elucidate the
extent to which hair color, external
contamination and other factors (e.g.,
hair treatments, hygiene) will affect hair
tests and the interpretation of hair drug
test results. The Department will
continue to monitor the science of hair
testing and will carefully review peerreviewed literature and other valid
scientific information submitted by
federal agencies and the public for
scientific support of hair testing. Based
on this evaluation, the Department will
decide whether performance standards
can be established to mitigate identified
limitations and obviate the requirement
to collect an alternate authorized
specimen. The Department is also
soliciting public comment on the
potential added burden to federal
agencies and specimen donors should
an alternate specimen be necessary. As
noted under Executive Orders 13563
and 12866 in the Regulatory Impact and
Notices section of this Notice, the
Department does not find these
proposed mandatory guidelines to be a
significant burden for federal agencies
or incur a significant cost. In addition,
a federal agency is not required to adopt
hair testing in their Drug-free Workplace
Programs. However, comments provided
by the public on the subject of potential
added burden could be useful to federal
agencies deciding whether to test hair in
addition to other specimen types in
their federal workplace drug testing
programs.
In addition, the Department is
specifically requesting comments,
including support from the recent
scientific literature, on whether hair
tests that are positive for the marijuana
analyte, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol-9carboxylic acid (THCA), should be
excluded from the requirement to test
an alternate authorized specimen (i.e.,
MROs would report verified positive
THCA hair results to the federal
agency).
Costs and Benefits
Using data obtained from the Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs and
HHS-certified laboratories, the
Department estimates that 275,000 urine
specimens are tested annually by federal
agencies. HHS projects that
approximately 1% (or 2,750) of the
275,000 specimens tested per year will
be hair specimens and 89% (or 244,750)
will be urine specimens, with the
remaining approximately 10% being
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
oral fluid specimens (27,500). The
approximate annual numbers of
regulated specimens for the Department
of Transportation (DOT) and the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
are 6.1 million and 150,000,
respectively. It should be noted that the
NRC-related information in this notice
only pertains to individuals subject to
drug testing conducted pursuant to 10
CFR part 26, ‘‘Fitness for Duty
Programs’’ (i.e., employees of certain
NRC-regulated entities). Should DOT
and NRC allow hair testing in their
regulated workplace programs, the
estimated annual numbers of specimens
for DOT would be 50% (3,050,000) hair
specimens for pre-employment testing,
7% (427,000) oral fluid specimens, and
43% (2,623,000) urine specimens; and
numbers of specimens for NRC would
be 10% (15,000) hair, 7% (10,500) oral
fluid, and 83% (124,500) urine. These
projected numbers are based on existing
annual pre-employment testing in the
regulated industries and hair testing
currently conducted in the private
sector for commercial drivers.
An HHS-certified laboratory may
group analytes for initial testing as
shown in the table in Section 3.4 (i.e.,
use a single test for two or more analytes
that are in the same drug class and have
the same initial test cutoff), or may use
multiple tests. In Section 3.4, the
Department is proposing criteria for
calibrating initial tests for grouped
analytes and is specifying the minimum
cross-reactivity of the immunoassay to
the non-target analytes(s) within the
group (i.e., those not used for
calibration). An immunoassay
manufacturer may incur costs if they
choose to alter their existing product
and resubmit the immunoassay for Food
and Drug Administration (FDA)
clearance.
Costs associated with hair testing are
greater than for urine or oral fluid
testing based on information from
commercial laboratories currently
testing hair specimens. Costs of initial
testing will not pose a significant
increase for laboratories currently
testing hair if the laboratory can use
currently available immunoassay testing
kits cleared by the FDA for hair testing.
All confirmatory testing can be achieved
using commercially available
instrumentation. Prior to testing
regulated hair specimens, laboratories
must be specifically certified for hair
testing by the Department through the
National Laboratory Certification
Program (NLCP). Laboratories choosing
to apply for HHS certification may incur
additional costs associated with adding
the matrix and/or validating and
implementing assays using different
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
56109
cutoffs and analytes. The estimated
laboratory cost to complete and submit
a certification application is $3,000 and
the estimated cost for the Department to
process the application is $10,200. The
initial HHS hair testing certification
includes the requirement for the
laboratory to demonstrate that their
performance meets Guidelines
analytical requirements by testing three
(3) sets of performance testing (PT) hair
samples. The Department will provide
the three groups of PT samples through
the NLCP at no cost to laboratories
participating in the NLCP Pilot
Proficiency Testing Program for hair.
This pilot PT program is described in
the History and Proposed Changes to the
HHS Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs
section below. Based on estimated fees
charged for hair specimen testing,
laboratory costs to conduct the PT
testing would range from $3,000 to
$3,375 for each applicant laboratory.
Based on information from current
commercial hair testing laboratories,
once hair testing is implemented, the
average cost per specimen will range
from $40.00 to $45.00. Information from
current HHS-certified laboratories
indicates that the average cost of testing
a urine specimen ranges from
approximately $6.50 to $11.00 per
specimen. Once hair testing is
implemented, the estimated cost per
specimen for each initial test will range
from $2.50 to $6.00 including costs for
initial test reagents and sample
preparation (e.g., washing, digestion).
Estimated additional costs for each
confirmatory test will range from $20.00
to $35.00, primarily due to the costs of
sample preparation (including
decontamination procedures as defined
in Section 1.5) and analysis. Therefore,
the estimated cost of a commercial hair
testing laboratory using both initial
testing with confirmation will range
from $40.00 to $80.00 per specimen.
These costs for the laboratories or
federal agencies choosing to use hair in
their drug testing programs will be
incorporated into the overall testing cost
for the federal agency submitting the
specimen to the laboratory.
As described earlier, a federal agency
choosing to use hair for pre-employment
and/or random testing may collect an
alternate specimen type at the same
collection event or later, at the direction
of the MRO. Agencies choosing not to
collect an alternate specimen at the
same time as hair would save upfront
collection and handling costs, and
would pay for alternate specimen
collection and testing only when
directed by the MRO (i.e., when the
donor has no legitimate medical
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
56110
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
explanation for a positive hair test,
when the hair specimen was reported by
the laboratory as invalid or rejected, or
when the donor requests testing of the
split specimen and the split specimen
cannot be tested). A federal agency that
chooses to collect an alternate specimen
type at the same time as hair for a preemployment or random test would incur
additional upfront costs for collection
and handling of the alternate specimen,
but would only pay for testing of those
alternate specimens when directed by
the MRO, and would save time on
recollection in those instances. Agencies
choosing to use hair in their drug testing
programs may also incur some costs for
training of federal employees such as
drug program coordinators.
As explained in more detail below,
hair testing potentially offers several
benefits when compared to urine,
including directly observed collections,
ease of transport and storage, increased
specimen stability, and a longer window
of drug detection. The Department
believes these benefits justify pursuing
hair testing in federal workplace
programs.
Background
The Department of Health and Human
Services, pursuant to the Department’s
authority under Section 503 of Public
Law 100–71, 5 U.S.C. Section 7301, and
Executive Order No. 12564, establishes
the scientific and technical guidelines
for federal workplace drug testing
programs and establishes standards for
certification of laboratories engaged in
drug testing for federal agencies. As
required, HHS originally published the
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs
(Guidelines) in the Federal Register
[FR] on April 11, 1988 [53 FR 11979].
The Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration
(SAMHSA) subsequently revised the
Guidelines on June 9, 1994 [59 FR
29908], September 30, 1997 [62 FR
51118], November 13, 1998 [63 FR
63483], April 13, 2004 [69 FR 19644],
and November 25, 2008 [73 FR 71858].
SAMHSA published the revised
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs using
Urine (UrMG) on January 23, 2017 [82
FR 7920] and published the proposed
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs using
Oral Fluid (OFMG) on May 15, 2015 [80
FR 28054].
On December 4, 2015, the President
signed the Fixing America’s Surface
Transportation (FAST) Act, which
required HHS to ‘‘issue scientific and
technical guidance for hair testing as a
method of detecting the use of a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
controlled substance for purposes of
section 31306 of title 49, United States
Code.’’ Public Law 114–94, section
5402(b).
History and Proposed Changes to the
HHS Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs
A focus of the HHS mission is to
maintain the integrity and ensure the
quality of federal drug-free workplace
programs by a commitment to identify
and mandate the use of the most
accurate, reliable drug tests and testing
methods available. To accomplish these
goals, the Department implements
ongoing scientific reviews and program
collaboration with federal regulators,
researchers, drug testing laboratories,
and public and private sector
employers. As the use of alternative
specimens (other than urine) and new
analytical test technologies increased
over the previous years, the Department,
through SAMHSA’s Center for
Substance Abuse and Prevention
(CSAP) Drug Testing Advisory Board
(DTAB), responded by reviewing new
technologies and assessing drug testing
using other specimen types, such as oral
fluid (saliva), hair, and sweat for
possible use in federal agency
workplace testing programs.
The proposed HMG are the result of
a directed Departmental assessment that
began in 1997 with a 3-day scientific
meeting of the DTAB. During that public
meeting, DTAB members discussed drug
testing using alternative specimens and
the use of new and developing drug
testing technologies with potential
applicability to workplace drug testing
programs. Following the initial meeting,
members of the DTAB continued to
review and analyze all available
information on alternative specimens
and testing technologies. These efforts
identified specific scientific,
administrative, and procedural
requirements necessary for a
comprehensive federal workplace drug
testing program that included
alternative specimens and technologies.
The first working draft of new
Guidelines that included the testing of
alternative specimens including hair
was presented at the June 2000 DTAB
meeting. These ‘‘work-in-progress’’ draft
Guidelines were placed on the
SAMHSA website and the public was
invited to submit information and
comments to improve the draft
document and further SAMHSA’s
knowledge of the analysis of alternative
specimens. Twenty-eight separate
comments were received. Those
comments were summarized,
incorporated into the draft Guidelines
and the updated document was
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
presented at the DTAB meeting in
September 2000. Again, comments were
requested from all interested parties. At
the December 2000 DTAB meeting, a
third working draft of the Guidelines
was presented that included public
comments resulting from the September
meeting. SAMHSA, in consultation with
subject matter experts including
researchers and drug testing industry
professionals, continued to assess the
scientific supportability of testing
alternative specimens in the Drug-Free
Workplace Program (DFWP). Areas of
specimen collection, specimen validity,
initial testing, confirmation, medical
review, and performance testing were
examined to evaluate the integrity,
reliability, and defensibility of drug
testing using alternate matrices.
To assess laboratory performance and
utility of alternative specimen testing in
federal drug-free workplace programs,
the Department initiated a voluntary
pilot proficiency testing (PT) program
for hair. The Hair Pilot PT program ran
from 2000 to 2007 and resumed in 2014
based on DTAB’s recommendation. The
program was developed, and the
samples were prepared using
government funding. This pilot PT
program was established to determine if
it was possible to prepare stable and
accurate hair PT samples, and to
develop criteria for the PT program.
Participating laboratories used their
established procedures to test the PT
samples and shared their results with
SAMHSA. Based on data obtained from
the pilot PT program, it appeared that
valid and stable hair PT samples could
be prepared. The results of the pilot PT
program showed that the technology
used by participant laboratories for
confirmatory testing could meet
requirements for sensitivity and
specificity. Also, inter-laboratory
precision improved during the pilot PT
program for most drug analytes.
Based on the pilot PT results from
2000 to 2003 and input from subject
matter experts for all alternate matrices,
the Department issued a Federal
Register notice [69 FR 19673] on April
13, 2004 proposing inclusion of oral
fluid, hair, and sweat specimens in
federal workplace drug testing
programs. Following publication of the
proposed Guidelines, the public and
federal agencies identified significant
scientific, legal, and public policy
concerns about the use of the alternative
specimens. As a result of the review, the
Department issued a Final Notice of
Revisions to the Mandatory Guidelines
for Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs on November 25, 2008 [73 FR
71858] that concluded the scientific,
technical, and legal information for the
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
testing of alternative specimens (oral
fluid, hair, and sweat) was insufficient
to include these specimens in the
federal programs at that time. As noted
above, the purposes of the Hair Pilot PT
Program were to determine if it was
possible to prepare stable and accurate
hair PT samples, and to develop criteria
for the PT program. Many of the issues
raised by commenters (e.g., concerns
over external contamination) were not
addressed in the pilot PT program. The
Department committed to monitoring
developments in alternative specimen
testing and has continued to do so since
2008.
The complexity of responses to the
2004 notice made it clear that if the
Department were to subsequently
authorize alternative specimens for the
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs, each
specimen matrix would need a separate
set of Guidelines. Additionally, the
Department proposed to stagger the
timeline for the review and potential
incorporation of alternative specimens,
and to begin with oral fluid. The
decision to begin with oral fluid was
supported by fewer legal and policy
concerns, and current peer-reviewed
literature that existed with oral fluid.
The Department published the proposed
OFMG on May 15, 2015 [80 FR 28054].
Since 2004, methodology developed
for non-regulated private sector
workplace alternate matrix testing has
evolved, leading to enhanced analytical
sensitivity and specificity for hair
testing. The scientific literature for hair
testing and interpretation of results has
grown. Many non-regulated private
sector organizations have incorporated
hair testing into their workplace drug
testing programs.
At the open session of the January
2012 DTAB meeting, SAMHSA shared
updated information on hair testing
with DTAB and the public. During the
meeting, experts made scientific
presentations concerning hair
specimens for workplace drug testing,
including physiological composition of
hair, tested drugs and cutoffs, wash
procedures, decontamination
procedures, hair testing results and best
practices in laboratory methodologies
(initial and confirmatory testing). Wash
procedures consisted of a rinse with
organic solvents to remove oils and
residue on the hair prior to initial
testing. Decontamination procedures
were more extensive methods (e.g.,
multiple organic and aqueous washes)
designed to remove drug present due to
environmental contamination prior to
confirmatory testing.
In May 2015, SAMHSA solicited
comments regarding the science and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
practice of hair testing via a Request for
Information (RFI) [80 FR 30689], and
subsequently extended the due date for
comments [80 FR 34921]. The notice
requested comments from the public
and industry stakeholders regarding a
variety of hair testing issues (e.g.,
specimens, collection, specimen
preparation, analytes/cutoffs, specimen
validity, and testing methods). The RFI
gave the public and industry
stakeholders an opportunity to provide
information and comments for
consideration during the development
of the proposed Guidelines for hair
testing. The Department received 37
comments from drug testing
laboratories, MROs, manufacturers, drug
testing industry associations, and the
public. All submitted comments were
reviewed and were presented to the
DTAB members for consideration
during SAMHSA’s continuing
assessment of hair as an alternative
specimen.
Following the August 2015 meeting of
the DTAB, the Board submitted the
following recommendation to SAMHSA:
‘‘Based on the review of the science,
DTAB recommends that SAMHSA
pursue hair as an alternative specimen
in the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs,
including performance standards that
sufficiently address external
contamination and hair color impact.’’
Thereafter, SAMHSA continued to
critically review the state-of-the-science
and technology for forensic drug testing
of hair and the utility of hair as a
specimen in federal workplace drug
testing programs. SAMHSA also
consulted subject matter experts with
expertise in biochemistry, toxicology,
laboratory operations, MRO practices
and workplace policy. The input of
these experts was considered along with
Department officials at quarterly DTAB
meetings.
Rationale for Pursuing Hair Testing in
the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs
Hair has been used in non-regulated
testing programs including the
transportation and casino industries
(i.e., for pre-employment and random
testing), and other situations when
longer detection periods may be needed.
Corresponding developments have led
to analytical technologies that provide
the needed sensitivity and accuracy for
testing hair specimens at the levels
required to determine a positive test
result, as demonstrated in the Hair Pilot
PT Program.
Hair and urine pre-employment test
results have been shown to be
somewhat dissimilar because each
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
56111
matrix has a different time window of
drug detection. Typically, positivity
rates are higher in hair due to hair’s
longer window of detection.1 Hair is
easily collected, transported and stored,
and is also more difficult to substitute
and/or adulterate than urine since
collections are performed under direct
observation. Separation, detection, and
identification techniques have improved
such that scientists are now able to
detect and quantify drugs and/or
metabolites in hair at picogram per
milligram (pg/mg) concentrations. A
forensic workplace testing program for
hair can be modeled after the existing
federal program: Specimens are first
tested using an initial test (e.g.,
immunoassay or an alternate
technology), and specimens with
positive initial test results are confirmed
using mass spectrometric identification.
What is hair?
Unlike urine and oral fluid, hair is a
solid, heterogenous matrix that is
exposed to the environment. Hair color
and structure differ by individual and
within the same individual. Hair
consists of a hair follicle and hair shaft.
At the base of the follicle (bulb) are
highly vascularized matrix cells. As
matrix cells in the dermis of the skin
move outward during growth, they form
layers of a hair shaft that include the
outer protectant cuticle, central cortex
and inner medulla. Hair grows in three
stages: About 85 percent of hair follicles
in the posterior vertex region of the
head are in active growth phase
(anagen), while the others are in a
transition phase (catagen) before the
resting phase (telogen). At the vertex
region of the scalp, the average growth
rate of hair is about 0.4 millimeters per
day or approximately 1 centimeter per
month.2–5 The Department is proposing
to permit agencies as part of their
federal drug-free workplace programs to
test head hair specimens between 0.5
and 1.0 inches (approximately 2.5 cm)
long, representing a detection time
period of approximately 30–60 days, for
pre-employment and random testing.
What is the mechanism of drug
disposition in hair?
Drugs and drug metabolites may be
incorporated into hair by several
pathways.6–10 As drugs and their
metabolites travel through the body in
blood, they diffuse from the
bloodstream into the base of the hair
follicle. The amount of drug in the hair
is related to the drug concentration in
the blood when the hair was formed and
depends on the chemical structure of
the drug or metabolite. Drugs and/or
metabolites may also be incorporated
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
56112
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
into hair via secretions of the sweat
glands and sebaceous glands, which are
in close contact with hair as it develops
and emerges from the skin. Sweat and
sebum can deposit drugs and/or
metabolites on the hair shaft that are
absorbed into the hair during and after
its formation. As hair grows and
emerges from the skin, the location of
drug and metabolite in the hair shaft can
be used to generally assess the
timeframe of drug use. However, sweat
can contribute to drug and/or metabolite
incorporation across the entire length of
the hair. Therefore, segmental analysis
(i.e., analysis of multiple short
longitudinal segments to determine a
time profile of use) must be done with
caution and is not recommended for
workplace drug testing. 6–10
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
What are some of the known issues with
drug testing using hair?
Numerous factors influence the
amount of drug incorporated into hair
(e.g., drug dose, length of exposure,
physical and chemical properties of
hair, and factors associated with the
chemical structure of the drug). Of
concern are environmental
contamination, the impact of natural
hair color on drug incorporation, and
the effects of hygiene and cosmetic hair
treatments. These issues may confound
the results and interpretation of hair
tests as explained in more detail below.
Environmental Contamination and
Decontamination
Concerns have been raised over
environmental contamination of
hair.2 4 11–15 There can be opportunities
for hair to be contaminated from drugs
in the environment.14 For example, a
donor may claim they tested positive for
a drug because they were in the
presence of others using the drug, or
were in an environment in which drug
particulates were in the air or on
contaminated surfaces.
Effective decontamination procedures
are a key issue in hair testing, because
the inability to rule out external
contamination presents legal challenges.
In one relevant case, a state court
upheld a state commission’s finding that
hair testing did not adequately rule out
the possibility of a false positive drug
test resulting from external
contamination such that an employer
could rely on hair testing as the sole
basis for an employee’s termination. See
Thompson v. Civil Service Com’n, 90
Mass.App.Ct. 462 (Oct. 7, 2016).
Notably, the court in Thompson v. Civil
Service Com’n stated the following
regarding the reliability of hair testing:
A threshold issue before the commission
was the scientific reliability of the hair
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
testing, and its ability to distinguish between
voluntary ingestion and environmental
exposure. The ten officers and the
department held competing views as to
whether the testing alone was reliable
enough to establish just cause supporting the
officers’ terminations . . . . Ultimately, the
commission found that the hair testing
methodology was not sufficiently reliable to
be the sole basis for an officer’s termination,
concluding that ‘‘[a] reported positive test
result . . . is not necessarily conclusive of
ingestion and, depending on the
preponderance of evidence in a particular
case, may or may not justify termination or
other appropriate discipline of a tenured
[department] officer.’’ Nonetheless, the
commission found that hair testing is an
appropriate tool to enforce the department’s
substance abuse policy and that hair test
results could be used as some evidence of
drug use.
Id. at 465—466 (internal citations
omitted) (emphasis added). The
Thompson court also stated that:
Here, after an exhaustive inquiry on the
scientific reliability of the . . . hair testing
methodology, the commission reached the
conclusion that a positive test was not
conclusive on the question of voluntary
ingestion, as the positive test may also
represent sample contamination by
environmental exposure. In other words, the
commission found that the risk of a false
positive test was great enough to require
additional evidence to terminate an officer
for just cause. That conclusion is well
supported by the record, which includes
evidence of shifting cutoff levels through the
years since the testing had been
implemented, a lack of general acceptance in
the scientific and law enforcement
communities, and a lack of universally
recognized industry standards.
Id. at 467—468. The Thompson court
went on to hold that, ‘‘the evidence
amply supported the commission
decision.’’ Id. at 470.
Many laboratories use wash
procedures to remove oils and residue
on the hair prior to initial testing.
Approximately 90% of specimens are
negative upon initial testing, and are
subsequently reported negative.16
Depending upon the analyte, external
contamination is of the most concern for
the remaining 10% of hair specimens
submitted for confirmation testing.
Therefore, some laboratories use
decontamination procedures designed
to remove drug present due to
environmental contamination prior to
performing confirmatory testing.
Decontamination procedures that
adequately remove externally deposited
drug and drug metabolites prior to
confirmation testing are the subject of
much scientific inquiry. It is likely that
hair from individuals who use drugs is
also externally contaminated.6 17 In
other words, drugs and some drug
metabolites (e.g., benzoylecgonine)
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
detected during testing of a drug user’s
hair can be from drug ingestion and/or
external contamination. This is mainly
because of drug users’ exposure to drugs
in their environment as well as drugs
and/or metabolites in the individual’s
own sweat and sebum coming into
contact with their hair.
A variety of decontamination
procedures have been reported in the
literature with varying
effectiveness.11–13 Decontamination
procedures employing multiple washes
with analysis of the final wash solution
may be a useful tool to identify external
contamination.11 12 15 However, it has
been shown that some externally
deposited drug may remain, even after
extensive washing.11 To address this
issue, some laboratories have developed
procedures employing a wash ‘‘factor’’
for some drugs (e.g., cocaine), whereby
the concentration of the final wash
solution is multiplied by a factor to
simulate the effect of additional washes
and the product is subtracted from the
concentration of the drug measured in
the hair.12 The factor used in these
calculations varies and is dependent
upon the drug and the laboratory. For
some drugs (e.g., cocaine), the factor
alone was not found to be effective at
discriminating external contamination
from drug use, so laboratories have
employed additional criteria (e.g.,
presence of multiple metabolites,
metabolite to parent drug ratios).12 One
study proposed using a wash-to-hair
concentration ratio to designate results
as either indicative of drug use,
indicative of drug use in combination
with external contamination or
indicative that the source of the drug
was external contamination and
inconclusive as to drug use.15 In that
study, 11% of all test results had ratios
indicative of external contamination
and inconclusive for drug use. While
the use of wash factors or ratios has
shown promise in mitigating the effect
of external contamination on hair drug
testing, the Department is not proposing
that such procedures be used in federal
agency testing programs, in part because
of the difficulty in development of
performance testing samples to assess
their effectiveness in the certified
laboratories.
Laboratories that have researched the
validity and efficacy of decontamination
procedures recommend utilizing
aqueous and organic solvents in these
decontamination procedures.11 Both the
Society of Hair Testing and United
Nations Office of Drugs and Crime
recommend a hair decontamination
procedure that includes both an organic
and aqueous washing step, whereas the
European Workplace Drug Testing
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Society recommends an organic and/or
aqueous wash. The proposed inclusion
of both organic and aqueous solvent
wash steps is in accordance with
current peer reviewed literature. As
opposed to requiring a single method for
decontamination to be used by all
testing laboratories, SAMHSA proposes
that minimum performance standards
be established for the efficacy of
decontamination procedures that are
followed in all HHS-certified hair drug
testing laboratories.
However, although there is scientific
evidence that suggests that wash and
decontamination procedures may be
effective in ensuring that the outer
protectant cuticle and inner medulla
portions of the hair shaft are
decontaminated, there are no published
studies that prove that external
contamination cannot reach the central
cortex of the hair. Further, one
published study concludes that drugcontaminated hair when washed with
water and methanol is indistinguishable
from drug user hair because the drug
migrates into the cortex and medulla
due to swelling effects of these
solvents.13 If this issue is not addressed,
a donor may claim that, even if hair is
washed and decontaminated in
accordance with the most vigorous
washing methodologies utilized by
laboratories, a hair test result could
remain influenced by contamination
and potentially result in a false positive
test. Therefore, more time and research
are needed for the development of
performance standards that address this
and other issues. The Department is
currently in the process of developing
performance standards for
decontamination of hair and is seeking
public comment on what such standards
should be and how performance test
samples could be developed to assess
these standards. When the
decontamination performance standards
are fully developed, it is the
Department’s intention to add them to
the HMG through the notice and
comment process rather than delay
publishing of the proposed HMG until
such standards are developed.
Compliance with these mandatory
minimum standards, when fully
developed and included in these
Guidelines, will be evaluated through
the NLCP Performance Testing (PT)
program.
After relevant performance testing
standards are developed, the HMG
require laboratories to perform a valid
and effective decontamination
procedure prior to confirmatory drug
testing in order to address the external
contamination issue. The Department is
requesting comments and information
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
about decontamination procedures that
remove drug present as a result of
external contamination. All
decontamination and test methods must
meet the validation, quality control, and
review requirements specified by the
HMG. Furthermore, the NLCP
Performance Testing (PT) program
would challenge those methods using
drug user hair, hair contaminated with
drug analytes, hair subjected to cosmetic
treatments, and blind quality controls.
The laboratories will also be required to
prepare decontamination controls that
challenge their decontamination
procedures and are analyzed with each
confirmatory drug analysis. The
Department is specifically requesting
comments on the types of samples to be
included in the hair PT program and
procedures used to prepare
decontamination controls.
Identification of Unique Metabolites
Identification of a unique drug
metabolite would distinguish drug use
from environmental contamination as
long as strict criteria for defining a
unique metabolite are established.11 The
proposed HMG define a unique
metabolite as ‘‘a drug metabolite present
in a hair specimen only as a result of
biotransformation following drug use’’
and which ‘‘does not occur as a
contaminant in licit and illicit drug
products and is not produced from the
drug as an artifact.’’
To date, only one unique metabolite
(i.e., THCA) meets the above definition
and has been included for the proposed
drugs. However, while the use of a
unique metabolite addresses the
external contamination issue, the
Department is not aware of any
controlled dosing studies that
demonstrate the lack of a hair color
impact on THCA results. See additional
discussion on the impact of hair color
on hair test results below. Accordingly,
the Department is requesting comments
including support from the scientific
literature on whether THCA positive
hair tests can be excluded from the
requirement to test an alternate
authorized specimen (i.e., MROs would
report verified positive THCA hair
results to the federal agency).
The Department is also requesting
information including, at a minimum,
support from the scientific literature
about unique metabolites that can be
analyzed on a stand-alone basis for the
other proposed drugs listed in Section
3.4. For example, one recent study
analyzing opioids in hair indicates that
unique glucuronide metabolites of
opioid drugs may be reliably detected in
hair.18 In addition, although
hydroxylated metabolites of cocaine and
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
56113
benzoylecgonine do not meet the
Guidelines definition of a unique
metabolite for hair, these analytes have
been touted in the literature as being
diagnostic of cocaine use when ratio
criteria are applied to the quantitative
results.12 19–22 Hydroxy-metabolites of
cocaine were originally thought to be
unique metabolites as defined in the
HMG, until these compounds were
identified in street cocaine samples and
found to be produced during hair
treatment experiments.21 22 More
recently, hydroxy-metabolites of
benzoylecgonine were identified in hair
and thought to represent a new
opportunity to reliably identify cocaine
use.19–21 However, these analytes also
have been detected in a limited study of
street cocaine samples, and were found
to form and increase in concentration
over a period of eight weeks after
contamination of seven subjects’ hair
with cocaine.20 To compensate for these
issues, researchers have proposed the
use of ratios and criteria schemes (i.e.,
detection of multiple metabolites at or
above proposed cutoff concentrations
and within certain ratios to each
other).20 21 These schemes require the
analysis of cocaine and multiple
hydroxylated metabolites to be effective,
thereby increasing the costs of testing
and the NLCP performance testing used
to monitor the accuracy and reliability
of laboratory results.
Impact of Hair Color on Hair Test
Results
The natural color of human hair
ranges from shades of black, brown, red,
yellow, gray and white. Hair color is
controlled, in part, by the biochemistry
of two major groups of melanin
pigments. The eumelanins are black to
brown and the pheomelanins are
reddish in color.23 The presence of
eumelanin appears to be the major
determinant of drug binding and
incorporation of drug into the hair shaft.
One of the postulated mechanisms for
drug uptake in hair is ionic binding of
drugs containing basic nitrogen moieties
in their molecular structure (e.g.,
amphetamines, cocaine, opioids, and
phencyclidine) with melanins.24
Neutral and acidic drugs appear to bind
to hair by other poorly understood
means. Direct evidence of binding of
various drugs with melanin and with
human hair has been demonstrated.25–27
In one in vitro study, cocaine binding
experiments with black, brown, and
blonde human hair demonstrated up to
34-fold differences in cocaine binding
with dark hair as compared to blonde
hair.26 These findings have raised
concerns that selective drug binding
with the wide variation of color
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
56114
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
pigments distributed amongst the
population may introduce bias in drug
test results.
A number of laboratory animal
studies indicate that some drugs are
differentially incorporated into hair
based on color. Following
administration of the same dose, higher
drug concentrations were demonstrated
in dark hair versus light hair in animals
administered amphetamine,28
methamphetamine,29 methadone,30 and
phencyclidine.31 Several controlled
dosing studies in humans are consistent
with the findings in animals.
In one human study, administration
of the same dose of isotopically labeled
cocaine to Caucasians (hair color
primarily brown) and non-Caucasians
(hair color primarily black) resulted in
approximately 2.7 times more cocaine
being incorporated into non-Caucasian
hair than Caucasian hair.32 In another
study, codeine was administered to
male and female participants with black
(Caucasians, non-Caucasian, American
Indian, Hispanic, Asian), brown
(Caucasians), blond (Caucasians) and
red hair (Caucasians).33 Codeine
concentrations in black hair were sevenfold higher than those in brown hair and
14–15-fold higher than those in blond
hair. Using the proposed confirmatory
cutoff of 200 pg/mg, 100% of subjects
with black hair and 50% subjects with
brown hair in this study would have
been reported as positive. In contrast,
subjects with blond or red hair would
have tested negative. The authors
suggested a direct relationship between
codeine concentration and melanin
concentration in hair. In another study
of codeine administration to
participants with different hair colors, a
strong correlation was observed between
codeine concentrations in hair and
melanin concentrations.34
Some of these investigators
conducting controlled drug dosing
studies measured melanin pigments as
well as the amount of drug
incorporation in hair and suggested that
normalization of drug concentration to
pigment content would effectively
reduce potential bias in test results.33 34
However, it remains unclear how the
effect of pigmentation differences on
drug amount in hair translates to a
broader population as a whole, given
the many other sources of variability
(e.g., individual differences in amount
and frequency of drug use and rates of
drug metabolism and disposition).
Epidemiology studies have suggested no
significant hair color impact exists for
THCA,35 heroin, cocaine, and
amphetamines.36 The THCA result is
consistent with studies of other acidic
and neutral drugs and metabolites in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
hair. However, the Department is
unaware of any controlled dosing
studies that evaluated THCA in hair and
therefore without this objective data the
question of whether THCA exhibits a
hair color impact remains. As noted
earlier, the Department is requesting
comments including support from the
recent scientific literature on whether
THCA positive hair tests should be
excluded from the requirement to test
an alternate authorized specimen (i.e.,
MROs would report verified positive
THCA hair results to the federal
agency). It is unknown for the other
drugs whether the absence of an
objective and scientific measure of hair
color and differences in how hair color
was categorized between these
epidemiological and controlled human
dosing studies played a role in the lack
of concordance in results. Another
study found that black arrestees tested
positive for cocaine more often than
white arrestees in both urine and hair.37
The authors suggested that, given the
consistency between self-reported
cocaine use and test outcome, there was
no bias in the hair or urine tests based
on racial group. A recent prepublication
article by researchers from the
University of Arkansas was provided to
the Department for review. Similar to
the Mieczkowski studies referenced
above, the article attempts to consider
hair pigmentation difference by dividing
donors into ethnic groups and
comparing urine and hair specimen
testing results. The authors suggest that
ethnic groups are significantly different
irrespective of testing procedure. As
noted, the Department wishes to solicit
feedback on scientific studies
comparing drug results and hair color
and results comparing urine to hair.
In addition, in vitro binding studies,
animal studies, and controlled human
dosing studies for certain drug classes
(i.e., amphetamines, cocaine, opioids,
and phencyclidine) provide scientific
evidence that melanin pigments may
influence the amount of drug
incorporated into hair. However, it is
unclear whether this influence would
lead to significant bias in different
populations of workers undergoing drug
tests, given variabilities described
herein, that could be introduced into
test results from other sources and
within the time frame of 30–60 days
based on a 0.5 to 1.0 inch hair test. The
Department is requesting information,
including support from the recent
scientific literature to address the
impact of hair color on drug test results.
The hair color impact/bias issue also
presents legal challenges. It should be
highlighted in this regard that the
United States Court of Appeals for the
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
First Circuit found that certain AfricanAmerican police officers who were
terminated from their positions on the
basis of hair testing results were able to
prove a ‘‘prima facie case of disparate
impact under Title VII.’’ See Jones v.
City of Boston, 752 F.3d 38, 60 (1st Cir.
2014).) The First Circuit reiterated this
finding in a subsequent 2016 proceeding
and remanded the matter to the district
court for further proceedings on the
remaining prongs of the disparate
impact analysis. See Jones v. City of
Boston, 845 F.3d 28 (1st Cir. 2016). The
First Circuit held that:
[t]he record contains sufficient evidence
from which a reasonable factfinder could
conclude that hair testing plus a follow-up
series of random urinalysis tests for those few
officers who tested positive on the hair test
would have been as accurate as the hair test
alone at detecting the non-presence of
cocaine metabolites while simultaneously
yielding a smaller share of false positives in
a manner that would have reduced the
disparate impact of the hair test. We also
think that, on the present record, a
reasonable factfinder could conclude that the
[Boston Police] Department in 2003 refused
to adopt this alternative.
Jones v. City of Boston, 845 F.3d 28, 38
(1st Cir. 2016).
Thus, the First Circuit characterized
‘‘a follow-up series of random urinalysis
tests’’ for officers who tested positive
using hair as being just ‘‘as accurate as
the hair test alone at detecting the nonpresence of cocaine metabolites while
simultaneously yielding a smaller share
of false positives in a manner that
would have reduced the disparate
impact of the hair test.’’ Id. Accordingly,
the Department is proposing to include
testing using an alternate specimen
when directed by the MRO for
individuals who test positive on a hair
test, unless the donor has a legitimate
medical explanation for the positive test
or the MRO has corroborating evidence
to support the positive hair test (i.e.,
donor admission of illicit drug use). In
addition, testing of an alternative matrix
could also prove to be an effective
measure to mitigate the external
contamination issue because it would
supply additional evidence to support
an adverse action when premised on a
positive drug test, which the Thompson
court found to be needed when hair
specimens are used for drug testing. As
noted earlier, the Department is
specifically requesting comments,
including support from recent peerreviewed scientific literature, on
advances in the science of hair testing
that may mitigate the requirement for an
alternate authorized specimen in place
of a donor’s positive hair specimen in
certain circumstances. The Department
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
is also seeking comments from the
public on the potential for added
burden should the alternate specimen
requirement be necessary. Specifically,
the Department is soliciting comments
on potential burden that this approach
could place on the federal agency
employers and specimen donors.
Information from the public could be
useful to federal agencies evaluating
hair testing as compared to using urine
or oral fluid testing in their workplace
drug testing programs.
Effects of Cosmetic Hair Treatments
Hair treatments such as bleaching,
straightening, relaxing, frequent
washing, and vigorous brushing may; (1)
decrease the hair concentrations of
incorporated drug, (2) have effects that
are drug, metabolite, target marker and
profile dependent, and (3) because of
the physical and chemical damage
caused by these processes, they may
increase the susceptibility of the hair to
environmental contamination.38–42 The
Department is proposing that each
laboratory have a scientifically validated
method to identify hair that has been
damaged to the extent a drug test may
be affected. One method for
identification of damaged or porous hair
has been published in the scientific
literature but further information on this
topic is needed.43 Therefore, the
Department is requesting information
including, at a minimum, support from
the scientific literature to address these
issues. Examples of requested
information might include published
scientific studies, internal laboratory
study procedures or protocols, or
reviews conducted by outside
stakeholders to identify damaged hair.
The Department is also requesting
comments on whether this testing
should be performed routinely on all
specimens, or only on certain specimens
(e.g., based on initial test results). The
Department is also seeking comment on
the extent to which (based upon
scientific studies) hair specimens can be
impacted by hair treatments and
whether such specimens should be
reported as invalid and an alternate
specimen be collected and tested.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Rationale for Hair for Pre-Employment
and Random Testing
The Department is proposing the use
of hair for pre-employment and random
drug testing. Because drugs/metabolites
are not detected in hair for 5 to 7 days
after ingestion, it is not an appropriate
specimen to detect recent use. Thus,
hair is not an appropriate specimen for
post-accident and reasonable suspicion
testing. The Department is requesting
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
56115
comments on whether hair may be used
for follow-up or return to duty testing.
laboratory certification, suspension or
revocation.
How were analytes and cutoffs selected?
The selection of analytes for testing
was based on known drug disposition
patterns in hair. Analytes for the
regulated drugs tested in hair are
marijuana metabolite (delta-9tetrahydrocannabinol-9-carboxylic acid,
THCA), cocaine (parent drug and
metabolite, benzoylecgonine),
phencyclidine (PCP), opioids (codeine,
morphine, hydrocodone,
hydromorphone, oxycodone,
oxymorphone), heroin metabolite (6acetylmorphine, 6–AM), and
amphetamines (amphetamine,
methamphetamine,
methylenedioxymethamphetamine
[MDMA], and
methylenedioxyamphetamine [MDA]).
Cutoffs were based on those proposed
by the Department in 2004 (69 FR
19673). The Department has added the
same prescription opioids (i.e.,
hydrocodone, hydromorphone,
oxycodone, and oxymorphone)
specified in the UrMG and OFMG, with
the same hair cutoffs as proposed for
codeine and morphine. The codeine and
morphine cutoffs are consistent with
those recommended by the European
Workplace Drug Testing Society and the
Society of Hair Testing.44 45
Organization of Proposed Guidelines
This preamble describes the
differences between the UrMG and the
proposed HMG. In addition, it provides
the rationale for the differences between
the two Guidelines. The preamble also
presents a number of issues raised
during the development of the HMG.
These issues are presented first in
summary form as they appear in the
proposed HMG and second as issues for
which the Department is seeking
specific public comment.
References to Instrumented Initial
Test Facilities (IITFs) have been
removed in multiple sections, because
IITFs are not practical for hair testing
and will not be allowed to test hair
specimens (see discussion under
Subpart L, section 12.1 below).
Will there be specimen validity tests for
hair?
The Department is not aware of any
objective methods in use to assess hair
specimen validity (e.g., to distinguish
synthetic from human hair or to identify
hair that has been damaged to the extent
a drug test result may be affected). As
noted earlier, the Department is
proposing that each laboratory use a
validated method to identify damaged
hair; therefore, the Department is
seeking information on such methods
and comments on whether all or only
certain hair specimens should be
subjected to such testing. The
Department is also seeking comments
on whether other validity testing is
necessary for hair and, if so, what tests
could be used.
National Laboratory Certification
Program (NLCP)
The functions of the National
Laboratory Certification Program
include maintaining laboratory
inspection and PT programs as
described in these Guidelines. Activities
within these functions also include, but
are not limited to, reviewing inspection
reports and PT results, preparing
summary reports of inspection and PT
results, and making decisions regarding
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Subpart A—Applicability
Section 1.1 contains the same policies
as described in the UrMG regarding who
is covered by the Guidelines, except that
instrumented initial test facilities will
not be allowed to test hair specimens.
Sections 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4 contain the
same policies as described in the UrMG
regarding who is responsible for the
development and implementation of the
Guidelines, how a federal agency
requests a change from these
Guidelines, and how these Guidelines
are revised.
In Section 1.5, where terms are
defined, the Department proposes to
add terms that apply specifically to hair
(e.g., artificial hair, false hair, wash
procedures, decontamination, unique
metabolite).
Section 1.6 contains the same policies
as described in the UrMG regarding
what an agency is required to do to
protect federal applicant and employee
records.
Section 1.7 contains the conditions
that constitute a refusal to take a
federally regulated drug test. The
Department has removed UrMG items
that are not applicable to hair (e.g.,
situations involving observed or
monitored urine collections) and is
proposing conditions specific to hair.
For example, in the event a donor is
unable to provide a sufficient amount of
hair for faith-based or medical reasons,
or due to an insufficient amount or
length of hair, the federal agency would
be required to collect another
authorized specimen type (e.g., urine,
oral fluid). In addition, the Department
is proposing in Section 8.4 that the
collector ask the donor whether the
donor is wearing false hair (i.e., artificial
or natural hair that is not the donor’s
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
56116
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
own such as a wig, weave, or
extensions). If the donor states that they
are wearing false hair, or the collector
otherwise identifies its presence, this
does not constitute a refusal to test. If
the collector can collect a sufficient
amount of the donor’s own hair, the
collector will proceed with the hair test.
If the donor is unable to provide a
sufficient amount of hair because of the
false hair or for faith-based or medical
reasons, or due to an insufficient
amount or length of hair, the collector
will collect an alternate authorized
specimen.
Section 1.8 contains the same policies
as described in the UrMG with regard to
the consequences of a refusal to take a
federally regulated drug test.
Subpart B—Hair Specimen
In section 2.1, the Department
proposes to expand the drug testing
program for federal agencies to permit
the use of hair specimens. There is no
requirement for federal agencies to use
hair as part of their program. A federal
agency may choose to use urine, oral
fluid, hair, or any combination of
authorized specimen types in their drug
testing program. However, any agency
choosing to use hair is required to
follow the HMG. For example, for preemployment or random drug tests, an
agency program can randomly assign
individuals for urine, oral fluid, or hair
collection. The Department is proposing
to allow federal agencies the option to
collect an alternate authorized specimen
(e.g., urine, oral fluid) either: (1) At the
same time as the hair specimen or (2) at
the direction of the MRO, following
verification of a hair test as positive or
invalid, or when the laboratory rejected
the hair specimen. Under both options,
the MRO would direct testing of the
alternate specimen after completing the
review and verification of the hair test
results. Under these procedures, MROs
would only be authorized to report a
positive result for a hair test when the
donor admits illicit use of the drug(s)
that caused the positive test. To be clear,
the results of a positive hair test cannot
be reported to a federal agency without
this corroborating evidence to support
the positive test result. This hair testing
approach best addresses the current
disparate impact and external
contamination legal issues discussed in
the Jones v. City of Boston and
Thompson v. Civil Service Com’n. cases.
As noted earlier, the Department is
specifically requesting comments
including support from the scientific
literature on advances in the science of
hair testing that address these issues
and obviate the need for the alternate
specimen collection, as well as whether
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
THCA should be excluded from this
requirement (i.e., MROs would report
verified positive THCA hair results to
the federal agency). In the event a donor
was unable to provide a sufficient
amount of head hair for faith-based or
medical reasons, or due to an
insufficient amount or length of hair,
the federal agency would be required to
collect an alternate authorized
specimen.
Section 2.2 describes the
circumstances under which a hair
specimen may be collected. The
Department proposes that hair tests be
used in the pre-employment and
random drug testing contexts only.
Because drug analytes do not appear in
hair for 5–7 days after use, hair is not
an appropriate specimen to detect
recent use. The Department is proposing
to allow hair testing for pre-employment
and random testing, and is requesting
comments on whether hair may be used
for follow-up or return to duty testing.
In addition, due to different growth
rates and drug detection windows based
on the location of hair on the body, as
well as privacy concerns, the
Department is proposing to limit
collection to head hair only and require
federal agencies to authorize another
specimen type for collection when head
hair cannot be collected.
Section 2.3 describes how each hair
specimen is collected for testing. This
section is consistent with the
established requirement for all
specimens to be collected as a split
specimen. The Department proposes
that the collector subdivide the
collected hair specimen into the
primary (A) and split (B) specimens.
Section 2.4 establishes the amount of
hair that must be collected for each
specimen.
Section 2.5 describes how a hair
specimen is split.
Section 2.6 includes the same
requirement as the UrMG, that all
entities and individuals identified in
Section 1.1 of these Guidelines are
prohibited from releasing specimens
collected under the federal workplace
drug testing program to any individual
or entity unless expressly authorized by
these Guidelines or in accordance with
applicable federal law.
While the HMG do not authorize the
release of specimens, or portions
thereof, to donors, the Guidelines afford
donors a variety of protections that
ensure the identity, security and
integrity of their specimens from the
time of collection through final
disposition of the specimen. There are
also procedures that allow donors to
request the retesting of their specimen
(for drugs or adulteration) at a different
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
certified laboratory. Furthermore, the
Guidelines grant donors access to a
wide variety of information and records
related to the testing of their specimens,
including a documentation package that
includes, among other items, a copy of
the Federal Custody and Control Form
(CCF) with any attachments, internal
chain of custody records for the
specimen, and any memoranda
generated by the laboratory regarding
the donor’s drug test.
Therefore, the procedures in these
Guidelines offer federal employees and
federal agencies transparent and
definitive evidence of a specimen’s
identity, security, control and chain of
custody. However, the Guidelines do
not entitle employees to access the
specimen itself or a portion thereof. The
reason for this prohibition is that
specimens collected under the
Guidelines are for the purpose of drug
testing only. They are not intended or
designed to be used for other purposes
such as deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA)
testing. Furthermore, conducting
additional testing outside the
parameters of the Guidelines would not
guarantee incorporation of the
safeguards, quality control protocols,
and the exacting scientific standards
developed under the Guidelines to
ensure the security, reliability and
accuracy of the drug testing process.
Subpart C—Hair Specimen Tests
Section 3.1 describes the tests to be
performed on each hair specimen. This
is the same policy that is in the UrMG
regarding which drug tests must be
performed on a specimen. A federal
agency is required to test all specimens
for marijuana and cocaine and is
authorized to also test specimens for
opioids, amphetamines, and
phencyclidine. The Department realizes
that most federal agencies typically test
for all five drug classes authorized by
the existing Guidelines, but has not
made this a mandatory requirement, and
will continue to rely on the individual
agencies and departments to determine
their testing needs above the required
minimum. The Department is not aware
of any currently used hair tests for a
biomarker or specific adulterant.
However, the HMG authorize specimen
validity testing (e.g., for a biomarker, for
a specific adulterant) upon request of
the MRO as is allowed in the URMG. All
tests must be properly validated and
include appropriate quality control
samples in accordance with these
Guidelines. Specimen validity testing
methods must be reviewed and
approved by SAMHSA prior to use with
federally regulated specimens. The
Department is seeking comments on
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
whether validity testing is necessary for
hair and, if so, what tests could be used.
The policy in Section 3.2 does not
differ from that for urine testing in that
an agency may test a donor’s hair
specimen for additional drugs on a caseby-case basis. For reasons outlined
above, hair may be used for preemployment and random testing
purposes but cannot be used for other
reasons (e.g., reasonable suspicion and
post-accident testing). A federal agency
must consider collecting another
authorized specimen type (e.g., urine or
oral fluid) in such cases.
The Department has included the
same policy as the UrMG for a federal
agency that wishes to routinely test its
specimens for any drug not included in
the Guidelines, in that the agency must
obtain approval from the Department
before expanding its program. The HHScertified laboratory performing such
additional testing must validate the test
methods and meet the quality control
requirements as described in the
Guidelines for the other drug analyses.
Section 3.3 states that specimens must
only be tested for drugs and to
determine their validity in accordance
with Subpart C of these Guidelines.
Additional explanation is provided
above, in the description of Section 2.6.
The table in Section 3.4 lists the
proposed analytes and cutoff
concentrations for hair. Most of the
analytes and cutoffs are the same as
those proposed in 2004. The
Department has added the same
prescription opioids (i.e., hydrocodone,
hydromorphone, oxycodone, and
oxymorphone) as the UrMG, with the
same hair cutoffs as codeine and
morphine. The codeine and morphine
cutoffs are consistent with those
recommended by the European
Workplace Drug Testing Society and the
Society of Hair Testing.44 45 The
Department is specifically requesting
comments on the appropriateness of
these analytes and cutoffs.
Due to issues of possible external
contamination and possible concerns of
hair color impact, SAMHSA is
continuing to evaluate standards
regarding these issues. The Department
is soliciting comments, with supporting
scientific information, on unique
metabolites as defined in these
Guidelines that show use, or ingestion,
of a drug, thereby eliminating external
contamination as a concern.
Other footnotes in the Section 3.4
table include the same calibration and
immunoassay cross-reactivity
requirements as the UrMG for the initial
tests. This includes the requirement for
a laboratory to use the confirmatory test
cutoff as the cutoff for an alternate
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
technology initial test that is specific for
THCA. Immunoassays for cannabinoids
react with multiple compounds that
may be incorporated into hair as a result
of marijuana use. Therefore, it is
necessary to use an immunoassay cutoff
higher than that of the confirmatory test
in order to detect the target analyte
(THCA) at or above the confirmatory test
cutoff. An initial test using an alternate
technology with specificity comparable
to the confirmatory test requires use of
the confirmatory test cutoff.
Section 3.5 has the same policy as the
UrMG regarding additional tests to
provide information that the MRO
would use to report a verified drug test
result. HHS-certified laboratories are
authorized to perform additional tests
upon MRO request on a case-by-case
basis, but are not authorized to routinely
perform such tests without prior
authorization from the Secretary or
designated HHS representative, with the
exception of the determination of D, L
stereoisomers of amphetamine and
methamphetamine. The Department is
requesting comments including
supporting data from the scientific
literature on specimen validity tests and
tests for additional analytes (e.g.,
metabolites) that may be performed on
a case-by-case basis or routinely upon
MRO request.
Section 3.6 includes criteria for
reporting a hair specimen as
adulterated. While there are no known
hair adulterants at this time, the
Department is proposing to establish
criteria similar to that for urine
specimens, to ensure procedures that
are forensically acceptable and
scientifically sound, while allowing
laboratories the flexibility necessary to
develop specific testing requirements
for an adulterant.
Section 3.7 includes criteria
applicable for reporting a hair specimen
as substituted (i.e., the laboratory has
identified physical or chemical
characteristics inconsistent with human
hair).
Section 3.8 incorporates criteria from
the UrMG that are applicable for
reporting an invalid result for a hair
specimen and includes additional
criteria specific for hair specimens. As
noted previously, the Department is
proposing that laboratories subject each
confirmatory drug test specimen to a
validated and effective decontamination
procedure prior to testing for the
confirmatory test analyte(s) listed in
Section 3.4. If a laboratory has used its
validated decontamination procedure
for a specimen with a positive
confirmatory drug test and was unable
to distinguish external contamination
from drug ingestion based on its test
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
56117
results, the laboratory would report the
specimen as invalid. Additionally, a
hair specimen may be damaged to the
extent that the drug test is invalid (i.e.,
the damaged hair is susceptible to
incorporation of drug from external
contamination or to loss of incorporated
drug). Therefore, the Department is also
proposing that each laboratory use a
validated specimen validity test to
identify damaged specimens and report
specimens as invalid when the damage
may affect the drug test result. The
Department is requesting comments on
whether testing for hair damage should
be routinely performed on all specimens
or only on certain specimens (e.g., based
on initial test results).
Subpart D—Collectors
Sections 4.1 through 4.5 contain the
same policies as described in the UrMG
regarding who may or may not collect
a specimen, the requirements to be a
collector, the requirements to be a
trainer for collectors, and what a federal
agency must do before a collector is
permitted to collect a specimen.
Subpart E—Collection Sites
Sections 5.1 through 5.6 address
requirements for collection sites,
collection site records, how a collector
ensures the security and integrity of a
specimen at the collection site, and the
privacy requirements when collecting a
specimen. These are the same
requirements as in the UrMG.
Subpart F—Federal Drug Testing
Custody and Control Form
Sections 6.1 and 6.2 are the same as
in the UrMG, requiring the OMBapproved Federal CCF be used to
document custody and control of each
specimen at the collection site, and
specifying what should occur if the
correct OMB-approved CCF is not used.
Subpart G—Hair Specimen Collection
Materials
Section 7.1 describes the collection
materials that must be used to collect a
hair specimen. The Department is
proposing that either single-use or
reusable scissors may be used to cut the
hair. If reusable scissors are used, the
collector must use an individually
packaged isopropyl alcohol wipe to
clean the scissors in the presence of the
donor. Materials also must include two
specimen guides, as defined in Section
1.5, and two sealable collection
containers for the A and B specimens.
Section 7.2 describes specific
requirements for the hair collection
materials, to maintain the integrity of
the specimen. All collection materials
that come into contact with the hair
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
56118
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
must not substantially affect the
composition of drug and/or drug
metabolites in the specimen. The
specimen guides and containers must be
sufficiently transparent to enable an
objective assessment of specimen
appearance and identification of
abnormal physical characteristics
without opening the container. This is
the same requirement as in the UrMG
for urine collection bottles.
Section 7.3 details the minimum
performance requirements for hair
collection materials. Specimen guides
must be capable of holding the hair
specimen as positioned by the collector,
and have an indication of the
orientation (i.e., root or distal end) of the
hair specimen collected. The specimen
guides or the containers must have
graduated markings or guides for
collectors to verify the minimum width
(i.e., 0.5 inches wide) and length (i.e.,
1.0 inch, approximately 2.5 cm, long) of
hair that would equate to 100 mg of hair
or 50 mg of hair in each container
labeled A and B.
Subpart H—Hair Specimen Collection
Procedure
This subpart addresses the same
topics, in the same order, as the UrMG
procedures for urine specimen
collection, but excludes UrMG
requirements that are specific for
observed or monitored urine collection.
Section 8.1 includes the procedures
required to provide privacy for the hair
donor during the collection procedure.
Sections 8.2 through 8.5 describe the
responsibilities and procedures the
collector must follow before, during,
and after a hair collection. Sections 8.3
and 8.5 specify how hair is to be
selected, collected, and packaged.
Section 8.3 requires the collector to stop
the collection if lice or a similar
infestation is present in the donor’s hair
and Section 8.4 requires the collector to
stop the collection if the donor has false
hair and the collector cannot collect a
sufficient amount of the donor’s own
hair. In these cases, the collector
proceeds with collection of another
specimen type authorized by the federal
agency. Section 8.5 specifies that only
head hair should be collected.
Section 8.6 describes the procedures
the collector must follow when a donor
is unable to provide a hair specimen
(i.e., as described in Sections 2.1, 8.3,
and 8.4). In these cases, the collector
proceeds with collection of another
specimen type authorized by the federal
agency.
Section 8.7 requires collection of an
alternate specimen when a donor is
unable to provide a sufficient amount of
hair for faith-based or medical reasons,
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
or due to an insufficient amount or
length of hair. As noted earlier, if a
federal agency authorizes the collection
of hair specimens in its workplace drug
testing program, it must also authorize
the collection of one or more alternate
specimen types in the event that hair
cannot be collected, in accordance with
the Mandatory Guidelines for the
alternate specimen type. Enabling
collection of another specimen without
delay should facilitate the preemployment process and may help
reduce attempts to subvert the drug test.
Section 8.8 describes how the
collector prepares the hair specimens,
including the description of the hair
split specimen collection.
Section 8.9 specifies how a collector
is to report a refusal to test. The
procedures are the same as in the UrMG.
Section 8.10 is the same as that in the
UrMG in regard to federal agency
responsibilities for ensuring that each
collection site complies with all
provisions of the Mandatory Guidelines.
An example of appropriate action that
may be taken in response to a reported
collection site deficiency is selfassessment using the Collection Site
Checklist for the Collection of Hair
Specimens for Federal Agency
Workplace Drug Testing Programs. This
document will be available on the
SAMHSA website https://
www.samhsa.gov/workplace/drugtesting.
Subpart I—HHS-Certification of
Laboratories
This subpart addresses the same
topics for HHS certification of
laboratories to test hair specimens, as
are included in the UrMG for HHS
certification of laboratories to test urine
specimens.
Sections 9.1 through 9.4 contain the
same policies as in the UrMG for
laboratories to become HHS-certified
and to maintain HHS certification to
conduct hair testing for a federal agency,
as well as what a laboratory must do
when certification is not maintained.
Section 9.5 contains specifications for
NLCP PT samples, Section 9.6 contains
PT requirements for an applicant
laboratory, and Section 9.7 contains PT
requirements for an HHS-certified
laboratory. These sections incorporate
the applicable requirements from the
current UrMG, but exclude UrMG
requirements that are specific for urine
testing. In Sections 9.6 and 9.7, the
Department also added a requirement
for laboratories to correctly identify a
sample that has been contaminated with
one or more drugs.
As noted earlier, the Department
plans to use multiple types of head hair
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
(e.g., drug user hair, hair contaminated
with drug analytes, hair subjected to
cosmetic treatments, bleached hair) in
the NLCP PT Program. These samples
will be used to challenge the
laboratories’ abilities to identify and
quantify drug analytes, to remove
external contamination, and to identify
damaged hair. The Department will use
additional PT materials (e.g., spiked
reference materials) as part of a multipronged approach to assess accuracy
and precision of HHS certified hair
testing laboratories. The Department is
specifically requesting comments on the
types of samples and multi-pronged
approach to be included in the hair PT
program.
The remaining Sections 9.8 through
9.17 contain the same policies as the
UrMG. These sections address
inspection requirements for applicant
and HHS-certified laboratories,
inspectors, consequences of an
applicant or HHS-certified laboratory
failing to meet PT or inspection
performance requirements, factors
considered by the Secretary in
determining the revocation or
suspension of HHS-certification, the
procedure for notifying a laboratory that
adverse action (e.g., suspension or
revocation) is being taken by HHS, and
the process for re-application once a
laboratory’s certification has been
revoked by the Department.
Section 9.17 states that a list of
laboratories certified by HHS to conduct
forensic drug testing for federal agencies
will be published monthly in the
Federal Register. The list will indicate
the type of specimens (e.g., hair, oral
fluid, and/or urine) that each laboratory
is certified to test.
Subpart J—Blind Samples Submitted by
an Agency
This subpart (Sections 10.1 through
10.4) describes the same policies for
federal agency blind samples as the
UrMG, with two exceptions. Hair blind
samples that challenge specimen
validity tests are not required, and the
concentration of drug positive blind
samples must be at least 1.5 times the
initial drug test cutoff concentration
(i.e., no upper limit as in the UrMG).
Subpart K—Laboratory
This subpart addresses the same
topics, in the same order, as the UrMG
procedures for laboratories testing urine
specimens. As appropriate, the section
includes requirements that are specific
for hair testing.
Sections 11.1 through 11.8 include
the same requirements that are
contained in the UrMG for the
laboratory standard operating procedure
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
(SOP) manual; responsibilities and
scientific qualifications of the
responsible person (RP); procedures in
the event of the RP’s extended absence
from the laboratory; qualifications of the
certifying scientists, certifying
technicians, and other HHS-certified
laboratory staff; security; and chain of
custody requirements for specimens and
aliquots.
A new Section 11.9 has been added to
describe how an HHS-certified
laboratory processes the alternate
authorized specimen that was collected
at the same time as a hair specimen in
accordance with Section 8.5(e).
A new Section 11.10 has been added
to describe the amount of hair tested.
This section specifies that 1.0 inch of
the hair specimen from the root end is
tested, when the collector has identified
the root end.
Sections 11.11 through 11.16 include
the same requirements as in the UrMG
in regard to initial and confirmatory
drug test requirements, validation, and
batch quality control as described in
each section below.
Section 11.11 describes the
requirements for the initial drug test
which permit the use of an
immunoassay or alternate technology
(e.g., spectrometry or spectroscopy).
Sections 11.12 and 11.13 cover
validation and quality control
requirements for the initial tests.
Section 11.14 describes the same
requirements for a confirmatory drug
test as the UrMG with one exception.
This section requires laboratories to
perform a decontamination procedure
prior to confirmatory drug testing.
Sections 11.15 and 11.16 cover
validation and quality control
requirements for the confirmatory tests.
Section 11.15 includes the requirement
to demonstrate and document the
effectiveness of decontamination
procedures and Section 11.16 requires
at least one control in each batch to
monitor the effectiveness of the
decontamination procedure.
Sections 11.17 and 11.18 address
specimen validity tests that a laboratory
performs for hair specimens. The
Department is proposing that each
laboratory have a validated specimen
validity test that identifies hair that has
been damaged to the extent that a drug
test may be affected. The HMG allow,
but do not require, other specimen
validity testing for hair. The HMG
collection procedures greatly minimize
the risks of donor attempts to tamper
with the specimen. To avoid prohibiting
use of scientifically supportable hair
biomarker or adulterant tests that may
become available, the Department is
authorizing specimen validity testing
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
upon request of the Medical Review
Officer as described in Sections 3.1 and
3.5. All tests must be properly validated
and include appropriate quality control
samples in accordance with these
Guidelines. Specimen validity testing
methods must be approved by SAMHSA
prior to use with federally regulated
specimens. As noted earlier, the
Department is requesting information on
procedures to identify damaged hair and
other specimen validity tests for hair.
The Department is also requesting
comments on whether testing for hair
damage should be routinely performed
on all specimens or only on certain
specimens (e.g., based on initial test
results).
Section 11.19 describes in detail,
requirements for how a certified
laboratory reports test results to the
MRO for hair specimens. This section
has requirements specific to hair.
Sections 11.20 and 11.21 contain the
same requirements as the UrMG for
length of time of specimen and record
retention and specifies that hair
specimens must be stored at room
temperature and out of direct light. As
noted in Section 11.9, the collector
forwards the alternate authorized
specimen collected at the same time as
the hair specimen to a laboratory that is
certified by HHS for that specimen type.
Section 11.20 also requires that alternate
authorized specimens (e.g., urine, oral
fluid) be retained under appropriate
storage conditions as specified by the
Mandatory Guidelines for that specimen
type, for the same period of time that
the associated hair specimen is retained.
Section 11.22 describes the statistical
summary report that a laboratory must
provide to a federal agency for hair
testing. This section is comparable to
the same section in the UrMG, differing
only in that the statistical report
elements are specific for hair testing.
Section 11.23 addresses the laboratory
information to be made available to a
federal agency and describes the
contents of a standard laboratory
documentation package. This is the
same policy as in the UrMG.
Section 11.24 addresses the laboratory
information to be made available to an
applicant or employee upon written
request through the MRO, and clarifies
that specimens are not a part of the
information package that donors can
receive from HHS-certified laboratories.
This is the same policy as in the UrMG.
The remaining section, Section 11.25,
describes the relationships that are
prohibited between an HHS-certified
laboratory and an MRO. These are the
same as in the UrMG.
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
56119
Subpart L—Instrumented Initial Test
Facility (IITF)
This subpart emphasizes that federal
agencies may choose to use IITFs for
urine testing but not for hair testing.
Section 12.1 clearly states that only
HHS-certified laboratories are
authorized to test hair specimens for
federal agency workplace drug testing
programs. Instrumented Initial Test
Facilities will not be allowed, primarily
because of the limited amount of hair
collected from the donor.
Subpart M—Medical Review Officer
(MRO)
MROs play a key role in the federal
safety program and maintain the balance
between the safety and privacy
objectives of the program. This subpart
addresses the same topics, in the same
order, as the UrMG procedures for
MROs.
The proposed requirements in Section
13.1 through 13.3 are the same as in the
UrMG, including training requirements
in Section 13.3 for a physician to
receive training on the Mandatory
Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug
Testing Programs for all authorized
specimen types prior to serving as an
MRO, and for a certified MRO to
complete training on any revisions to
the Guidelines prior to their effective
date, to continue serving as an MRO for
federal agency specimens. Section 13.4
includes the same requirements as the
UrMG except the HMG do not permit an
MRO to conduct a medical evaluation or
review the examining physician’s
findings to determine clinical evidence
of opioid abuse when codeine or
morphine is positive below a specified
concentration in hair. Because of the
longer detection time for hair, the
medical evaluation would not be useful
after limited drug use (e.g., injection site
healing). Furthermore, this requirement
would have significant effects on the
costs of the program and the turnaround
time of the result. The Department
would like to clarify that the Mandatory
Guidelines, including the HMG,
authorize testing that detects illicit drug
use, not drug ‘‘abuse.’’ Therefore, an
MRO’s inquiry in this context is limited
to whether a legitimate medical
explanation exists for the positive
result, not whether the donor has
‘‘abused’’ opioids.
Section 13.5 describes an MRO’s
actions when reviewing a hair
specimen’s test results. This section
includes procedures that are specific to
hair specimen results. The review and
verification procedures for negative,
adulterated, and substituted results are
the same as those for urine. The review
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
56120
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
and verification procedures for invalid
results and rejected specimens are the
same as those for urine, except that the
HMG specifically requires testing of an
alternate specimen type in these cases.
MRO actions required for a positive hair
test are described below.
When an HHS-certified laboratory
reports a positive result for the primary
(A) hair specimen, the MRO must
contact the donor to determine if there
is an explanation for the positive test. If
the donor provides a legitimate medical
explanation (e.g., a valid prescription),
the MRO reports the hair test result as
negative to the federal agency. If the
donor admits illicit use of the drug(s)
that caused the positive test, the MRO
reports the hair test result as positive to
the federal agency. If the donor is
unable to provide a legitimate medical
explanation and does not admit illicit
drug use, the MRO cancels the test and
directs testing of an alternate authorized
specimen from the donor.
If an alternate authorized specimen
was collected at the same time as the
hair specimen, the MRO directs (in
writing) the laboratory who has custody
of the specimen to proceed with testing.
If an alternate specimen was not
collected, the MRO directs the agency to
collect an alternate authorized specimen
from the donor. The collector,
laboratory, and MRO must follow the
applicable Mandatory Guidelines for
Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs for that specimen type.
The MRO would also direct testing of
the alternate authorized specimen for
invalid and rejected for testing hair
results.
The Department had considered
specifying a morphine or codeine
confirmatory concentration that could
be used as a decision point to rule out
consumption of food products as a
legitimate explanation for the donor
having morphine or codeine at or above
the specified concentration in his or her
hair. There is limited information in the
scientific literature on the codeine and/
or morphine concentrations seen in hair
after consumption of poppy seed food
products. One study found morphine
concentrations ranging from 0.05 –0.48
ng/10 mg (5.0–48.0 pg/mg) in the hair of
10 poppy seed consumers.46 The
Department had chosen a conservative
concentration of 2000 pg/mg (i.e., 10
times the confirmatory test cutoff) as the
decision point. Because the HMG
require testing of an alternate specimen
when a hair test is positive (i.e., unless
the donor has a legitimate medical
explanation or admits illicit drug use),
the additional decision point for
codeine and morphine results is not
needed. However, in the event that this
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
is needed in the final HMG, the
Department specifically requests public
comment on the appropriateness of this
concentration.
Section 13.6 describes what an MRO
must do when the collector reports that
a donor did not provide a sufficient
amount of hair for a drug test. In the
event a donor was unable to provide a
sufficient amount of hair, the collector
should direct the donor to submit
another authorized specimen type
consistent with the respective federal
agency’s policies and procedures.
Sections 13.7 and 13.8 are similar to
the UrMG, addressing who may request
a test of the split (B) specimen and how
an MRO reports a primary (A) specimen
result. However, because the MRO does
not report positive hair test results to
the federal agency without corroborating
evidence (i.e., donor admission of illicit
drug use); the split specimen is not
tested to reconfirm a positive hair test
result. Split hair specimens are only
retested to reconfirm adulterated or
substituted results at the donor’s
request.
Section 13.9 is the same as in the
UrMG, addressing the types of
relationships that are prohibited
between an MRO and an HHS- certified
laboratory.
Subpart N—Split Specimen Tests
Section 14.1 includes the same
policies as the UrMG in regard to when
a split (B) specimen may be tested. As
noted previously in this preamble,
because the MRO does not report
positive hair test results to the federal
agency without corroborating evidence
(i.e., donor admission of illicit drug
use), split specimens are not tested to
reconfirm positive hair test results. A
split hair specimen may be tested only
to reconfirm an adulterated or
substituted result reported for the
primary hair specimen.
Section 14.2 specifies how the split
testing laboratory tests a split (B) hair
specimen when the primary (A)
specimen was reported as adulterated.
As noted previously in this Preamble,
the Department is not aware of any
adulterants being used for hair
specimens, but has included policies in
these Guidelines to allow for the testing
and reporting of adulterants in hair.
Section 14.3 specifies how the split
testing laboratory tests a split (B) hair
specimen when the primary (A)
specimen was reported as substituted.
As noted previously in this Preamble,
the Department is requesting
information from the public on
specimen validity tests for hair, and has
included policies in these Guidelines to
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
allow for the testing and reporting of
hair as substituted.
Section 14.4 includes the same policy
as the UrMG, requiring the laboratory to
report the split (B) specimen result to
the MRO.
In Section 14.5, the Department is
proposing the actions an MRO must take
after receiving the split (B) specimen
result. This section is analogous to the
corresponding section in the UrMG with
differences, where applicable, for hair
specimen reports.
Section 14.6 is the same as the UrMG
in regard to how an MRO reports a split
(B) specimen result to an agency.
Section 14.7 is the same as the UrMG,
requiring the HHS-certified laboratory to
retain a split hair specimen for the same
length of time that the primary
specimen is retained.
Subpart O—Criteria for Rejecting a
Specimen for Testing
Section 15.1 specifies the same fatal
flaws as the UrMG that require the
laboratory to reject the specimen, with
one addition specific to hair specimens.
Section 15.1, item (i) requires the
laboratory to reject the specimen when
the physical characteristics of the
primary (A) and split (B) specimen are
clearly different (i.e., could not be from
the same individual). An example of a
hair specimen that would be rejected is
a short straight hair sample labeled as A
and a long curly hair labeled as B.
However, this requirement does not
apply to A and B specimens that only
have different hair color, because an
individual may have different colored
hair. Sections 3.8(c) and 11.19(e)
address reporting as invalid when A and
B specimens have clearly different
colors, and the A specimen has been
tested.
Section 15.3 lists those discrepancies
that would not affect either testing or
reporting of a hair specimen result.
These are similar to the corresponding
section in the UrMG, with differences
where applicable for hair specimens.
The other sections in this Subpart
(i.e., Sections 15.2 and 15.4) contain the
same policies as the UrMG concerning
correctable discrepancies and fatal flaws
that may require the MRO to cancel the
test.
Subpart P—Laboratory Suspension/
Revocation Procedures
In this subpart, the Department
proposes the same procedures that are
described in the UrMG to revoke or
suspend the HHS certification of
laboratories.
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Impact of These Guidelines on
Government Regulated Industries
The Department is aware that these
proposed new Guidelines may impact
the Department of Transportation (DOT)
and Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) regulated industries depending
on these agencies’ decisions to
incorporate the final HMG into each of
their programs under their own
authority.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Topics of Special Interest
The Department requests public
comment on all aspects of this notice.
However, the Department is providing
the following list of areas for which
specific comments are requested.
The continuing questions and
concerns on the impact of hair color on
drug test results are discussed in this
preamble. The Department is requesting
information including, at a minimum,
support from the scientific literature to
address the impact of hair color on hair
drug test results.
To address the potential issues of both
disparate impact and external
contamination, Section 2.1 includes the
requirement to collect a second
biological specimen (i.e., urine or other
authorized specimen type) at the same
time as the hair specimen or as directed
by the MRO after verification of a hair
specimen as positive, invalid, or when
the laboratory rejected the hair
specimen. Under these procedures,
MROs would only be authorized to
report the results of a positive hair test
to an agency when the donor admits to
the MRO the illicit use of the drug(s)
that caused the positive test. The
Department is specifically requesting
comments including support from the
recent scientific literature on advances
in the science of hair testing that
adequately address these issues and
elucidate the extent to which hair color,
external contamination as well as other
factors (e.g., hair treatments, hygiene)
will affect hair tests and the
interpretation of hair drug test results.
The Department is also requesting
comment with scientific support on
whether THCA positive hair tests
should be excluded from the
requirement to test an alternate
authorized specimen (i.e., MROs would
report verified positive THCA hair
results to the federal agency) and
information on other unique metabolites
that can be analyzed on a stand-alone
basis for the other proposed drugs listed
in Section 3.4.
Section 2.2 describes the
circumstances under which a hair
specimen may be collected. The
Department proposes to limit the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
reasons for testing to pre-employment
and random. Because drug analytes do
not appear in hair for 5–7 days after use,
hair is not an appropriate specimen to
detect recent use. However, the longer
window of detection makes hair an
appropriate choice for pre-employment
and random. The Department is
requesting comments on whether hair
may be used for other reasons (e.g.,
return to duty, follow-up,).
In Sections 3.1 and 3.5, the
Department allows laboratories to
perform specimen validity testing for
hair specimens. The Department is
seeking comments on whether validity
testing is necessary for hair and, if so,
what tests could be used.
Section 3.4 lists the proposed test
analytes and cutoff concentrations. The
Department is specifically requesting
comments on the appropriateness of
these analytes and cutoffs.
Section 3.5 allows laboratories to
perform additional tests to provide
information that the MRO would use to
report a verified drug test result. The
Department is specifically requesting
comments including supporting data
from the scientific literature on
additional analytes (e.g., metabolites)
that may be tested on a case-by-case
basis or routinely upon MRO request.
Section 9.5 contains the specifications
for PT samples. The Department is
specifically requesting comments on the
types of samples and the multi-pronged
approach that should be included in a
hair PT program.
In Section 11.14, the Department is
proposing that laboratories implement
procedures to distinguish external
contamination from drug use using a
validated and effective decontamination
procedure prior to confirmatory testing.
The Department is requesting comment
on (1) decontamination procedures that
remove drug present as a result of
external contamination, (2) procedures
used to prepare decontamination
controls, and (3) drug metabolites that
are uniquely found in hair after drug
use.
In Section 11.17, the Department is
proposing that laboratories implement
procedures to identify damaged hair
specimens. The Department is
requesting information including, at a
minimum, support from the scientific
literature, on procedures to identify
damaged hair. The Department is also
requesting comments on whether testing
for hair damage should be routinely
performed on all specimens or only on
certain specimens (e.g., based on initial
test results).
In Section 13.5, the Department had
considered a concentration equal to or
greater than 2000 pg/mg morphine or
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
56121
codeine be used by the MRO to report
a positive hair test result for these drugs
in the absence of a legitimate medical
explanation (i.e., prescription), to rule
out the possibility of a positive result
due to consumption of food products.
The proposal for testing an alternate
specimen type for all positive hair tests
negates the need for this procedure.
However, the Department is requesting
specific comments on this proposed
concentration if it is included in the
final HMG.
Regulatory Impact and Notices
The Department welcomes public
comment on all figures and assumptions
described in this section.
Executive Orders 13563 and 12866
Executive Order 13563 of January 18,
2011 (Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review) states ‘‘Our
regulatory system must protect public
health, welfare, safety, and our
environment while promoting economic
growth, innovation, competitiveness,
and job creation.’’ Consistent with this
mandate, Executive Order 13563
requires agencies to tailor ‘‘regulations
to impose the least burden on society,
consistent with obtaining regulatory
objectives.’’ Executive Order 13563 also
requires agencies to ‘‘identify and
consider regulatory approaches that
reduce burdens and maintain flexibility
and freedom of choice’’ while selecting
‘‘those approaches that maximize net
benefits.’’ This notice proposes a
regulatory approach that will reduce
burdens to providers and to consumers
while continuing to provide adequate
protections for public health and
welfare.
The Secretary has examined the
impact of the proposed Guidelines
under Executive Order 12866, which
directs federal agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, when regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety,
and other advantages; distributive
impacts; and equity).
According to Executive Order 12866,
a regulatory action is ‘‘significant’’ if it
meets any one of a number of specified
conditions, including having an annual
effect on the economy of $100 million;
adversely affecting in a material way a
sector of the economy, competition, or
jobs; or if it raises novel legal or policy
issues. The proposed Guidelines do
establish additional regulatory
requirements and allow an activity that
was otherwise prohibited. While this is
a significant regulatory action as defined
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
56122
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
by Executive Order 12866, the Secretary
finds that it does not confer significant
costs to regulated entities warranting a
regulatory flexibility analysis.
Therefore, the Department does not find
these proposed mandatory guidelines to
be a significant burden for federal
agencies or incur a significant cost. In
addition, a federal agency is not
required to adopt hair testing in their
Drug-free Workplace Programs.
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
For the reasons outlined above, the
Secretary has determined that the
proposed Guidelines will not have a
significant impact upon a substantial
number of small entities within the
meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act [5 U.S.C. 605(b)]. The flexibility
added by the HMG will not require
additional expenditures. Therefore, an
initial regulatory flexibility analysis is
not required for this notice.
Need for Regulation
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Enhances Flexibility
The proposed Mandatory Guidelines
for Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs using Hair (HMG) will provide
flexibility to address workplace drug
testing needs of federal agencies and
federally regulated entities while
continuing to promulgate established
standards to ensure the full reliability
and accuracy of drug test results.
Enhances Versatility
Medical conditions exist that may
prevent a federal employee or applicant
from providing sufficient urine or oral
fluid for a drug test. When the HMG are
implemented, in the event that an
individual is unable to provide a urine
or oral fluid specimen, the federal
agency may authorize the collection of
a hair specimen. In the event a federal
agency adopts hair testing and the donor
is unable to provide a hair specimen for
faith-based or medical reasons, or due to
an insufficient amount or length of hair,
the federal agency would be required to
collect an alternate specimen. Thus, the
inclusion of hair in federal workplace
drug testing programs will reduce both
the need to reschedule collections and
the need for the Medical Review Officer
(MRO) to arrange a medical evaluation
of a donor’s inability to provide a urine
or oral fluid specimen.
Urine collection requires use of a
specialized collection facility, secured
restrooms, observers of the same gender
as the donor for observed collections,
and other special requirements. Hair
may be collected in various settings and
may not necessarily require a
specialized collection facility, but if a
second authorized specimen is collected
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
at the same time then the collection
facility must meet the requirements for
a collection facility for the alternate
specimen. An acceptable hair collection
site must allow the collector to observe
the donor, maintain control of the
collection materials during the process,
maintain record storage, and protect
donor privacy.
Decreases Invalid Tests
Hair collections will occur under
direct observation, which should
substantially lessen the risks of invalid
results due to specimen substitution and
adulteration. The Department is also
proposing that each laboratory have a
method to identify damaged hair as
invalid specimens, which would further
decrease the risk of invalid results.
Saves Time
The requirement to collect a urine or
oral fluid specimen in the event that the
donor cannot provide a hair specimen
(and vice versa) will reduce both the
need to reschedule a collection and the
need for the MRO to arrange a medical
evaluation of a donor’s inability to
provide a urine or oral fluid specimen.
Versatility in Detection
The time course of drugs and
metabolites differs between hair, urine,
and oral fluid, resulting in some
differences in analytes and detection
times. A federal agency may wish to
pursue hair testing if they want to use
a longer detection window and retain
the ability to use other specimen types
for circumstances necessitating more
recent use, such as post-accident
situations.
Current Testing in the Drug-Free
Workplace Program
Urine was the original specimen of
choice for forensic workplace drug
testing, and urine testing is expected to
remain an established and reliable
component of federal workplace drug
testing programs. Urine testing provides
scientifically accurate and legally
defensible results and has proven to be
an effective deterrent to drug use in the
workplace. However, urine testing is not
observed in all cases. Hair testing, like
oral fluid testing, is observed, and
therefore, less susceptible to
substitution or adulteration.
Time Horizon of this Analysis
The transition to the testing of hair
will be gradual over the course of four
years, when it should plateau. By that
time, it is expected that hair tests will
account for 25–30% of all regulated
drug testing. This estimate is based on
the current percentage of regulated pre-
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
employment and random tests using
urine and the non-regulated sector’s
time course of the testing of hair, oral
fluid, and urine in the past four years.
Cost and Benefit
Using data obtained from the Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs and
HHS certified laboratories, the
Department estimates that 275,000
specimens are will be tested annually by
federal agencies. HHS projects that
approximately 1% (or 2,750) of the
275,000 specimens tested per year will
be hair specimens and 92% (or 253,000)
will be urine specimens, with the
remainder being oral fluid specimens
(19,250). The approximate annual
number of regulated specimens for the
Department of Transportation (DOT)
and Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) is 6.1 million and 150,000,
respectively. Should DOT and NRC
allow hair testing in their regulated
workplace programs, the estimated
annual numbers of specimens for DOT
would be 25% (1.53 million) hair
specimens for pre-employment, 7%
(427,000) oral fluid specimens and 68%
(4.15 million) urine, and numbers of
specimens for NRC would be 10%
(15,000) hair, 7% (10,500) oral fluid and
83% (124,500) urine. These projected
numbers are based on existing annual
pre-employment testing that currently
occurs in the regulated industries and
current hair testing being conducted.
In Section 3.4, the Department is
proposing criteria for calibrating initial
tests for grouped analytes such as
opiates and amphetamines, and
specifying the cross-reactivity of the
immunoassay to the other analytes(s)
within the group. These proposed
Guidelines allow the use of methods
other than immunoassay for initial
testing. An immunoassay manufacturer
may incur costs if they choose to alter
their existing product and resubmit the
immunoassay for FDA clearance.
Costs associated with the addition of
hair testing and testing for oxycodone,
oxymorphone, hydrocodone and
hydromorphone will be minimal based
on information from some HHS-certified
laboratories currently testing nonregulated hair specimens. Likewise,
there will be minimal costs associated
with changing initial testing to include
MDA and MDMA since current
immunoassays can be adapted to test for
these analytes. Prior to being allowed to
test regulated hair specimens,
laboratories must be certified by the
Department through the NLCP.
Estimated laboratory costs to complete
and submit the application are $3,000,
and estimated costs for the Department
to process the application are $10,200.
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
These estimates are based on the NLCP
fee schedule and historical costs. The
initial certification process includes the
requirement to demonstrate that their
performance meets Guidelines
requirements by testing three (3) groups
of PT samples. The Department will
provide the three groups of PT samples
through the NLCP at no cost to
laboratories participating in the NLCP
Hair Pilot PT Program. Based on costs
charged for urine specimen testing,
56123
session would be between $108,000 and
$138,000 (i.e., assuming 8 hours of time
multiplied by a GS 12/13 wage
including benefits and overhead
adjustments). This training cost is
included in the costs of the proposed
HMG. The Department will offer the
choice of online or in-person training.
This will eliminate travel costs for those
federal agencies who choose to use
online training.
laboratory costs to conduct the PT
testing would range from $900 to $1,800
for each applicant laboratory.
Agencies choosing to use hair in their
drug testing programs may also incur
some costs for training of federal
employees such as drug program
coordinators. Based on current training
modules offered to drug program
coordinators, and other associated costs
including travel for 90% of drug
program coordinators, the estimated
total training cost for a one-day training
Summary of One-Time Costs
Lower bound
Upper bound
Cost of Application * .....................................................................................................................
Application Processing * ..............................................................................................................
Performance Testing * .................................................................................................................
Training * ......................................................................................................................................
........................
........................
$3,600.00
54,000.00
........................
........................
$7,200.00
69,000.00
Total ......................................................................................................................................
110,400.00
129,000.00
Primary
$12,000.00
40,800.00
* Estimated using costs presented above multiplied by the number of laboratories (4).
Costs and Benefits
Thus, the Department estimates onetime, upfront costs of between $110,400
and $129,000 for hair testing
laboratories. While the Department has
only monetized a small portion of the
benefits to a small subset of the
workplace drug testing programs that
could be affected by the HMG (i.e.,
federal employee testing programs and
not drug testing programs conducted
under NRC and DOT regulations), the
Department is confident that the
benefits would outweigh the one-time
upfront costs. Even if NRC and DOT do
not implement hair testing, the benefits
to federal workplace testing programs
could be a cost savings, which would
recur on annual basis.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
For the reasons outlined above, the
Secretary has determined that the
proposed Guidelines will not have a
significant impact upon a substantial
number of small entities within the
meaning of the Regulatory Flexibility
Act [5 U.S.C. 605(b)]. The flexibility
added by the HMG will not require
addition expenditures. Therefore, an
initial regulatory flexibility analysis is
not required for this notice.
As mentioned in the section on
Executive Orders 13563 and 12866, the
Secretary anticipates that there will be
no reduction in costs if drug testing is
expanded under the HMG. The costs to
implement this change to regulations
are negligible. The added flexibility will
permit federal agencies to select the
specimen type best suited for their
needs and to authorize collection of an
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
alternate specimen type when an
applicant or employee is unable to
provide the originally authorized
specimen type. The added flexibility
will also benefit federal applicants and
employees, who should be able to
provide one of the specimen types,
thereby facilitating the drug test
required for their employment.
Unfunded Mandates
The Secretary has examined the
impact of the proposed Guidelines
under the Unfunded Mandates Reform
Act (UMRA) of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4).
This notice does not trigger the
requirement for a written statement
under section 202(a) of the UMRA
because the proposed Guidelines do not
impose a mandate that results in an
expenditure of $100 million (adjusted
annually for inflation) or more by either
state, local, and tribal governments in
the aggregate or by the private sector in
any one year.
Environmental Impact
The Secretary has considered the
environmental effects of the HMG. No
information or comments have been
received that would affect the agency’s
determination there would be a
significant impact on the human
environment and that neither an
environmental assessment nor an
environmental impact statement is
required.
Executive Order 13132: Federalism
The Secretary has analyzed the
proposed Guidelines in accordance with
Executive Order 13132: Federalism.
Executive Order 13132 requires federal
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
agencies to carefully examine actions to
determine if they contain policies that
have federalism implications or that
preempt state law. As defined in the
Order, ‘‘policies that have federalism
implications’’ refer to regulations,
legislative comments or proposed
legislation, and other policy statements
or actions 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.
Because the Mandatory Guidelines
govern standards applicable to the
management of federal agency
personnel, there should be little, if any,
direct effect 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. Accordingly, the
Secretary has determined that the
Guidelines do not contain policies that
have federalism implications.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
The proposed Guidelines contain
information collection requirements
which are subject to review by the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction
Act of 1995 [the PRA 44 U.S.C. 3507(d)].
Information collection and
recordkeeping requirements which
would be imposed on laboratories
engaged in drug testing for federal
agencies concern quality assurance and
quality control documentation, reports,
performance testing, and inspections as
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
56124
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
set out in subparts H, I, K, L, M and N.
To facilitate ease of use and uniform
reporting, a Federal CCF for each type
of specimen collected will be developed
as referenced in Section 6.1. The
Department has submitted the
information collection and
recordkeeping requirements contained
in the proposed Guidelines to OMB for
review and approval.
Privacy Act
The Secretary has determined that the
Guidelines do not contain information
collection requirements constituting a
system of records under the Privacy Act.
The Federal Register notice announcing
the proposed Mandatory Guidelines for
Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs using Hair is not a system of
records as noted in the information
collection/recordkeeping requirements
below.
Note the collection of information on
the Federal Chain of Custody Form as
required by the Mandatory Guidelines
are discussed below under information
collection and record keeping and are a
separate submission and approval by
the Office of Management and Budget.
Executive Order 13175: Consultation
and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249,
November 6, 2000) requires SAMHSA to
develop an accountable process to
ensure ‘‘meaningful and timely input by
tribal officials in the development of
regulatory policies that have tribal
implications.’’ ‘‘Policies that have tribal
implications’’ as defined in the
Executive Order, include regulations
that have ‘‘substantial direct effects on
one or more Indian tribes, on the
relationship between the federal
government and the Indian tribes, or on
the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the federal
government and Indian tribes.’’ The
proposed Guidelines do not have tribal
sources, gathering and maintaining the
data needed, and completing and
reviewing the collection of information.
Title: The Mandatory Guidelines for
Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs using Hair.
Description: The Guidelines establish
the scientific and technical guidelines
for federal drug testing programs and
establish standards for certification of
laboratories engaged in drug testing for
federal agencies under authority of
Public Law 100–71, 5 U.S.C. 7301 note,
and Executive Order No. 12564. Federal
drug testing programs test applicants to
sensitive positions, individuals
involved in accidents, individuals for
cause, and random testing of persons in
sensitive positions. The program has
depended on urine specimen testing
since 1988; the reporting, recordkeeping
and disclosure requirements associated
with urine specimen testing are
approved under OMB control number
0930–0158. Since 1988, several
products have appeared on the market
making it easier for individuals to
adulterate or substitute the urine
specimen. Scientific advances in the use
of hair in detecting drugs have made it
possible for this alternative specimen to
be pursued in federal programs. The
proposed Guidelines establish when
hair specimens may be collected, the
procedures that must be used in
collecting a hair specimen, and the
certification process for approving a
laboratory to test hair specimens.
Description of Respondents:
Individuals or households; businesses;
or other-for-profit; not-for-profit
institutions.
The burden estimates in the tables
below are based on the following
number of respondents: 38,000 donors
who apply for employment in testing
designated positions, 100 collectors, 10
hair specimen testing laboratories, and
100 MROs.
implications. The Guidelines will not
have substantial direct effects on tribal
governments, on the relationship
between the federal government and
Indian tribes, or on the distribution of
power and responsibilities between the
federal government and Indian tribes, as
specified in Executive Order 13175.
Information Collection/Record Keeping
Requirements
The information collection
requirements (i.e., reporting and
recordkeeping) in the current
Guidelines (82 FR 7920 for urine, 84 FR
57554 for oral fluid), which establish
the scientific and technical guidelines
for federal workplace drug testing
programs and establish standards for
certification of laboratories engaged in
urine and oral fluid drug testing for
federal agencies under authority of 5
U.S.C. 7301 and Executive Order 12564,
are approved by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under
control number 0930–0158. The Federal
Drug Testing Custody and Control Form
used to document the collection and
chain of custody of urine and oral fluid
specimens at the collection site, for
laboratories to report results, and for
Medical Review Officers to make a
determination; the National Laboratory
Certification Program (NLCP)
application; the NLCP Laboratory
Information Checklist; and
recordkeeping requirements in the
current Guidelines, as approved under
control number 0930–0158, will be
revised for the use of hair specimens
when the final Guidelines using hair are
issued.
The title, description and respondent
description of the information
collections are shown in the following
paragraphs with an estimate of the
annual reporting, disclosure and
recordkeeping burden. Included in the
estimate is the time for reviewing
instructions, searching existing data
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN
Number of
respondents
Section
Purpose
9.2(a)(1) .........
9.10(a)(3) .......
11.3 ................
11.4(c) ...........
Laboratory required to submit application for certification ..
Materials to submit to become an HHS inspector ..............
Laboratory submits qualifications of RP to HHS .................
Laboratory submits information to HHS on new RP or alternate RP.
Specifications for laboratory semi-annual statistical report
of test results to each federal agency.
Specifies that MRO must report all verified split specimen
test results to the federal agency.
Specifies content of request for informal review of suspension/proposed revocation of certification.
Specifies information appellant provides in first written
submission when laboratory suspension/revocation is
proposed.
11.21 ..............
14.7 ................
16.1(b) &
16.5(a).
16.4 ................
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00018
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Responses/
respondent
Hours/
response
Total hours
10
10
10
10
1
1
1
1
3
2
2
2
30
20
20
20
10
5
0.5
25
100
5
0.05 (3 min)
25
1
1
3
3
1
1
0.5
0.5
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
56125
ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL REPORTING BURDEN—Continued
Number of
respondents
Responses/
respondent
Hours/
response
Section
Purpose
16.6 ................
1
1
0.5
0.5
1
1
1
1
50
3
50
3
16.9(c) ...........
Requires appellant to notify reviewing official of resolution
status at end of abeyance period.
Specifies contents of appellant submission for review .......
Specifies content of appellant request for expedited review
of suspension or proposed revocation.
Specifies contents of review file and briefs .........................
1
1
50
50
Total .......
..............................................................................................
156
........................
........................
247
16.7(a) ...........
16.9(a) ...........
The following reporting requirements
are also in the proposed Guidelines, but
have not been addressed in the above
reporting burden table: Collector must
report any unusual donor behavior or
refusal to participate in the collection
process on the Federal CCF (Sections
1.8, 8.9); collector annotates the Federal
CCF when a sample is a blind sample
(Section 10.3(a)); MRO notifies the
federal agency and HHS when an error
occurs on a blind sample (Section
10.4(d)); Section 13.5 describes the
actions an MRO takes to report a
primary specimen result; and Section
14.6 describes the actions an MRO takes
Total hours
to report a split specimen result.
SAMHSA has not calculated a separate
reporting burden for these requirements
because they are included in the burden
hours estimated for collectors to
complete Federal CCFs and for MROs to
report results to federal agencies.
ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL DISCLOSURE BURDEN
Number of
respondents
Section
Purpose
8.3(a) & 8.6 ...
11.23 & 11.24
Collector must contact federal agency point of contact ......
Information on drug test that laboratory must provide to
federal agency upon request or to donor through MRO.
MRO must inform donor of right to request split specimen
test when an adulterated or substituted result is reported.
13.7(b) ...........
Total .......
..............................................................................................
The following disclosure
requirements are also included in the
proposed Guidelines, but have not been
addressed in the above disclosure
burden table: The collector must explain
the basic collection procedure to the
Responses/
respondent
Hours/
response
Total hours
100
10
1
10
0.05 (3 min)
3
5
300
100
5
3
1,500
210
........................
........................
1,805
donor and answer any questions
(Section 8.3(h), and must review the
procedures for the hair specimen
collection materials used with the donor
(Section 8.4(c)). SAMHSA believes
having the collector explain the
collection procedure to the donor and
answer any questions is a standard
business practice and not a disclosure
burden.
ESTIMATE OF ANNUAL RECORDKEEPING BURDEN
Responses/
respondent
Hours/
response
Purpose
8.3, 8.4, & 8.8
8.8(c) & (e) .....
Collector completes Federal CCF for specimen collected ....
Donor initials specimen labels/seals and signs statement
on the Federal CCF.
Laboratory completes Federal CCF upon receipt of specimen and before reporting result.
MRO completes Federal CCF before reporting the result ....
100
38,000
380
1
0.07 (4 min)
0.08 (5 min)
2,534
3,167
10
3,800
0.05 (3 min)
1,900
100
380
0.05 (3 min)
1,900
MRO documents donor’s request to have split hair specimen tested.
300
1
0.05 (3 min)
15
................................................................................................
38,510
........................
11.8(a) &
11.18.
13.4(d) (4),
13.8 (c), &
14.7(c).
14.1(b) ............
Total ........
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Number of
respondents
Section
The proposed Guidelines contain a
number of recordkeeping requirements
that SAMHSA considers not to be an
additional recordkeeping burden. In
subpart D, a trainer is required to
document the training of an individual
to be a collector [Section 4.3(a)(3)] and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
the documentation must be maintained
in the collector’s training file [Section
4.3(c)]. SAMHSA believes this training
documentation is common practice and
is not considered an additional burden.
In subpart F, if a collector uses an
incorrect form to collect a federal
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
.....................
Total hours
9,516
agency specimen, the collector is
required to provide a statement [Section
6.2(b)] explaining why an incorrect form
was used to document collecting the
specimen. SAMHSA believes this is an
extremely infrequent occurrence and
does not create a significant additional
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
56126
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
recordkeeping burden. Subpart H
[Sections 8.3 (f), and 8.4 (d), (f)] requires
collectors to enter any information on
the Federal CCF of any unusual findings
during the hair specimen collection
procedure. These recordkeeping
requirements are an integral part of the
collection procedure and are essential to
documenting the chain of custody for
the specimens collected. The burden for
these entries is included in the
recordkeeping burden estimated to
complete the Federal CCF and is,
therefore, not considered an additional
recordkeeping burden. Subpart K
describes a number of recordkeeping
requirements for laboratories associated
with their testing procedures,
maintaining chain of custody, and
keeping records (i.e., Sections 11.1(a)
and (d); 11.2(b), (c), and (d); 11.6(b);
11.7(c); 11.8; 11.12(a); 11.15(a); 11.18;
11.19(a), (b), and (c); 11.22; 11.23, and
11.24. These recordkeeping
requirements are necessary for any
laboratory to conduct forensic drug
testing and to ensure the scientific
supportability of the test results.
Therefore, they are considered to be
standard business practice and are not
considered a burden for this analysis.
Thus, the total annual response
burden associated with the testing of
hair specimens by the laboratories is
estimated to be 13,268 hours (that is, the
sum of the total hours from the above
tables). This is in addition to the
1,788,809 hours currently approved by
OMB under control number 0930–0158
for urine testing under the current
Guidelines.
As required by Section 3507(d) of the
PRA, the Secretary has submitted a copy
of these proposed Guidelines to OMB
for its review. Comments on the
information collection requirements are
specifically solicited in order to: (1)
Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of HHS’s
functions, including whether the
information will have practical utility;
(2) evaluate the accuracy of HHS’s
estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection of information, including the
validity of the methodology and
assumptions used; (3) enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (4)
minimize the burden of the collection of
information on those who are to
respond, including through the use of
appropriate automated, electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology.
OMB is required to make a decision
concerning the collection of information
contained in these proposed Guidelines
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
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. This does not affect the
deadline for the public to comment to
HHS on the proposed Guidelines.
Organizations and individuals
desiring to submit comments on the
information collection requirements
should direct them to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs,
OMB, New Executive Office Building,
725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC
20502, Attn: Desk Officer for SAMHSA.
Because of delays in receipt of mail,
comments may also be sent to (202)
395–6974 (fax).
References
1. DuPont RL, Baumgartner WA. 1995. Drug
testing by urine and hair analysis:
complementary features and scientific
issues. Forensic Sci Int. 70:63–76.
2. Barroso M, Gallardo E, Vieira DN, LopezRivadulla M, Queiroz JA. 2011. Hair: a
complementary source of bioanalytical
information in forensic toxicology.
Bioanalysis. 3:67–79.
3. LeBeau MA, Montgomery MA, Brewer JD.
2011. The role of variations in growth
rate and sample collection on
interpreting results of segmental analyses
of hair. Forensic Sci Int. 210:110–6.
4. Boumba VA, Ziavrou KS, Vougiouklakis T.
2006. Hair as a biological indicator of
drug use, drug abuse or chronic exposure
to environmental toxicants. Int J Toxicol.
25:143–63.
5. de Berker D, Higgins CA, Johoda C,
Christiano AM. 2012. Biology of hair and
nails. In: Bolognia, JL, Jorizzo, JL,
Schaffer, JV, editors. Dermatology. 3rd
ed. China: Elsevier Saunders.
6. Po¨tsch L, Skopp G, Moeller MR. 1997.
Biochemical approach on the
conservation of drug molecules during
hair fiber formation. Forensic Sci Int.
84:25–35.
7. Caplan YH, Goldberger BA. 2001.
Alternative specimens for workplace
drug testing. J Anal Toxicol, 25:396–399.
8. Henderson GL. 1993. Mechanisms of drug
incorporation into hair. For Sci Int.
63:19–29.
9. Mak WC, Patzelt A, Richter H, Renneberg
R, Lai KK, Ruhl E, Sterry W, Lademann
J. 2012. Triggering of drug release of
particles in hair follicles. J.Control
Release. 160:509–514.
10. Auwarter V, Wohlfarth A, Traber, J,
Thieme D, Weinmann W. 2010. Hair
analysis for delta-9tetrahydrocannabinolic acid A–new
insights into the mechanism of drug
incorporation of cannabinoids into hair.
Forensic Sci Int. 196:10–13.
11. Mantinieks D, Gerostamoulos D, Wright
P, Drummer, O. 2018. The effectiveness
of decontamination procedures used in
forensic hair analysis. Forensic Sci Med
Pathol. 14:349–357.
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
12. Morris-Kukoski C, Montgomery MA,
Hammer RI. 2014. Analysis of
extensively washed hair from cocaine
users and drug chemists to establish new
reporting criteria. J Anal Toxicol.
38:628–36.
13. Cuypers E, Flinders B, Boone CM,
Bosman IJ, Lusthof KL, Van Asten AC,
Tygat J Heeren RMA. 2016.
Consequences of Decontamination
Procedures in Forensic Hair Analysis
Using Metal-Assisted Secondary Ion
Mass Spectrometry Analysis. Anal
Chem. 88:3091–3097.
14 Wright J, Kenneally M, Edwards J, Walker
S. 2017. Adverse Health Effects
Associated with Living in a Former
Methamphetamine Drug LaboratoryVictoria, Australia, 2015. MMWR. 65
(52): 1470–1473.
15 Tsanaclis L, Wicks J. 2008. Differentiation
between Drug Use and Environmental
Contamination when Testing for Drugs
in Hair. Forensic Sci Int. 176:19–22.
16. de La Torre R, Civit E, Svaizer F, Lotti
A, Gottardi M, Miozzo M. 2010. High
throughput analysis of drugs of abuse in
hair by combining purposely designed
sample extraction compatible with
immunometric methods used for drug
testing in urine. Forensic Sci Int. 196:18–
21.
17. Kamata T, Shima N, Sasaki K, Matsuta S,
Takei S, Katagi M, Miki A, Zaitsu K,
Nakanishi T, Sato T, Suzuki K,
Tsuchihashi H. 2015. Time-course mass
spectrometry imaging for depicting drug
incorporation into hair. Anal Chem.
87:5476–81.
18. Grabenauer M, Bynum N, Moore K, White
R, Mitchell J, Hayes E, Flegel R. 2018.
Detection and quantification of codeine6-glucuronide, hydromorphone-3glucuronide, oxymorphone-3glucuronide, morphine 3-glucuronide
and morphine-6-glucuronide in human
hair from opioid users by LC–MS–MS. J
Anal Toxicol. 42(2):115–125.
19. Musshoff F, Thieme D, Schwarz G, Sachs
H, Skopp G, Franz T. 2018.
Determination of hydroxy metabolites of
cocaine in hair samples for proof of
consumption. Drug Test Anal. 10(4):681–
688.
20. Scholz C, Quednow B, Herdener M,
Kraemer T, Baumgartner M. 2019.
Cocaine Hydroxy Metabolites in Hair:
Indicators for Cocaine Use Versus
External Contamination. J Anal Toxicol.
43(7):543–552.
21. Franz T, Scheufler F, Stein K, Uhl M,
Dame T, Schwarz G, Sachs H, Skopp G,
Musshoff F. 2018. Determination of
hydroxy metabolites of cocaine from hair
samples and comparison with street
cocaine samples. Forensic Sci Int.
288:223–226.
22. Schaffer M, Cheng C, Chao O, Hill V,
Matsui P. 2016. Analysis of cocaine and
metabolites in hair: validation and
application of measurement of
hydroxycocaine metabolites as evidence
of cocaine ingestion. Anal Bioanal Chem.
408(8):2043–54.
23. Castanet J, Ortonne JP. 1997. Hair
melanin and hair color. In: Jolles P, Zahn
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
H, Hoecker H, editors. Formation and
structure of human hair. Basel,
Switzerland: Birkhauser Verlag. Pp. 209–
225.
24. Rollins DE, Wilkins DG, Gygi SP,
Slawson MH, Nagasawa PR. 1997.
Testing for drugs of abuse in hair—
experimental observations and
indications for future research. Forensic
Sci Rev. 9:24–35.
25. Borges CR, Martin SD, Meyer LJ, Wilkins
DG, Rollins DE. 2002. Influx and efflux
of amphetamine and Nacetylamphetamine in keratinocytes,
pigmented melanocytes, and
nonpigmented melanocytes. J. Pharm.
Sci. 91:1523–1535.
26. Joseph RE Jr, Su TP, Cone EJ. 1996. In
vitro binding studies of drugs to hair:
influence of melanin and lipids on
cocaine binding to Caucasoid and
Africoid hair. J Anal Toxicol. 20:338–
344.
27. Borges CR, Roberts JC, Wilkins DG,
Rollins DE. 2003. Cocaine,
benzoylecgonine, amphetamine, and Nacetylamphetamine binding to melanin
subtypes. J Anal Toxicol. 27:125–134.
28. Borges R, Wilkins DG, Rollins DE. 2001.
Amphetamine and N-acetylamphetamine
incorporation into hair: an investigation
of the potential role of drug basicity in
hair color bias. J Anal Toxicol. 25:221–
227.
29. Stout PR, Claffey DJ, Ruth JA. 2000.
Incorporation and retention of
radiolabeled S-(+)-and R-(-)methamphetamine and S(+)- and R(-)-N(n-butyl)-amphetamine in mouse hair
after systemic administration. Drug
Metab Dispos. 28:286–291.
30. Green SJ, Wilson JF. 1996. The effect of
hair color on the incorporation of
methadone into hair in the rat. J Anal
Toxicol. 20:121–123.
31. Slawson MH, Wilkins DG, Rollins DE.
1998. The incorporation of drugs into
hair: relationship of hair color and
melanin concentration to phencyclidine
incorporation. J Anal Toxicol. 22:406–
413.
32. Henderson GL, Harkey MR, Zhou C, Jones
RT, Jacob P III. 1998. Incorporation of
isotopically labeled cocaine into human
hair: race as a factor. J Anal Toxicol.
22:156–165.
33. Rollins DE, Wilkins DG, Krueger GG,
Augsburger MP, Mizuno A, O’Neal C,
Borges CR, Slawson MH. 2003. The effect
of hair color on the incorporation of
codeine into human hair. J Anal Toxicol.
27, 545–551.
34. Kronstrand R, Forstberg-Peterson S,
Kagedal B, Ahlner J, Larson G. 1999.
Codeine concentration in hair after oral
administration is dependent on melanin
content. Clin Chem. 45:1485–1494.
35. Mieczkowski T. 2003. Assessing the
potential of a ‘‘color effect’’ for hair
analysis of 11-nor-9-carboxy-delta(9)tetrahydrocannabinol: analysis of a large
sample of hair specimens. Life Sci.
74:463–469.
36. Mieczkowski T, Newel R. 2000. Statistical
examination of hair color as a potential
biasing factor in hair analysis. Forensic
Sci. Int. 107:13–38.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
37. Mieczkowski T, Newel R. 1993. An
evaluation of patterns of racial bias in
hair assays for cocaine: black and white
arrestees compared. Forensic Sci. Int.
63:85–98.
38. Cuypers E, Flinders B., Bosman IJ,
Lusthof KJ, Van Asten AC, Tytgat J,
Heeren RMA. 2014. Hydrogen peroxide
reactions on cocaine in hair using
imaging mass spectrometry. Forens Sci
Int. 242:103–110.
39. Tanaka S, Iio R, Takayama N., Hayakawa
K. 2001. Identification of reaction
products of methamphetamine and
hydrogen peroxide in hair dye and
decolorant treatments by high
performance liquid chromatography/
mass spectrometry. Biomed Chromatgr.
15;45–49.
40. Pritchett JS, Phinney KW. 2015. Influence
of chemical straightening on the stability
of drugs of abuse in hair. J Anal Toxicol.
39:13–16.
41. Baeck S, Han E, Chung H, Pyo M. 2011.
Effects of repeated hair washing and a
single hair dyeing on concentrations of
methamphetamine and amphetamine in
human hairs. Forens Sci Int. 206:77–80.
42. Kidwell DA, Smith FP, Shepherd AR.
2015. Ethnic hair care products may
increase false positives in hair drug
testing. Forens Sci Int. 257:160–164.
43. Hill V, Loni E, Cairns T, Sommer J,
Schaffer M. 2014. Identification and
analysis of damaged or porous hair. Drug
Test Anal. 6:42–54.
44. European Workplace Drug Testing
Society. 2015. European guidelines for
workplace drug and alcohol testing in
hair. 2015–11–01 Version 2.0. Retrieved
from https://www.ewdts.org/.
45. Cooper GAA, Kronstrand R, Kintz P.
2012. Society of hair testing guidelines
for drug testing in hair. Forens Sci Int.
218:20–24.
46. Hill V, Cairns T, Cheng CC, Schaffer M.
2005. Multiple aspects of hair analysis
for opiates: methodology, clinical and
workplace populations, codeine, and
poppy seed ingestion. J Anal Toxicol.
29:696–703.
Summary
The Department believes that the
benefits of pursuing the proposed
Mandatory Guidelines using Hair
outweigh the costs to include this
additional specimen type in federal
workplace drug testing programs. There
is no requirement for federal agencies to
use hair as part of their drug testing
program. A federal agency may choose
to use urine, oral fluid, hair or any
combination of specimen types in
accordance with the Mandatory
Guidelines for each matrix in their
program based on the agency’s mission,
its employees’ duties, and the danger to
the public health and safety or to
national security that could result from
an employee’s failure to carry out the
duties of his or her position.
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
56127
Dated: July 20, 2020.
Elinore F. McCance-Katz,
Assistant Secretary for Mental Health and
Substance Use, Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration.
Approved: July 23, 2020.
Alex M. Azar II,
Secretary, Department of Health and Human
Services.
The Mandatory Guidelines using Hair
are hereby proposed to be adopted in
accordance with section 503 of Public
Law 100–71 and Executive Order 12564.
■
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs
Using Hair
Subpart A—Applicability
1.1 To whom do these Guidelines apply?
1.2 Who is responsible for developing and
implementing these Guidelines?
1.3 How does a federal agency request a
change from these Guidelines?
1.4 How are these Guidelines revised?
1.5 What do the terms used in these
Guidelines mean?
1.6 What is an agency required to do to
protect employee records?
1.7 What is a refusal to take a federally
regulated drug test?
1.8 What are the potential consequences for
refusing to take a federally regulated
drug test?
Subpart B—Hair Specimens
2.1 What type of specimen may be
collected?
2.2 Under what circumstances may a hair
specimen be collected?
2.3 How is each hair specimen collected?
2.4 What amount of hair is collected?
2.5 How does the collector split the hair
specimen collected?
2.6 When may an entity or individual
release a hair specimen?
Subpart C—Hair Specimen Tests
3.1 Which tests are conducted on a hair
specimen?
3.2 May a hair specimen be tested for
additional drugs?
3.3 May any of the specimens be used for
other purposes?
3.4 What are the drug test cutoff
concentrations for hair?
3.5 May an HHS-certified laboratory
perform additional drug and/or
specimen validity tests on a specimen at
the request of the Medical Review
Officer (MRO)?
3.6 What criteria are used to report a hair
specimen as adulterated?
3.7 What criteria are used to report a hair
specimen as substituted?
3.8 What criteria are used to report an
invalid result for a hair specimen?
Subpart D—Collectors
4.1 Who may collect a specimen?
4.2 Who may not collect a specimen?
4.3 What are the requirements to be a
collector?
4.4 What are the requirements to be a
trainer for collectors?
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
56128
4.5
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
What must a federal agency do before a
collector is permitted to collect a
specimen?
Subpart E—Collection Sites
5.1 Where can a collection for a drug test
take place?
5.2 What are the requirements for a
collection site?
5.3 Where must collection site records be
stored?
5.4 How long must collection site records
be stored?
5.5 How does the collector ensure the
security and integrity of a specimen at
the collection site?
5.6 What are the privacy requirements
when collecting a hair specimen?
Subpart F—Federal Drug Testing Custody
and Control Form
6.1 What federal form is used to document
custody and control?
6.2 What happens if the correct OMBapproved Federal CCF is not available or
is not used?
Subpart G—Hair Specimen Collection
Materials
7.1 What is used to collect a hair specimen?
7.2 What are the requirements for hair
collection materials?
7.3 What are the minimum performance
requirements for hair collection
materials?
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Subpart H—Hair Specimen Collection
Procedure
8.1 What privacy must the donor be given
when providing a hair specimen?
8.2 What must the collector ensure at the
collection site before starting a hair
specimen collection?
8.3 What are the preliminary steps in the
hair specimen collection procedure?
8.4 What steps does the collector take in the
collection procedure before the donor
provides a hair specimen?
8.5 What steps does the collector take
during and after the hair specimen
collection procedure?
8.6 What procedure is used when the donor
is unable to provide a hair specimen?
8.7 If the donor is unable to provide a hair
specimen, may another specimen type be
collected for testing?
8.8 How does the collector prepare the hair
specimens?
8.9 How does the collector report a donor’s
refusal to test?
8.10 What are a federal agency’s
responsibilities for a collection site?
Subpart I—HHS Certification of
Laboratories
9.1 Who has the authority to certify
laboratories to test hair specimens for
federal agencies?
9.2 What is the process for a laboratory to
become HHS-certified?
9.3 What is the process for a laboratory to
maintain HHS certification?
9.4 What is the process when a laboratory
does not maintain its HHS certification?
9.5 What are the qualitative and
quantitative specifications of
performance testing (PT) samples?
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
9.6
What are the PT requirements for an
applicant laboratory that seeks to
perform hair testing?
9.7 What are the PT requirements for an
HHS-certified hair laboratory?
9.8 What are the inspection requirements
for an applicant laboratory?
9.9 What are the maintenance inspection
requirements for an HHS-certified
laboratory?
9.10 Who can inspect an HHS-certified
laboratory and when may the inspection
be conducted?
9.11 What happens if an applicant
laboratory does not satisfy the minimum
requirements for either the PT program
or the inspection program?
9.12 What happens if an HHS-certified
laboratory does not satisfy the minimum
requirements for either the PT program
or the inspection program?
9.13 What factors are considered in
determining whether revocation of a
laboratory’s HHS certification is
necessary?
9.14 What factors are considered in
determining whether to suspend a
laboratory’s HHS certification?
9.15 How does the Secretary notify an HHScertified laboratory that action is being
taken against the laboratory?
9.16 May a laboratory that had its HHS
certification revoked be recertified to test
federal agency specimens?
9.17 Where is the list of HHS-certified
laboratories published?
Subpart J—Blind Samples Submitted by an
Agency
10.1 What are the requirements for federal
agencies to submit blind samples to
HHS-certified laboratories?
10.2 What are the requirements for blind
samples?
10.3 How is a blind sample submitted to an
HHS-certified laboratory?
10.4 What happens if an inconsistent result
is reported for a blind sample?
Subpart K—Laboratory
11.1 What must be included in the HHScertified laboratory’s standard operating
procedure manual?
11.2 What are the responsibilities of the
responsible person (RP)?
11.3 What scientific qualifications must the
RP have?
11.4 What happens when the RP is absent
or leaves an HHS-certified laboratory?
11.5 What qualifications must an individual
have to certify a result reported by an
HHS-certified laboratory?
11.6 What qualifications and training must
other personnel of an HHS-certified
laboratory have?
11.7 What security measures must an HHScertified laboratory maintain?
11.8 What are the laboratory chain of
custody requirements for specimens and
aliquots?
11.9 How must an HHS-certified laboratory
process an alternate specimen that was
collected at the same time as a hair
specimen?
11.10 What amount of hair is tested?
11.11 What are the requirements for an
initial drug test?
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
11.12 What must an HHS-certified
laboratory do to validate an initial drug
test?
11.13 What are the batch quality control
requirements when conducting an initial
drug test?
11.14 What are the requirements for a
confirmatory drug test?
11.15 What must an HHS-certified
laboratory do to validate a confirmatory
drug test?
11.16 What are the batch quality control
requirements when conducting a
confirmatory drug test?
11.17 What are the analytical and quality
control requirements for conducting
specimen validity tests?
11.18 What must an HHS-certified
laboratory do to validate a specimen
validity test?
11.19 What are the requirements for an
HHS-certified laboratory to report a test
result?
11.20 How long must an HHS-certified
laboratory retain specimens?
11.21 How long must an HHS-certified
laboratory retain records?
11.22 What statistical summary reports
must an HHS-certified laboratory
provide for hair testing?
11.23 What HHS-certified laboratory
information is available to a federal
agency?
11.24 What HHS-certified laboratory
information is available to a federal
employee?
11.25 What types of relationships are
prohibited between an HHS-certified
laboratory and an MRO?
Subpart L—Instrumented Initial Test Facility
(IITF)
12.1 May an IITF test hair specimens for a
federal agency’s workplace drug testing
program?
Subpart M—Medical Review Officer (MRO)
13.1 Who may serve as an MRO?
13.2 How are nationally recognized entities
or subspecialty boards that certify MROs
approved?
13.3 What training is required before a
physician may serve as an MRO?
13.4 What are the responsibilities of an
MRO?
13.5 What must an MRO do when
reviewing a hair specimen’s test results?
13.6 What action does the MRO take when
the collector reports that the donor did
not provide a sufficient amount of hair
for a drug test?
13.7 Who may request a test of a split (B)
hair specimen?
13.8 How does an MRO report a primary
(A) specimen test result to an agency?
13.9 What types of relationships are
prohibited between an MRO and an
HHS-certified laboratory?
Subpart N—Split Specimen Tests
14.1 When may a split (B) hair specimen be
tested?
14.2 How does an HHS-certified laboratory
test a split (B) hair specimen when the
primary (A) specimen was reported
adulterated?
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
14.3
How does an HHS-certified laboratory
test a split (B) hair specimen when the
primary (A) specimen was reported
substituted?
14.4 Who receives the split (B) specimen
result?
14.5 What action(s) does an MRO take after
receiving the split (B) hair specimen
result from the second HHS-certified
laboratory?
14.6 How does an MRO report a split (B)
specimen test result to an agency?
14.7 How long must an HHS-certified
laboratory retain a split (B) specimen?
Subpart O—Criteria for Rejecting a
Specimen for Testing
15.1 What discrepancies require an HHScertified laboratory to report a specimen
as rejected for testing?
15.2 What discrepancies require an HHScertified laboratory to report a specimen
as rejected for testing unless the
discrepancy is corrected?
15.3 What discrepancies are not sufficient
to require an HHS-certified laboratory to
reject a hair specimen for testing or an
MRO to cancel a test?
15.4 What discrepancies may require an
MRO to cancel a test?
Subpart P—Laboratory Suspension/
Revocation Procedures
16.1 When may the HHS certification of a
laboratory be suspended?
16.2 What definitions are used for this
subpart?
16.3 Are there any limitations on issues
subject to review?
16.4 Who represents the parties?
16.5 When must a request for informal
review be submitted?
16.6 What is an abeyance agreement?
16.7 What procedures are used to prepare
the review file and written argument?
16.8 When is there an opportunity for oral
presentation?
16.9 Are there expedited procedures for
review of immediate suspension?
16.10 Are any types of communications
prohibited?
16.11 How are communications transmitted
by the reviewing official?
16.12 What are the authority and
responsibilities of the reviewing official?
16.13 What administrative records are
maintained?
16.14 What are the requirements for a
written decision?
16.15 Is there a review of the final
administrative action?
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Subpart A—Applicability
Section 1.1 To whom do these
Guidelines apply?
(a) These Guidelines apply to:
(1) Executive Agencies as defined in
5 U.S.C. 105;
(2) The Uniformed Services, as
defined in 5 U.S.C. 2101(3) (but
excluding the Armed Forces as defined
in 5 U.S.C. 2101(2));
(3) Any other employing unit or
authority of the federal government
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
except the United States Postal Service,
the Postal Rate Commission, and
employing units or authorities in the
Judicial and Legislative Branches; and
(4) The Intelligence Community, as
defined by Executive Order 12333, is
subject to these Guidelines only to the
extent agreed to by the head of the
affected agency;
(5) Laboratories that provide drug
testing services to the federal agencies;
(6) Collectors who provide specimen
collection services to the federal
agencies; and
(7) Medical Review Officers (MROs)
who provide drug testing review and
interpretation of results services to the
federal agencies.
(b) These Guidelines do not apply to
drug testing under authority other than
Executive Order 12564, including
testing of persons in the criminal justice
system, such as arrestees, detainees,
probationers, incarcerated persons, or
parolees.
Section 1.2 Who is responsible for
developing and implementing these
Guidelines?
(a) Executive Order 12564 and Public
Law 100–71 require the Department of
Health and Human Services (HHS) to
establish scientific and technical
guidelines for federal workplace drug
testing programs.
(b) The Secretary has the
responsibility to implement these
Guidelines.
Section 1.3 How does a federal agency
request a change from these Guidelines?
(a) Each federal agency must ensure
that its workplace drug testing program
complies with the provisions of these
Guidelines unless a waiver has been
obtained from the Secretary.
(b) To obtain a waiver, a federal
agency must submit a written request to
the Secretary that describes the specific
change for which a waiver is sought and
a detailed justification for the change.
Section 1.4 How are these Guidelines
revised?
(a) To ensure the full reliability and
accuracy of specimen tests, the accurate
reporting of test results, and the
integrity and efficacy of federal drug
testing programs, the Secretary may
make changes to these Guidelines to
reflect improvements in the available
science and technology.
(b) The changes will be published in
final as a notice in the Federal Register.
Section 1.5 What do the terms used in
these Guidelines mean?
The following definitions are adopted:
Accessioner. The individual who
signs the Federal Drug Testing Custody
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
56129
and Control Form at the time of
specimen receipt at the HHS-certified
laboratory or (for urine) the HHScertified IITF.
Adulterated Specimen. A specimen
that has been altered, as evidenced by
test results showing either a substance
that is not a normal constituent for that
type of specimen or showing an
abnormal concentration of a normal
constituent (e.g., nitrite in urine).
Aliquot. A portion of a specimen used
for testing.
Alternate Responsible Person. The
person who assumes professional,
organizational, educational, and
administrative responsibility for the
day-to-day management of the HHScertified laboratory when the
responsible person is unable to fulfill
these obligations.
Alternate Technology Initial Drug
Test. An initial drug test using
technology other than immunoassay to
differentiate negative specimens from
those requiring further testing.
Artificial hair. A weave or other
synthetic forms of hair, as well as
animal substitutes.
Batch. A number of specimens or
aliquots handled concurrently as a
group.
Biomarker. An endogenous substance
used to validate a biological specimen.
Blind Sample. A sample submitted to
an HHS-certified test facility for quality
assurance purposes, with a fictitious
identifier, so that the test facility cannot
distinguish it from a donor specimen.
Calibrator. A sample of known
content and analyte concentration
prepared in the appropriate matrix used
to define expected outcomes of a testing
procedure. The test result of the
calibrator is verified to be within
established limits prior to use.
Cancelled Test. The result reported by
the MRO to the federal agency when a
specimen has been reported to the MRO
as an invalid result (and the donor has
no legitimate explanation), the
specimen has been rejected for testing,
when a hair specimen has been reported
as positive and the MRO directs testing
of the alternate specimen for the donor,
when a split specimen fails to
reconfirm, or when the MRO determines
that a fatal flaw or unrecovered
correctable flaw exists in the forensic
records (as described in Sections 15.1
and 15.2).
Carryover. The effect that occurs
when a sample result (e.g., drug
concentration) is affected by a preceding
sample during the preparation or
analysis of a sample.
Certifying Scientist (CS). The
individual responsible for verifying the
chain of custody and scientific
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
56130
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
reliability of a test result reported by an
HHS-certified laboratory.
Certifying Technician (CT). The
individual responsible for verifying the
chain of custody and scientific
reliability of negative, rejected for
testing, and (for urine) negative/dilute
results reported by an HHS-certified
laboratory or (for urine) an HHScertified IITF.
Chain of Custody (COC) Procedures.
Procedures that document the integrity
of each specimen or aliquot from the
point of collection to final disposition.
Chain of Custody Documents. Forms
used to document the control and
security of the specimen and all
aliquots. The document may account for
an individual specimen, aliquot, or
batch of specimens/aliquots and must
include the name and signature of each
individual who handled the specimen(s)
or aliquot(s) and the date and purpose
of the handling.
Collection Container. A receptacle
used to collect a donor’s drug test
specimen.
Collection Site. The location where
specimens are collected.
Collector. A person trained to instruct
and assist a donor in providing a
specimen.
Confirmatory Drug Test. A second
analytical procedure performed on a
separate aliquot of a specimen to
identify and quantify a specific drug or
drug metabolite.
Confirmatory Specimen Validity Test.
A second test performed on a separate
aliquot of a specimen to further support
an initial specimen validity test result.
Control. A sample used to evaluate
whether an analytical procedure or test
is operating within predefined tolerance
limits.
Cutoff. The analytical value (e.g., drug
or drug metabolite concentration) used
as the decision point to determine a
result (e.g., negative, positive,
adulterated, invalid, or substituted) or
the need for further testing.
Decontamination. The removal of
external contamination (i.e.,
environmentally-deposited drug) in or
on a hair specimen.
Donor. The individual from whom a
specimen is collected.
External Service Provider. An
independent entity that performs
services related to federal workplace
drug testing on behalf of a federal
agency, a collector/collection site, an
HHS-certified laboratory, a Medical
Review Officer (MRO), or, for urine, an
HHS-certified Instrumented Initial Test
Facility (IITF).
Failed to Reconfirm. The result
reported for a split (B) specimen when
a second HHS-certified laboratory is
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
unable to corroborate the result reported
for the primary (A) specimen.
False Hair. Hair that is not the donor’s
hair. False hair may be artificial or
human in origin.
Federal Drug Testing Custody and
Control Form (Federal CCF). The Office
of Management and Budget (OMB)
approved form that is used to document
the collection and chain of custody of a
specimen from the time the specimen is
collected until it is received by the test
facility (i.e., HHS-certified laboratory or,
for urine, HHS-certified IITF). It may be
a paper (hardcopy), electronic, or
combination electronic and paper
format (hybrid). The form may also be
used to report the test result to the
Medical Review Officer.
HHS. The Department of Health and
Human Services.
Initial Drug Test. An analysis used to
differentiate negative specimens from
those requiring further testing.
Initial Specimen Validity Test. The
first analysis used to determine if a
specimen is invalid, adulterated, or
substituted.
Instrumented Initial Test Facility
(IITF). A permanent location where (for
urine) initial testing, reporting of
results, and recordkeeping are
performed under the supervision of a
responsible technician.
Invalid Result. The result reported by
an HHS-certified laboratory in
accordance with the criteria established
in Section 3.8 when a positive, negative,
adulterated, or substituted result cannot
be established for a specific drug or
specimen validity test.
Laboratory. A permanent location
where initial and confirmatory drug
testing, reporting of results, and
recordkeeping are performed under the
supervision of a responsible person.
Limit of Detection. The lowest
concentration at which the analyte (e.g.,
drug or drug metabolite) can be
identified.
Limit of Quantification. For
quantitative assays, the lowest
concentration at which the identity and
concentration of the analyte (e.g., drug
or drug metabolite) can be accurately
established.
Lot. A number of units of an item
(e.g., reagents, quality control material)
manufactured from the same starting
materials within a specified period of
time for which the manufacturer
ensures that the items have essentially
the same performance characteristics
and expiration date.
Medical Review Officer (MRO). A
licensed physician who reviews,
verifies, and reports a specimen test
result to the federal agency.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Negative Result. The result reported
by an HHS-certified laboratory or (for
urine) an HHS-certified IITF to an MRO
when a specimen contains no drug and/
or drug metabolite; or the concentration
of the drug or drug metabolite is less
than the cutoff for that drug or drug
class.
Performance Testing (PT) Sample. A
program-generated sample sent to a
laboratory or (for urine) to an IITF to
evaluate performance.
Positive Result. The result reported by
an HHS-certified laboratory when a
specimen contains a drug or drug
metabolite equal to or greater than the
confirmation cutoff concentration.
Reconfirmed. The result reported for
a split (B) specimen when the second
HHS-certified laboratory corroborates
the original result reported for the
primary (A) specimen.
Rejected for Testing. The result
reported by an HHS-certified laboratory
or (for urine) an HHS-certified IITF
when no tests are performed on a
specimen because of a fatal flaw or an
unrecovered correctable error (see
Sections 15.1 and 15.2)
Responsible Person (RP). The person
who assumes professional,
organizational, educational, and
administrative responsibility for the
day-to-day management of an HHScertified laboratory.
Sample. A performance testing
sample, calibrator or control used
during testing, or a representative
portion of a donor’s specimen.
Secretary. The Secretary of the U.S.
Department of Health and Human
Services.
Specimen. Fluid or material collected
from a donor at the collection site for
the purpose of a drug test.
Specimen guide. An item that holds
the hair specimen as positioned by the
collector, and has an indication of the
orientation (i.e., root or distal end) of the
hair specimen collected.
Split Specimen Collection (for Hair).
A collection in which the specimen
collected is divided into a primary (A)
specimen and a split (B) specimen,
which are independently sealed in the
presence of the donor.
Standard. Reference material of
known purity or a solution containing a
reference material at a known
concentration.
Substituted Specimen. A specimen
with physical or chemical
characteristics that are not consistent
with those observed in human hair.
Wash procedures. A rinse with
organic solvents to remove oils and
residue on the hair prior to initial
testing.
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Unique metabolite. A drug metabolite
present in a hair specimen only as a
result of biotransformation following
drug use, and whose detection by a
confirmatory drug test distinguishes
drug use from external contamination. A
unique metabolite does not occur as a
contaminant in licit and illicit drug
products and is not produced from the
drug as an artifact and only results from
biotransformation following drug use.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Section 1.6 What is an agency required
to do to protect employee records?
Consistent with 5 U.S.C. 552a and 48
CFR 24.101–24.104, all agency contracts
with laboratories, collectors, and MROs
must require that they comply with the
Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a. In addition,
the contracts must require compliance
with employee access and
confidentiality provisions of Section
503 of Public Law 100–71. Each federal
agency must establish a Privacy Act
System of Records or modify an existing
system or use any applicable
Government-wide system of records to
cover the records of employee drug test
results. All contracts and the Privacy
Act System of Records must specifically
require that employee records be
maintained and used with the highest
regard for employee privacy.
The Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA)
Privacy Rule (Rule), 45 CFR parts 160
and 164, Subparts A and E, may be
applicable to certain health care
providers with whom a federal agency
may contract. If a health care provider
is a HIPAA covered entity, the provider
must protect the individually
identifiable health information it
maintains in accordance with the
requirements of the Rule, which
includes not using or disclosing the
information except as permitted by the
Rule and ensuring there are reasonable
safeguards in place to protect the
privacy of the information. For more
information regarding the HIPAA
Privacy Rule, please visit https://
www.hhs.gov/ocr/hipaa.
Section 1.7 What is a refusal to take a
federally regulated drug test?
(a) As a donor for a federally regulated
drug test, you have refused to take a
federally regulated drug test if you:
(1) Fail to appear for any test (except
a pre-employment test) within a
reasonable time, as determined by the
federal agency, consistent with
applicable agency regulations, after
being directed to do so by the federal
agency;
(2) Fail to remain at the collection site
until the collection process is complete
with the exception of a donor who
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
leaves the collection site before the
collection process begins for a preemployment test as described in Section
8.5(d);
(3) Fail to provide a hair specimen for
any drug test required by these
Guidelines or federal agency regulations
with the exception of a donor who
leaves the collection site before the
collection process begins for a preemployment test as described in Section
8.5(d); or a donor who is unable to
provide a sufficient amount of hair for
faith-based or medical reasons, or due to
an insufficient amount or length of hair;
or when the collector identifies lice or
a similar infestation in the hair.
(4) Fail or decline to participate in an
alternate specimen collection (e.g.,
urine, oral fluid) as directed by the
federal agency or collector (i.e., as
described in Section 8.5);
(5) Fail to cooperate with any part of
the testing process (e.g., disrupt the
collection process; refuse to allow the
collector to collect a sufficient amount
of hair; fail to provide a split specimen);
(6) Bring materials to the collection
site for the purpose of adulterating or
substituting the specimen;
(7) Attempt to adulterate or substitute
the specimen; or
(8) Admit to the collector or MRO that
you have adulterated or substituted the
specimen.
Section 1.8 What are the potential
consequences for refusing to take a
federally regulated drug test?
(a) As a federal agency employee or
applicant, a refusal to take a test may
result in the initiation of disciplinary or
adverse action, up to and including
removal from, or non-selection for,
federal employment.
(b) When a donor has refused to
participate in a part of the collection
process, the collector must terminate the
collection process and take action as
described in Section 8.9; immediately
notify the federal agency’s designated
representative by any means (e.g.,
telephone or secure facsimile [fax]
machine) that ensures that the refusal
notification is immediately received,
document the refusal on the Federal
CCF, sign and date the Federal CCF, and
send all copies of the Federal CCF to the
federal agency’s designated
representative.
(c) When documenting a refusal to
test during the verification process as
described in Sections 13.4 and 13.5, the
MRO must complete the MRO copy of
the Federal CCF to include:
(1) Checking the refusal to test box;
(2) Providing a reason for the refusal
in the remarks line; and
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
56131
(3) Signing and dating the MRO copy
of the Federal CCF.
Subpart B—Hair Specimens
Section 2.1 What type of specimen
may be collected?
a. Only specimen types authorized by
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs may
be collected.
b. A federal agency may collect hair
and/or an alternate specimen type for its
workplace drug testing program, but
may not implement hair testing as the
exclusive means of drug testing. A
federal agency using hair testing must
follow these Guidelines.
c. A federal agency that collects hair
specimens for its workplace drug testing
program must also authorize an
alternate specimen type to be collected
either:
(1) At the time that a donor’s hair
specimen is collected, or
(2) at the direction of the MRO,
following verification of a hair test as
positive or invalid, or when the
laboratory rejected the hair specimen.
Alternate specimens collected under
Section 2.1(c)(1) and (2) can be tested
only if an MRO directs, in writing, that
such specimens be tested and following
the MRO’s receipt and verification of a
positive, invalid, or rejected hair test
result from a laboratory (see Section
13.5).
d. A federal agency that collects hair
specimens for its workplace drug testing
program must also authorize the
collection of one or more alternative
specimen types when a donor is unable
to provide a sufficient amount of hair
for faith-based or medical reasons, or
due to an insufficient amount or length
of hair.
Section 2.2 Under what circumstances
may a hair specimen be collected?
A federal agency may only collect a
hair specimen for federal agency preemployment and random testing
purposes, and may not use hair
specimens for reasonable suspicion/
cause, post accident, return to duty, or
follow-up testing purposes (i.e., for
purposes other than pre-employment or
random testing).
Section 2.3
collected?
How is each hair specimen
Each hair specimen is collected as a
split specimen as described in Sections
2.5 and 8.8.
Section 2.4
collected?
What amount of hair is
At least 100 mg of hair is collected, as
described in Section 8.5.
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
56132
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Section 2.5 How does the collector
split the hair specimen collected?
The collector subdivides the collected
hair into 2 specimens designated as ‘‘A’’
(primary) and ‘‘B’’ (split) as described in
Section 8.5.
Section 2.6 When may an entity or
individual release a hair specimen?
Entities and individuals subject to
these Guidelines under Section 1.1 may
not release specimens collected
pursuant to Executive Order 12564,
Public Law 100–71 and these
Guidelines to donors or their designees.
Specimens also may not be released to
any other entity or individual unless
expressly authorized by these
Guidelines or by applicable federal law.
This section does not prohibit a donor’s
request to have a split (B) specimen
tested in accordance with Section 13.9.
Subpart C—Hair Drug and Specimen
Validity Tests
Section 3.1 Which tests are conducted
on a hair specimen?
A federal agency:
(a) Must ensure that each specimen is
tested for marijuana and cocaine as
provided under Section 3.4;
(b) Is authorized to test each specimen
for opioids, amphetamines, and
phencyclidine, as provided under
Section 3.4;
(c) Is authorized to test hair
specimens for damage that may affect
drug test results;
(d) Is authorized upon a Medical
Review Officer’s request to test a hair
specimen to determine specimen
validity, using, for example, a test for a
biomarker or a test for a specific
adulterant; and
(e) May perform additional testing if
a specimen exhibits abnormal
characteristics, causes reactions or
responses characteristic of an adulterant
during initial or confirmatory drug tests
(e.g., non-recovery of internal standard,
unusual response), or contains an
unidentified substance that interferes
with the confirmatory analysis.
Section 3.2 May a hair specimen be
tested for additional drugs?
For approval to routinely test for any
drugs listed in Schedule I or II of the
Controlled Substances Act that are not
listed in Section 3.1, a federal agency
must petition the Secretary in writing.
Such approval must be limited to the
use of the appropriate science and
technology. If an initial test procedure is
not available upon request for a
Initial test
cutoff 1
Initial test analyte
Marijuana Metabolites (THCA) 2 ...................................
Cocaine/Benzoylecgonine ............................................
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Codeine/ .......................................................................
Morphine/ ......................................................................
6-Acetylmorphine ..........................................................
Hydrocodone/ ...............................................................
Hydromorphone ............................................................
Oxycodone/ ...................................................................
Oxymorphone ...............................................................
Phencyclidine ................................................................
Amphetamine/ ...............................................................
Methamphetamine 4 ......................................................
MDMA 5/MDA 6 .............................................................
31
Schedule I or Schedule II drug, the
HHS-certified laboratory must test for
the drug using the confirmatory
analytical method. For any specimen
with a positive result, the laboratory
must test a separate aliquot of the
specimen in a separate testing batch
using the same confirmatory analytical
method. Additionally, the split (B)
specimen will be available for testing if
the donor requests a retest at another
HHS-certified laboratory.
Section 3.3 May any of the specimens
be used for other purposes?
(a) Specimens collected pursuant to
Executive Order 12564, Public Law
100–71, and these Guidelines must only
be tested for drugs and to determine
their validity in accordance with
Subpart C of these Guidelines. Use of
specimens by donors, their designees or
any other entity, for other purposes (e.g.,
deoxyribonucleic acid, DNA, testing) is
prohibited unless authorized in
accordance with applicable federal law.
(b) These Guidelines are not intended
to prohibit federal agencies, specifically
authorized by law to test a specimen for
additional classes of drugs in its
workplace drug testing program.
Section 3.4 What are the drug test
cutoff concentrations for hair?
Confirmatory test analyte
pg/mg
pg/mg
THCA ............................................................................
Cocaine Benzoylecgonine ............................................
200 pg/mg
........................
........................
200 pg/mg
........................
200 pg/mg
........................
300 pg/mg
3 500 pg/mg
........................
3 500 pg/mg
........................
Codeine ........................................................................
Morphine .......................................................................
6-Acetylmorphine ..........................................................
Hydrocodone ................................................................
Hydromorphone ............................................................
Oxycodone ....................................................................
Oxymorphone ...............................................................
Phencyclidine ................................................................
Amphetamine ................................................................
Methamphetamine ........................................................
MDMA ...........................................................................
MDA ..............................................................................
3 500
Confirmatory
test cutoff
concentration
0.05
500
50
200
200
200
200
200
200
200
300
300
300
300
300
pg/mg
pg/mg
pg/mg
pg/mg
pg/mg
pg/mg
pg/mg
pg/mg
pg/mg
pg/mg
pg/mg
pg/mg
pg/mg
pg/mg
pg/mg
1 For grouped analytes (i.e., two or more analytes that are in the same drug class and have the same initial test cutoff):
Immunoassay: The test must be calibrated with one analyte from the group identified as the target analyte. The cross-reactivity of the
immunoassay to the other analyte(s) within the group must be 80 percent or greater; if not, separate immunoassays must be used for the
analytes within the group.
Alternate technology: Either one analyte or analytes as grouped in the table above must be used for calibration, depending on the technology.
At least one analyte within the group must have a concentration equal to or greater than the initial test cutoff or, alternatively, the sum of the
analytes present (i.e., equal to or greater than the laboratory’s validated limit of quantification) must be equal to or greater than the initial test cutoff.
2 An immunoassay must be calibrated with the target analyte, L-D-9-tetrahydrocannabinol-9-carboxylic acid (THCA).
3 Alternate technology (THCA): The confirmatory test cutoff (i.e., 0.05 pg/mg) must be used for an alternate technology initial test that is specific for THCA).
4 An immunoassay must be calibrated with the target analyte, D-amphetamine or D-methamphetamine.
5 Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA).
6 Methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDA).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Section 3.5 May an HHS-certified
laboratory perform additional drug and/
or specimen validity tests on a specimen
at the request of the Medical Review
Officer (MRO)?
An HHS-certified laboratory is
authorized to perform additional drug
and/or specimen validity tests on a caseby-case basis as necessary to provide
information that the MRO would use to
report a verified drug test result (e.g.,
specimen validity tests using
biomarkers). An HHS-certified
laboratory is not authorized to routinely
perform additional drug and/or
specimen validity tests at the request of
an MRO without prior authorization
from the Secretary or designated HHS
representative, with the exception of the
determination of D, L stereoisomers of
amphetamine and methamphetamine.
All tests must meet appropriate
validation and quality control
requirements in accordance with these
Guidelines.
Section 3.6 What criteria are used to
report a hair specimen as adulterated?
An HHS-certified laboratory reports a
hair specimen as adulterated when the
presence of an adulterant is verified
using an initial test on the first aliquot
and a different confirmatory test on the
second aliquot.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Section 3.7 What criteria are used to
report a hair specimen as substituted?
An HHS-certified laboratory
documents and reports a hair specimen
as substituted if it has physical or
chemical characteristics inconsistent
with those observed in human hair.
Such documentation should briefly
describe the physical or chemical
characteristics that are inconsistent with
human hair.
Section 3.8 What criteria are used to
report an invalid result for a hair
specimen?
An HHS-certified laboratory reports a
primary (A) hair specimen as an invalid
result when:
(a) Interference occurs on the initial
drug tests on two separate aliquots (i.e.,
valid initial drug test results cannot be
obtained);
(b) Interference with the confirmatory
drug assay occurs on two separate
aliquots of the specimen and the
laboratory is unable to identify the
interfering substance;
(c) The specimen has been tested and
the color of the primary (A) and the split
(B) specimens are clearly different;
(d) The laboratory determines the hair
is damaged (i.e., using a validated
method) to the extent that the drug test
result may be affected; or
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
(e) The laboratory obtains a positive
confirmatory drug test result and is
unable to definitively remove external
contamination from the specimen (i.e.,
using a validated decontamination
procedure).
Subpart D—Collectors
Section 4.1 Who may collect a
specimen?
(a) A collector who has been trained
to collect hair specimens in accordance
with these Guidelines.
(b) The immediate supervisor of a
federal employee donor may only
collect that donor’s specimen when no
other collector is available. The
supervisor must be a trained collector.
(c) The hiring official of a federal
agency applicant may only collect that
federal agency applicant’s specimen
when no other collector is available.
The hiring official must be a trained
collector.
Section 4.2 Who may not collect a
specimen?
(a) A federal agency employee who is
in a testing designated position and
subject to the federal agency drug
testing rules must not be a collector for
co-workers in the same testing pool or
who work together with that employee
on a daily basis.
(b) A federal agency applicant or
employee must not collect his or her
own drug testing specimen.
(c) An employee working for an HHScertified laboratory must not act as a
collector if the employee could link the
identity of the donor to the donor’s drug
test result.
(d) To avoid a potential conflict of
interest, a collector must not be related
to the employee (e.g., spouse, ex-spouse,
relative) or a close personal friend (e.g.,
fiancé´e).
Section 4.3 What are the requirements
to be a collector?
(a) An individual may serve as a
collector if they fulfill the following
conditions:
(1) Is knowledgeable about the
collection procedure described in these
Guidelines;
(2) Is knowledgeable about any
guidance provided by the federal
agency’s Drug-free Workplace Program
and additional information provided by
the Secretary relating to these
Guidelines;
(3) Is trained and qualified to collect
a hair specimen. Training must include
the following:
(i) All steps necessary to complete a
hair collection;
(ii) Completion and distribution of the
Federal CCF;
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
56133
(iii) Problem collections;
(iv) Fatal flaws, correctable flaws, and
how to correct problems in collections;
and
(v) The collector’s responsibility for
maintaining the integrity of the
collection process, ensuring the privacy
of the donor, ensuring the security of
the specimen, and avoiding conduct or
statements that could be viewed as
offensive or inappropriate.
(4) Has demonstrated proficiency in
collections by completing five
consecutive error-free mock collections.
(i) The five mock collections must
include two uneventful collection
scenarios, one insufficient specimen
quantity scenario, one scenario in which
the donor refuses to sign the Federal
CCF, and one scenario in which the
donor refuses to initial the specimen
container tamper-evident seal.
(ii) A qualified trainer for collectors
must monitor and evaluate the
individual being trained, in person or by
a means that provides real-time
observation and interaction between the
trainer and the trainee, and the trainer
must attest in writing that the mock
collections are ‘‘error-free.’’
(b) A trained collector must complete
refresher training at least every five
years that includes the requirements in
paragraph (a) of this section.
(c) The collector must maintain the
documentation of his or her training and
provide that documentation to a federal
agency when requested.
(d) An individual may not collect
specimens for a federal agency until his
or her training as a collector has been
properly documented.
Section 4.4 What are the requirements
to be a trainer for collectors?
(a) Individuals are considered
qualified trainers for collectors and may
train others to collect hair specimens
when they have completed the
following:
(1) Qualified as a trained collector and
regularly conducted hair drug test
collections for a period of at least one
year or
(2) Completed a ‘‘train the trainer’’
course given by an organization (e.g.,
manufacturer, private entity, contractor,
federal agency).
(b) A qualified trainer for collectors
must complete refresher training at least
every five years in accordance with the
collector requirements in Section 4.3(a).
(c) A qualified trainer for collectors
must maintain the documentation of his
or her training and provide that
documentation to a federal agency when
requested.
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
56134
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Section 4.5 What must a federal
agency do before a collector is permitted
to collect a specimen?
A federal agency must ensure the
following:
(a) The collector has satisfied the
requirements described in Section 4.3;
(b) The collector, who may be selfemployed, or an organization (e.g., third
party administrator that provides a
collection service, collector training
company, federal agency that employs
its own collectors) maintains a copy of
the training record(s); and
(c) The collector has been provided
the name and telephone number of the
federal agency representative.
Subpart E—Collection Sites
Section 5.1 Where can a collection for
a drug test take place?
(a) A collection site may be a
permanent or temporary facility located
either at the work site or at a remote
site.
(b) In the event that an agencydesignated collection site is not
accessible and there is an immediate
requirement to collect a hair specimen,
another site may be used for the
collection, providing the collection is
performed by a trained hair specimen
collector.
Section 5.2 What are the requirements
for a collection site?
The facility used as a collection site
must have the following:
(a) Provisions to ensure donor privacy
during the collection (as described in
Section 8.1);
(b) A suitable and clean surface area
that is not accessible to the donor for
handling the specimens and completing
the required paperwork;
(c) A secure temporary storage area to
maintain specimens until the specimen
is transferred to an HHS-certified
laboratory;
(d) A restricted access area where
only authorized personnel may be
present during the collection;
(e) A restricted access area for the
storage of collection supplies; and
(f) A restricted access area for the
secure storage of records.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Section 5.3 Where must collection site
records be stored?
Collection site records must be stored
at a secure site designated by the
collector or the collector’s employer.
Section 5.4 How long must collection
site records be stored?
Collection site records (e.g., collector
copies of the OMB-approved Federal
CCF) must be stored securely for a
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
minimum of 2 years. The collection site
may convert hardcopy records to
electronic records for storage and
discard the hardcopy records after 6
months.
Section 5.5 How does the collector
ensure the security and integrity of a
specimen at the collection site?
(a) A collector must do the following
to maintain the security and integrity of
a specimen:
(1) Not allow unauthorized personnel
to enter the collection area during the
collection procedure;
(2) Perform only one donor collection
at a time;
(3) Restrict access to collection
supplies before, during, and after
collection;
(4) Ensure that only the collector and
the donor are allowed to handle the
unsealed specimen;
(5) Ensure the chain of custody
process is maintained and documented
throughout the entire collection, storage,
and transport procedures;
(6) Ensure that the Federal CCF is
completed and distributed as required;
and
(7) Ensure that specimens transported
to an HHS-certified laboratory are sealed
and placed in transport containers
designed to minimize the possibility of
damage during shipment (e.g., specimen
boxes, padded mailers, or other suitable
shipping container), and those
containers are securely sealed to
eliminate the possibility of undetected
tampering.
(b) Couriers, express carriers, and
postal service personnel are not
required to document chain of custody
since specimens are sealed in packages
that would indicate tampering during
transit to the HHS-certified laboratory.
Section 5.6 What are the privacy
requirements when collecting a hair
specimen?
The collector collects hair from the
donor (as described in Section 8.5). The
donor must be allowed privacy while
the collector obtains the hair specimen.
Collections must be performed at a site
that provides reasonable privacy (as
described in Section 8.1).
Subpart F—Federal Drug Testing
Custody and Control Form
Section 6.1 What federal form is used
to document custody and control?
The OMB-approved Federal CCF must
be used to document custody and
control of each specimen at the
collection site.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
Section 6.2 What happens if the
correct OMB-approved Federal CCF is
not available or is not used?
(a) The use of a non-federal CCF or an
expired Federal CCF is not, by itself, a
reason for the HHS-certified laboratory
to automatically reject the specimen for
testing or for the MRO to cancel the test.
(b) If the collector does not use the
correct OMB-approved Federal CCF, the
collector must document that it is a
federal agency specimen collection and
provide the reason that the incorrect
form was used. Based on the
information provided by the collector,
the HHS-certified laboratory must
handle and test the specimen as a
federal agency specimen.
(c) If the HHS-certified laboratory or
MRO discovers that the collector used
an incorrect form, the laboratory or
MRO must obtain a memorandum for
the record from the collector describing
the reason the incorrect form was used.
If a memorandum for the record cannot
be obtained, the laboratory reports a
rejected for testing result to the MRO
and the MRO cancels the test. The HHScertified laboratory must wait at least 5
business days while attempting to
obtain the memorandum before
reporting a rejected for testing result to
the MRO.
Subpart G—Hair Specimen Collection
Materials
Section 7.1 What is used to collect a
hair specimen?
Collection materials include a means
(i.e., single-use or reusable scissors) to
cut the hair, individually packaged
isopropyl alcohol wipe (i.e., to clean
reusable scissors), two specimen guides
(items that hold the hair specimen as
positioned by the collector), and two
sealable collection containers (e.g.,
envelopes) labelled A for the primary
(A) and B for the split (B) specimens.
Section 7.2 What are the requirements
for hair collection materials?
(a) The specimen guides and the
collection containers must not
substantially affect the composition of
drugs and/or drug metabolites in the
hair specimen.
(b) All collection items (e.g., scissors,
clip) that come into contact with the
hair must be single-use items or must be
cleaned before each use, as described in
section 8.4.
(c) The specimen guides and
containers must maintain the integrity
of the specimen during storage and
transport so that the specimen
contained therein can be tested in an
HHS-certified laboratory for the
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
presence of drugs and/or their
metabolites.
(d) The specimen guides and
containers must be sufficiently
transparent to enable an assessment of
specimen appearance and identification
of abnormal physical characteristics
without opening the container.
Section 7.3 What are the minimum
performance requirements for hair
collection materials?
(a) The specimen guides must be
capable of holding the hair specimen as
positioned by the collector, and have an
indication of the orientation (i.e., root or
distal end) of the hair specimen
collected.
(b) The specimen guides or containers
must have graduated markings or guides
for collectors to verify the minimum
width and length of hair that would
equate to 100 mg of hair or 50 mg of hair
in each container labeled A and B.
Subpart H—Hair Specimen Collection
Procedure
Section 8.1 What privacy must the
donor be given when providing a hair
specimen?
The following privacy requirements
apply when a donor is providing a hair
specimen:
(a) Only authorized personnel and the
donor may be present in the restricted
access area where the collection takes
place.
(b) The collector is not required to be
the same gender as the donor.
Section 8.2 What must the collector
ensure at the collection site before
starting a hair specimen collection?
The collector must take all reasonable
steps to prevent the adulteration or
substitution of a hair specimen at the
collection site.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Section 8.3 What are the preliminary
steps in the hair specimen collection
procedure?
The collector must take the following
steps before beginning a hair specimen
collection:
(a) If a donor fails to arrive at the
collection site at the assigned time, the
collector must follow the federal agency
policy or contact the federal agency
representative to obtain guidance on
action to be taken.
(b) When the donor arrives at the
collection site, the collector should
begin the collection procedure without
undue delay. For example, the
collection should not be delayed
because an authorized employer or
employer representative is late in
arriving.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
(c) The collector requests the donor to
present photo identification (e.g.,
driver’s license; employee badge issued
by the employer; an alternative photo
identification issued by a federal, state,
or local government agency). If the
donor does not have proper photo
identification, the collector shall contact
the supervisor of the donor or the
federal agency representative who can
positively identify the donor. If the
donor’s identity cannot be established,
the collector must not proceed with the
collection.
(d) The collector asks the donor to
remove any unnecessary outer garments
such as a coat or jacket and any hat or
hood.
(e) If, at any point in the collection,
the collector sees any item that appears
to have been brought by the donor to the
collection site with the intent to
adulterate or substitute the specimen,
this is considered a refusal to test. The
collector must stop the collection and
report the refusal to test as described in
Section 8.9.
(f) If, at any point in the collection,
the collector sees any evidence that the
donor has lice or similar infestation in
his or her hair, the collector
immediately stops the collection
procedure. The collector records the
reason for not collecting a hair specimen
on the Federal CCF, contacts the federal
agency’s designated representative for
authorization to collect an alternate
specimen, and assuming proper
authorization is provided, begins the
collection procedure for the alternate
specimen (see Section 8.7) in
accordance with the Mandatory
Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug
Testing Programs using the alternate
specimen. The collector sends the
appropriate copies of the Federal CCF
used for the hair specimen to the MRO
and to the federal agency’s designated
representative. The federal agency may
choose to provide the collection site
with a standard protocol to follow in
lieu of requiring the collector to contact
the agency’s designated representative
for authorization in each case.
(g) The collector must provide
identification (e.g., employee badge,
employee list) if requested by the donor.
(h) The collector explains the basic
collection procedure to the donor.
(i) The collector informs the donor
that the instructions for completing the
Federal Custody and Control Form are
located on the Federal CCF (e.g., on the
back of Copy 5 or on a separate page)
or are available upon request.
(j) The collector answers any
reasonable and appropriate questions
the donor may have regarding the
collection procedure.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
56135
Section 8.4 What steps does the
collector take in the collection
procedure before the donor provides a
hair specimen?
(a) At the beginning of the collection,
the collector must put on single-use
gloves that are clean and unused. The
collector must remove the gloves from
the package in the presence of the
donor.
(b) The collector will provide or the
donor may select specimen collection
materials that are clean, unused, and
wrapped/sealed in original packaging.
The specimen collection materials will
be opened in view of the donor.
Specimen collection materials must be
single-use, with the exception of
scissors and/or clips which may be
either single-use or reusable (as
described in item 2 below).
(1) Both the donor and the collector
must keep the unwrapped collection
materials in view at all times until the
container containing the donor’s hair
specimen has been sealed and labeled.
(2) Scissors and/or clips may be
reused provided that the collector
cleans such items in the presence of the
donor with an isopropyl alcohol wipe
prior to use in the hair collection. If
single-use items are used, the collector
is not required to clean the item before
use assuming such use is the first use of
the item.
(c) The collector reviews with the
donor the procedures required for hair
specimen collection as stated in the
instructions for the specimen collection
kit.
(d) The collector asks the donor
whether they have false hair (i.e.,
artificial or natural hair that is not their
own such as a wig, weave, or
extensions). If the donor admits the
presence of false hair or the collector
identifies false hair after the donor
denies having false hair, this does not
constitute a refusal to test. If the
collector can collect a sufficient amount
of the donor’s own hair, the collector
proceeds with the collection.
(e) If the collector is unable to collect
the donor’s hair, the collector
immediately stops the collection
procedure. The collector records the
reason for not collecting a hair specimen
on the Federal CCF, contacts the federal
agency’s designated representative for
authorization to collect the alternate
specimen, and assuming proper
authorization is provided, begins the
collection procedure for the alternate
specimen (see Section 8.7) in
accordance with the Mandatory
Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug
Testing Programs using the alternate
specimen. The collector sends the
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
56136
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
appropriate copies of the Federal CCF
used for the hair specimen to the MRO
and to the federal agency’s designated
representative. The federal agency may
choose to provide the collection site
with a standard protocol to follow in
lieu of requiring the collector to contact
the agency’s designated representative
for authorization in each case.
(f) The collector notes any unusual
behavior or appearance of the donor on
the Federal CCF. If the collector detects
any conduct that clearly indicates an
attempt to tamper with a specimen, the
collector must report a refusal to test in
accordance with Section 8.9.
Section 8.5 What steps does the
collector take during and after the hair
specimen collection procedure?
Integrity and Identity of the
Specimen. The collector must take the
following steps during and after the
donor provides the hair specimen:
(a) The collector shall be present and
maintain visual contact with the donor
during the procedures outlined in this
section.
(b) The collector cuts a portion of the
donor’s hair that is approximately onehalf (0.5) inches wide and at least one
(1.0) inch long on the crown (i.e.,
posterior vertex) of the head and as
close to the scalp as possible.
(1) The collector must ensure that at
least 100 mg of hair is collected for
testing.
(2) If the donor’s hair is sparse or is
short (i.e., between one-half and one
inch long), the collector may collect hair
from multiple sites on the posterior
vertex and back of the head, avoiding
the front and side regions.
(3) If the donor’s hair is less than onehalf inch long or if the collector cannot
collect at least 100 mg from the
posterior vertex or back of the head, the
collector stops the collection and takes
actions described in Section 8.6.
(c) The collector subdivides the hair
specimen into two approximately equal
specimens (A and B), and places
specimen A in the first specimen guide
and specimen B in the second specimen
guide. If possible, the collector aligns
the hairs with the root end identified as
indicated on the specimen guide. For
short hair (between one-half and one
inch long), the collector is not required
to identify the root end. The collector
secures the hair in each specimen guide
(e.g., folds the guide).
(d) If the donor fails to remain present
through the completion of the
collection, fails to follow the
instructions for the collection, refuses to
allow the collector to collect sufficient
hair as required in step (b) above for
reasons other than those described in
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
Section 2.1, or refuses to provide an
alternate specimen when directed to do
so, the collector stops the collection and
reports the refusal to test in accordance
with Section 8.9.
(e) If the federal agency requires
collection of an alternate specimen at
the same time as the hair collection, the
collector should collect the hair
specimen first, and then collect the
other authorized specimen (e.g., urine or
oral fluid) using the applicable
collection procedures described in the
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs using
the alternate specimen.
(i) The collector must record a
comment on the Federal CCF for each
specimen with sufficient information to
link the two specimens (including the
unique specimen identification number
of the associated specimen).
(ii) The collector must also record a
comment on the Federal CCF for the
alternate specimen noting that the
laboratory is to hold the specimen for
testing pending the MRO’s request for
testing.
(iii) The collector must forward the
hair specimen to an HHS-certified hair
testing laboratory. The collector
forwards the alternate specimen, if one
is authorized to be collected at the same
time as the hair specimen, to a
laboratory that is certified by HHS for
that specimen type. The laboratory will
accession and store the alternate
specimen under appropriate storage
conditions in the event that the MRO
requests testing as described in Section
13.5.
Section 8.6 What procedure is used
when the donor is unable to provide a
hair specimen?
If the donor is unable to provide a
hair specimen (i.e., as described in
sections 2.1, 8.3, and 8.4), the collector
records the reason for not collecting a
hair specimen on the Federal CCF,
contacts the federal agency’s designated
representative for authorization to
collect an alternate specimen, and
assuming proper authorization is
provided, begins the collection
procedure for the alternate specimen
authorized by the federal agency (see
Section 8.7) in accordance with the
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs using
the alternate specimen. The collector
sends the appropriate copies of the
Federal CCF used for the hair specimen
to the MRO and to the federal agency’s
designated representative. The federal
agency may choose to provide the
collection site with a standard protocol
to follow in lieu of requiring the
collector to contact the agency’s
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
designated representative for
authorization to collect an alternate
specimen in each case.
Section 8.7 If the donor is unable to
provide a hair specimen, may another
specimen type be collected for testing?
Yes. A federal agency that elects to
implement hair testing is required to
authorize collections of one or more
alternate specimen types authorized by
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs.
Section 8.8 How does the collector
prepare the hair specimens?
(a) All federal agency collections are
to be split specimen collections.
(b) After placing the A and B hair
specimens (i.e., in the specimen guides)
into separate envelopes, in the presence
of the donor, the collector places a
tamper-evident label/seal from the
Federal CCF on each envelope. The
collector records the date of the
collection on the tamper-evident labels/
seals.
(c) The collector instructs the donor to
initial the tamper-evident labels/seals
on each specimen envelope. If the donor
refuses to initial the labels/seals, the
collector notes the refusal on the
Federal CCF and continues with the
collection process.
(d) The collector must ensure that all
the information required on the Federal
CCF is provided.
(e) The collector asks the donor to
read and sign a statement on the Federal
CCF certifying that the specimens
identified were collected from him or
her. If the donor refuses to sign the
certification statement, the collector
notes the refusal on the Federal CCF and
continues with the collection process.
(f) The collector signs and prints his
or her name on the Federal CCF,
completes the Federal CCF, and
distributes the copies of the Federal CCF
as required.
(g) The collector seals the specimens
(A and B) in a package and, within 24
hours or during the next business day,
sends them to the HHS-certified
laboratory that will be testing the
primary (A) hair specimen.
(h) If the specimen and Federal CCF
are not immediately transported to an
HHS-certified laboratory, they must
remain under direct control of the
collector or be appropriately secured
under proper specimen storage
conditions until transported.
Section 8.9 How does the collector
report a donor’s refusal to test?
If there is a refusal to test as defined
in Section 1.7, the collector stops the
collection, discards any hair specimen
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
collected and reports the refusal to test
by:
(a) Notifying the federal agency by
means (e.g., telephone, email, or secure
fax) that ensures that the notification is
immediately received,
(b) Documenting the refusal to test
including the reason on the Federal
CCF. In the event that a donor is unable
to provide a sufficient amount of hair
for faith-based or medical reasons, or
due to an insufficient amount or length
of hair, the collector must specify the
circumstances, and
(c) Sending all copies of the Federal
CCF to the federal agency’s designated
representative.
Section 8.10 What are a federal
agency’s responsibilities for a collection
site?
(a) A federal agency must ensure that
collectors and collection sites satisfy all
requirements in subparts D, E, F, G, and
H.
(b) A federal agency (or only one
federal agency when several agencies
are using the same collection site) must
inspect 5 percent or up to a maximum
of 50 collection sites each year, selected
randomly from those sites used to
collect agency specimens (e.g., virtual,
onsite, or self-evaluation).
(c) A federal agency must investigate
reported collection site deficiencies
(e.g., specimens reported ‘‘rejected for
testing’’ by an HHS-certified laboratory)
and take appropriate action which may
include a collection site self-assessment
(i.e., using the Collection Site Checklist
for the Collection of Hair Specimens for
Federal Agency Workplace Drug Testing
Programs) or an inspection of the
collection site. The inspections of these
additional collection sites may be
included in the 5 percent or maximum
of 50 collection sites inspected
annually.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Subpart I—HHS Certification of
Laboratories
Section 9.1 Who has the authority to
certify laboratories to test hair
specimens for federal agencies?
(a) The Secretary has broad discretion
to take appropriate action to ensure the
full reliability and accuracy of drug
testing and reporting, to resolve
problems related to drug testing, and to
enforce all standards set forth in these
Guidelines. The Secretary has the
authority to issue directives to any HHScertified laboratory, including
suspending the use of certain analytical
procedures when necessary to protect
the integrity of the testing process;
ordering any HHS-certified laboratory to
undertake corrective actions to respond
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
to material deficiencies identified by an
inspection or through performance
testing; ordering any HHS-certified
laboratory to send specimens or
specimen aliquots to another HHScertified laboratory for retesting when
necessary to ensure the accuracy of
testing under these Guidelines; ordering
the review of results for specimens
tested under the Guidelines for private
sector clients to the extent necessary to
ensure the full reliability of drug testing
for federal agencies; and ordering any
other action necessary to address
deficiencies in drug testing, analysis,
specimen collection, chain of custody,
reporting of results, or any other aspect
of the certification program.
(b) A laboratory is prohibited from
stating or implying that it is certified by
HHS under these Guidelines to test hair
specimens for federal agencies unless it
holds such certification.
Section 9.2 What is the process for a
laboratory to become HHS-certified?
(a) A laboratory seeking HHS
certification must:
(1) Submit a completed OMBapproved application form (i.e., the
applicant laboratory provides detailed
information on both the administrative
and analytical procedures to be used for
federally regulated specimens);
(2) Have its application reviewed as
complete and accepted by HHS;
(3) Successfully complete the PT
challenges in 3 consecutive sets of
initial PT samples;
(4) Satisfy all the requirements for an
initial inspection; and
(5) Receive notification of certification
from the Secretary before testing
specimens for federal agencies.
Section 9.3 What is the process for a
laboratory to maintain HHS
certification?
(a) To maintain HHS certification, a
laboratory must:
(1) Successfully participate in both
the maintenance PT and inspection
programs (i.e., successfully test the
required quarterly sets of maintenance
PT samples, undergo an inspection 3
months after being certified, and
undergo maintenance inspections at a
minimum of every 6 months thereafter);
(2) Respond in an appropriate, timely,
and complete manner to required
corrective action requests if deficiencies
are identified in the maintenance PT
performance, during the inspections,
operations, or reporting; and
(3) Satisfactorily complete corrective
remedial actions, and undergo special
inspection and special PT sets to
maintain or restore certification when
material deficiencies occur in either the
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
56137
PT program, inspection program, or in
operations and reporting.
Section 9.4 What is the process when
a laboratory does not maintain its HHS
certification?
(a) A laboratory that does not
maintain its HHS certification must:
(1) Stop testing federally regulated
specimens;
(2) Ensure the security of federally
regulated specimens and records
throughout the required storage period
described in Sections 11.20, 11.21, and
14.7;
(3) Ensure access to federally
regulated specimens and records in
accordance with Sections 11.23 and
11.24 and Subpart P; and
(4) Follow the HHS suspension and
revocation procedures when imposed by
the Secretary, follow the HHS
procedures in Subpart P that will be
used for all actions associated with the
suspension and/or revocation of HHS
certification.
Section 9.5 What are the qualitative
and quantitative specifications of
performance testing (PT) samples?
(a) PT samples used to evaluate drug
tests will be prepared using the
following specifications:
(1) PT samples may contain one or
more of the drugs and drug metabolites
in the drug classes listed in Section 3.4.
The PT samples must satisfy one of the
following parameters:
(i) The concentration of a drug or
metabolite will be at least 20 percent
above the initial test cutoff
concentration for the drug or drug
metabolite;
(ii) The concentration of a drug or
metabolite may be as low as 40 percent
of the confirmatory test cutoff
concentration when the PT sample is
designated as a retest sample; or
(iii) The concentration of drug or
metabolite may differ from 9.5(a)(1)(i)
and 9.5(a)(1)(ii) for a special purpose.
(2) A PT sample may contain an
interfering substance or other
substances for special purposes.
(3) A PT sample may be prepared in
various ways (e.g., using drug user hair,
hair externally contaminated with drug
analytes, hair subjected to cosmetic
treatments) to challenge the laboratory’s
decontamination and test procedures.
(4) A negative PT sample will not
contain a measurable amount of a target
analyte.
(b) The laboratory must (to the
greatest extent possible) handle, test,
and report a PT sample in a manner
identical to that used for a donor
specimen, unless otherwise specified.
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
56138
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Section 9.6 What are the PT
requirements for an applicant laboratory
that seeks to perform hair testing?
(a) An applicant laboratory that seeks
certification under these Guidelines to
perform hair testing must satisfy the
following criteria on three consecutive
sets of PT samples:
(1) Have no false positive results;
(2) Correctly identify, confirm, and
report at least 90 percent of the total
drug challenges over the three sets of PT
samples;
(3) Correctly identify at least 80
percent of the drug challenges for each
initial drug test over the three sets of PT
samples;
(4) For the confirmatory drug tests,
correctly determine the concentrations
[i.e., no more than ±20 percent or ±2
standard deviations (whichever is
larger) from the appropriate reference or
peer group means] for at least 80 percent
of the total drug challenges over the
three sets of PT samples;
(5) For the confirmatory drug tests,
must not obtain any drug concentration
that differs by more than ±50 percent
from the appropriate reference or peer
group mean;
(6) For each confirmatory drug test,
correctly identify and determine the
concentrations [i.e., no more than ±20
percent or ±2 standard deviations
(whichever is larger) from the
appropriate reference or peer group
means] for at least 50 percent of the
drug challenges for an individual drug
over the three sets of PT samples;
(7) For each confirmatory drug test,
correctly identify a sample that has been
contaminated with one or more drugs;
(b) Failure to satisfy these
requirements will result in the denial of
the laboratory’s application for HHS
certification to perform hair testing.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Section 9.7 What are the PT
requirements for an HHS-certified hair
laboratory?
(a) A laboratory certified under these
Guidelines to perform hair testing must
satisfy the following criteria on the
maintenance PT samples:
(1) Have no false positive results;
(2) Correctly identify, confirm, and
report at least 90 percent of the total
drug challenges over two consecutive
PT cycles;
(3) Correctly identify at least 80
percent of the drug challenges for each
initial drug test over two consecutive PT
cycles;
(4) For the confirmatory drug tests,
correctly determine that the
concentrations for at least 80 percent of
the total drug challenges are no more
than ±20 percent or ±2 standard
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
deviations (whichever is larger) from the
appropriate reference or peer group
means over two consecutive PT cycles;
(5) For the confirmatory drug tests,
must not obtain any drug concentration
that differs by more than ±50 percent
from the appropriate reference or peer
group means;
(6) For each confirmatory drug test,
correctly identify and determine that the
concentrations for at least 50 percent of
the drug challenges for an individual
drug are no more than ±20 percent or ±2
standard deviations (whichever is
larger) from the appropriate reference or
peer group means over two consecutive
PT cycles;
(7) For each confirmatory drug test,
correctly identify a sample
contaminated with one or more drugs;
(b) Failure to participate in all PT
cycles or to satisfy these requirements
may result in suspension or revocation
of an HHS-certified laboratory’s
certification.
Section 9.8 What are the inspection
requirements for an applicant
laboratory?
(a) An applicant laboratory is
inspected by a team of two inspectors.
(b) Each inspector conducts an
independent review and evaluation of
all aspects of the laboratory’s testing
procedures and facilities using an
inspection checklist.
Section 9.9 What are the maintenance
inspection requirements for an HHScertified laboratory?
(a) An HHS-certified laboratory must
undergo an inspection 3 months after
becoming certified and at least every 6
months thereafter.
(b) An HHS-certified laboratory is
inspected by two or more inspectors.
The number of inspectors is determined
according to the number of specimens to
be reviewed. Additional information
regarding inspections is available from
SAMHSA.
(c) Inspectors conduct an independent
evaluation and review of the HHScertified laboratory’s procedures,
records, and facilities using guidance
provided by the Secretary.
(d) To remain certified, an HHScertified laboratory must continue to
satisfy the minimum requirements as
stated in these Guidelines.
Section 9.10 Who can inspect an HHScertified laboratory and when may the
inspection be conducted?
(a) An individual may be selected as
an inspector for the Secretary if they
satisfy the following criteria:
(1) Has experience and an educational
background similar to that required for
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
either a responsible person or a
certifying scientist for an HHS-certified
laboratory as described in Subpart K;
(2) Has read and thoroughly
understands the policies and
requirements contained in these
Guidelines and in other guidance
consistent with these Guidelines
provided by the Secretary;
(3) Submits a resume and
documentation of qualifications to HHS;
(4) Attends approved training; and
(5) Performs acceptably as an
inspector on an inspection of an HHScertified laboratory.
(b) The Secretary or a federal agency
may conduct an inspection at any time.
Section 9.11 What happens if an
applicant laboratory does not satisfy the
minimum requirements for either the PT
program or the inspection program?
If an applicant laboratory fails to
satisfy the requirements established for
the initial certification process, the
laboratory must start the certification
process from the beginning.
Section 9.12 What happens if an HHScertified laboratory does not satisfy the
minimum requirements for either the PT
program or the inspection program?
(a) If an HHS-certified laboratory fails
to satisfy the minimum requirements for
certification, the laboratory is given a
period of time (e.g., 5 or 30 working
days depending on the nature of the
deficiency) to provide any explanation
for its performance and evidence that all
deficiencies have been corrected.
(b) A laboratory’s HHS certification
may be revoked, suspended, or no
further action taken depending on the
seriousness of the deficiencies and
whether there is evidence that the
deficiencies have been corrected and
that current performance meets the
requirements for certification.
(c) An HHS-certified laboratory may
be required to undergo a special
inspection or to test additional PT
samples to address deficiencies.
(d) If an HHS-certified laboratory’s
certification is revoked or suspended in
accordance with the process described
in Subpart P, the laboratory is not
permitted to test federally regulated
specimens until the suspension is lifted
or the laboratory has successfully
completed the certification
requirements as a new applicant
laboratory.
Section 9.13 What factors are
considered in determining whether
revocation of a laboratory’s HHS
certification is necessary?
(a) The Secretary shall revoke
certification of an HHS-certified
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
laboratory in accordance with these
Guidelines if the Secretary determines
that revocation is necessary to ensure
fully reliable and accurate drug test
results and reports.
(b) The Secretary shall consider the
following factors in determining
whether revocation is necessary:
(1) Unsatisfactory performance in
analyzing and reporting the results of
drug tests (e.g., an HHS-certified
laboratory reporting a false positive
result for an employee’s drug test);
(2) Unsatisfactory participation in
performance testing or inspections;
(3) A material violation of a
certification standard, contract term, or
other condition imposed on the HHScertified laboratory by a federal agency
using the laboratory’s services;
(4) Conviction for any criminal
offense committed as an incident to
operation of the HHS-certified
laboratory; or
(5) Any other cause that materially
affects the ability of the HHS-certified
laboratory to ensure fully reliable and
accurate drug test results and reports.
(c) The period and terms of revocation
shall be determined by the Secretary
and shall depend upon the facts and
circumstances of the revocation and the
need to ensure accurate and reliable
drug testing.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Section 9.14 What factors are
considered in determining whether to
suspend a laboratory’s HHS
certification?
(a) The Secretary may immediately
suspend (either partially or fully) a
laboratory’s HHS certification to
conduct drug testing for federal agencies
if the Secretary has reason to believe
that revocation may be required and that
immediate action is necessary to protect
the interests of the United States and its
employees.
(b) The Secretary shall determine the
period and terms of suspension based
upon the facts and circumstances of the
suspension and the need to ensure
accurate and reliable drug testing.
Section 9.15 How does the Secretary
notify an HHS-certified laboratory that
action is being taken against the
laboratory?
(a) When a laboratory’s HHS
certification is suspended or the
Secretary seeks to revoke HHS
certification, the Secretary shall
immediately serve the HHS-certified
laboratory with written notice of the
suspension or proposed revocation by
fax, mail, personal service, or registered
or certified mail, return receipt
requested. This notice shall state the
following:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
(1) The reasons for the suspension or
proposed revocation;
(2) The terms of the suspension or
proposed revocation; and
(3) The period of suspension or
proposed revocation.
(b) The written notice shall state that
the laboratory will be afforded an
opportunity for an informal review of
the suspension or proposed revocation
if it so requests in writing within 30
days of the date the laboratory received
the notice, or if expedited review is
requested, within 3 days of the date the
laboratory received the notice. Subpart
P contains detailed procedures to be
followed for an informal review of the
suspension or proposed revocation.
(c) A suspension must be effective
immediately. A proposed revocation
must be effective 30 days after written
notice is given or, if review is requested,
upon the reviewing official’s decision to
uphold the proposed revocation. If the
reviewing official decides not to uphold
the suspension or proposed revocation,
the suspension must terminate
immediately and any proposed
revocation shall not take effect.
(d) The Secretary will publish in the
Federal Register the name, address, and
telephone number of any HHS-certified
laboratory that has its certification
revoked or suspended under Section
9.13 or Section 9.14, respectively, and
the name of any HHS-certified
laboratory that has its suspension lifted.
The Secretary shall provide to any
member of the public upon request the
written notice provided to a laboratory
that has its HHS certification suspended
or revoked, as well as the reviewing
official’s written decision which
upholds or denies the suspension or
proposed revocation under the
procedures of Subpart P.
Section 9.16 May a laboratory that had
its HHS certification revoked be
recertified to test federal agency
specimens?
Following revocation, a laboratory
may apply for recertification. Unless
otherwise provided by the Secretary in
the notice of revocation under Section
9.15 or the reviewing official’s decision
under Section 16.9(e) or 16.14(a), a
laboratory which has had its
certification revoked may reapply for
HHS certification as an applicant
laboratory.
Section 9.17 Where is the list of HHScertified laboratories published?
(a) The list of HHS-certified
laboratories is published monthly in the
Federal Register. This notice is also
available on the internet at https://
www.samhsa.gov/workplace.
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
56139
(b) An applicant laboratory is not
included on the list.
Subpart J—Blind Samples Submitted
by an Agency
Section 10.1 What are the
requirements for federal agencies to
submit blind samples to HHS-certified
laboratories?
(a) Each federal agency is required to
submit blind samples for its workplace
drug testing program. The collector
must send the blind samples to the
HHS-certified laboratory that the
collector sends employee specimens.
(b) Each federal agency must submit
at least 3 percent blind samples along
with its donor specimens based on the
projected total number of donor
specimens collected per year (up to a
maximum of 400 blind samples). Every
effort should be made to ensure that
blind samples are submitted quarterly.
(c) Approximately 75 percent of the
blind samples submitted each year by
an agency must be negative and 25
percent must be positive for one or more
drugs.
Section 10.2 What are the
requirements for blind samples?
(a) Drug positive blind samples must
be validated by the supplier using
appropriate initial and confirmatory
tests.
(1) Drug positive blind samples must
contain one or more of the drugs or
metabolites listed in Section 3.4.
(2) Drug positive blind samples must
contain concentrations of drugs at least
1.5 times the initial drug test cutoff
concentration.
(b) Drug negative blind samples (i.e.,
certified to contain no drugs) must be
validated by the supplier as negative
using appropriate initial and
confirmatory tests.
(c) The supplier must provide
information on the blind samples’
content, validation, expected results,
and stability to the collection site/
collector sending the blind samples to
the laboratory, and must provide the
information upon request to the MRO,
the federal agency for which the blind
sample was submitted, or the Secretary.
Section 10.3 How is a blind sample
submitted to an HHS-certified
laboratory?
(a) A blind sample must be submitted
as a split specimen (specimens A and B)
with the current Federal CCF that the
HHS-certified laboratory uses for donor
specimens. The collector provides the
required information to ensure that the
Federal CCF has been properly
completed and provides fictitious
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
56140
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
initials on the specimen label/seal. The
collector must indicate that the
specimen is a blind sample on the MRO
copy where a donor would normally
provide a signature.
(b) A collector should attempt to
distribute the required number of blind
samples randomly with donor
specimens rather than submitting the
full complement of blind samples as a
single group.
Section 10.4 What happens if an
inconsistent result is reported for a
blind sample?
If an HHS-certified laboratory reports
a result for a blind sample that is
inconsistent with the expected result
(e.g., a laboratory reports a negative
result for a blind sample that was
supposed to be positive, a laboratory
reports a positive result for a blind
sample that was supposed to be
negative):
(a) The MRO must contact the
laboratory and attempt to determine if
the laboratory made an error during the
testing or reporting of the sample;
(b) The MRO must contact the blind
sample supplier and attempt to
determine if the supplier made an error
during the preparation or transfer of the
sample;
(c) The MRO must contact the
collector and determine if the collector
made an error when preparing the blind
sample for transfer to the HHS-certified
laboratory;
(d) If there is no obvious reason for
the inconsistent result, the MRO must
notify both the federal agency for which
the blind sample was submitted and the
Secretary; and
(e) The Secretary shall investigate the
blind sample error. A report of the
Secretary’s investigative findings and
the corrective action taken in response
to identified deficiencies must be sent to
the federal agency. The Secretary shall
ensure notification of the finding as
appropriate to other federal agencies
and coordinate any necessary actions to
prevent the recurrence of the error.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Subpart K—Laboratory
Section 11.1 What must be included in
the HHS-certified laboratory’s standard
operating procedure manual?
(a) An HHS-certified laboratory must
have a standard operating procedure
(SOP) manual that describes, in detail,
all HHS-certified laboratory operations.
When followed, the SOP manual
ensures that all specimens are tested
using the same procedures.
(b) The SOP manual must include at
a minimum, but is not limited to, a
detailed description of the following:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
(1) Chain of custody procedures;
(2) Accessioning;
(3) Security;
(4) Quality control/quality assurance
programs;
(5) Analytical methods and
procedures;
(6) Equipment and maintenance
programs;
(7) Personnel training;
(8) Reporting procedures; and
(9) Computers, software, and
laboratory information management
systems.
(c) All procedures in the SOP manual
must be compliant with these
Guidelines and all guidance provided
by the Secretary.
(d) A copy of all procedures that have
been replaced or revised and the dates
on which the procedures were in effect
must be maintained for at least 2 years.
Section 11.2 What are the
responsibilities of the responsible
person (RP)?
(a) Manage the day-to-day operations
of the HHS-certified laboratory even if
another individual has overall
responsibility for alternate areas of a
multi-specialty laboratory.
(b) Ensure that there are sufficient
personnel with adequate training and
experience to supervise and conduct the
work of the HHS-certified laboratory.
The RP must ensure the continued
competency of laboratory staff by
documenting their in-service training,
reviewing their work performance, and
verifying their skills.
(c) Maintain a complete and current
SOP manual that is available to all
personnel of the HHS-certified
laboratory and ensure that it is followed.
The SOP manual must be reviewed,
signed, and dated by the RP(s) when
procedures are first placed into use and
when changed or when a new
individual assumes responsibility for
the management of the HHS-certified
laboratory. The SOP must be reviewed
and documented by the RP annually.
(d) Maintain a quality assurance
program that ensures the proper
performance and reporting of all test
results; verify and monitor acceptable
analytical performance for all controls
and calibrators; monitor quality control
testing; and document the validity,
reliability, accuracy, precision, and
performance characteristics of each test
and test system.
(e) Initiate and implement all
remedial actions necessary to maintain
satisfactory operation and performance
of the HHS-certified laboratory in
response to the following: Quality
control systems not within performance
specifications; errors in result reporting
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
or in analysis of performance testing
samples; and inspection deficiencies.
The RP must ensure that specimen
results are not reported until all
corrective actions have been taken and
that the results provided are accurate
and reliable.
Section 11.3 What scientific
qualifications must the RP have?
The RP must have documented
scientific qualifications in analytical
toxicology.
Minimum qualifications are:
(a) Certification or licensure as a
laboratory director by the state in
forensic or clinical laboratory
toxicology, a Ph.D. in one of the natural
sciences, or training and experience
comparable to a Ph.D. in one of the
natural sciences with training and
laboratory/research experience in
biology, chemistry, and pharmacology
or toxicology;
(b) Experience in forensic toxicology
with emphasis on the collection and
analysis of biological specimens for
drugs of abuse;
(c) Experience in forensic applications
of analytical toxicology (e.g.,
publications, court testimony,
conducting research on the
pharmacology and toxicology of drugs
of abuse) or qualify as an expert witness
in forensic toxicology;
(d) Fulfillment of the RP
responsibilities and qualifications, as
demonstrated by the HHS-certified
laboratory’s performance and verified
upon interview by HHS-trained
inspectors during each on-site
inspection; and
(e) Qualify as a certifying scientist.
Section 11.4 What happens when the
RP is absent or leaves an HHS-certified
laboratory?
(a) HHS-certified laboratories must
have multiple RPs or one RP and an
alternate RP. If the RP(s) are
concurrently absent, an alternate RP
must be present and qualified to fulfill
the responsibilities of the RP.
(1) If an HHS-certified laboratory is
without the RP and alternate RP for 14
calendar days or less (e.g., temporary
absence due to vacation, illness, or
business trip), the HHS-certified
laboratory may continue operations and
testing of federal agency specimens
under the direction of a certifying
scientist.
(2) The Secretary, in accordance with
these Guidelines, will suspend a
laboratory’s HHS certification for all
specimens if the laboratory does not
have an RP or alternate RP for a period
of more than 14 calendar days. The
suspension will be lifted upon the
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Secretary’s approval of a new
permanent RP or alternate RP.
(b) If the RP leaves an HHS-certified
laboratory:
(1) The HHS-certified laboratory may
maintain certification and continue
testing federally regulated specimens
under the direction of an alternate RP
for a period of up to 180 days while
seeking to hire and receive the
Secretary’s approval of the RP’s
replacement.
(2) The Secretary, in accordance with
these Guidelines, will suspend a
laboratory’s HHS certification for all
federally regulated specimens if the
laboratory does not have a permanent
RP within 180 days. The suspension
will be lifted upon the Secretary’s
approval of the new permanent RP.
(c) To nominate an individual as an
RP or alternate RP, the HHS-certified
laboratory must submit the following
documents to the Secretary: The
candidate’s current resume or
curriculum vitae, copies of diplomas
and licensures, a training plan (not to
exceed 90 days) to transition the
candidate into the position, an itemized
comparison of the candidate’s
qualifications to the minimum RP
qualifications described in the
Guidelines, and have official academic
transcript(s) submitted from the
candidate’s institution(s) of higher
learning. The candidate must be found
qualified during an on-site inspection of
the HHS-certified laboratory.
(d) The HHS-certified laboratory must
fulfill additional inspection and PT
criteria as required prior to conducting
federally regulated testing under a new
RP.
(2) Training and experience in
reviewing and reporting forensic test
results and maintaining chain of
custody, and an understanding of
appropriate remedial actions in
response to problems that may arise.
Section 11.5 What qualifications must
an individual have to certify a result
reported by an HHS-certified laboratory?
Section 11.8 What are the laboratory
chain of custody requirements for
specimens and aliquots?
(a) HHS-certified laboratories must
use chain of custody procedures
(internal and external) to maintain
control and accountability of specimens
from the time of receipt at the laboratory
through completion of testing, reporting
of results, during storage, and
continuing until final disposition of the
specimens.
(b) HHS-certified laboratories must
use chain of custody procedures to
document the handling and transfer of
aliquots throughout the testing process
until final disposal.
(c) The chain of custody must be
documented using either paper copy or
electronic procedures.
(d) Each individual who handles a
specimen or aliquot must sign and
complete the appropriate entries on the
chain of custody form when the
(a) A certifying scientist must have:
(1) At least a bachelor’s degree in the
chemical or biological sciences or
medical technology, or equivalent;
(2) Training and experience in the
analytical methods and forensic
procedures used by the HHS-certified
laboratory relevant to the results that the
individual certifies; and
(3) Training and experience in
reviewing and reporting forensic test
results and maintaining chain of
custody, and an understanding of
appropriate remedial actions in
response to problems that may arise.
(b) A certifying technician must have:
(1) Training and experience in the
analytical methods and forensic
procedures used by the HHS-certified
laboratory relevant to the results that the
individual certifies; and
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
Section 11.6 What qualifications and
training must other personnel of an
HHS-certified laboratory have?
(a) All HHS-certified laboratory staff
(e.g., technicians, administrative staff)
must have the appropriate training and
skills for the tasks they perform.
(b) Each individual working in an
HHS-certified laboratory must be
properly trained (i.e., receive training in
each area of work that the individual
will be performing, including training in
forensic procedures related to their job
duties) before they are permitted to
work independently with federally
regulated specimens. All training must
be documented.
Section 11.7 What security measures
must an HHS-certified laboratory
maintain?
(a) An HHS-certified laboratory must
control access to the drug testing
facility, specimens, aliquots, and
records.
(b) Authorized visitors must be
escorted at all times, except for
individuals conducting inspections (i.e.,
for the Department, a federal agency, a
state, or other accrediting agency) or
emergency personnel (e.g., firefighters
and medical rescue teams).
(c) An HHS-certified laboratory must
maintain records documenting the
identity of the visitor and escort, date,
time of entry and exit, and purpose for
access to the secured area.
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
56141
specimen or aliquot is handled or
transferred, and every individual in the
chain must be identified.
(e) The date and purpose must be
recorded on an appropriate chain of
custody form each time a specimen or
aliquot is handled or transferred.
Section 11.9 How must an HHScertified laboratory process an alternate
specimen that was collected at the same
time as a hair specimen?
When an alternate specimen is
collected at the same time as a hair
specimen, the collector must forward
the hair specimen to an HHS-certified
hair testing laboratory and forward the
alternate specimen to a laboratory that
is certified by HHS for that specimen
type. Section 8.5(e) requires the
collector to record a comment on each
Federal CCF with sufficient information
(including the associated specimen’s
unique specimen identification number)
to enable the laboratory to identify that
there is an associated hair specimen.
(a) When a laboratory receives a
specimen that it is not certified by HHS
to test, the laboratory must contact the
federal agency representative to select a
laboratory with the appropriate HHS
certification to test the specimen, and
must forward the specimen to the
selected laboratory.
(b) The laboratory certified to test the
alternate specimen must accession and
hold the specimen under the storage
conditions specified by the Mandatory
Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug
Testing Programs for that specimen
type. The laboratory does not test the
alternate specimen unless an MRO
submits a signed request for testing.
(c) Upon receipt of a written MRO
request for testing of the alternate
specimen, the laboratory tests and
reports the specimen in accordance with
its standard operating procedures for
that specimen type.
Section 11.10
tested?
What amount of hair is
The laboratory prepares an aliquot of
the hair specimen of the specified
weight needed for the test. If the root
end is identified, the laboratory uses the
first one inch of the hair from the root
end.
Section 11.11 What are the
requirements for an initial drug test?
(a) An initial drug test may be:
(1) An immunoassay or
(2) An alternate technology (e.g.,
spectrometry, spectroscopy).
(b) An HHS-certified laboratory must
validate an initial drug test before
testing specimens.
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
56142
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
(c) Initial drug tests must be accurate
and reliable for the testing of specimens
when identifying drugs or their
metabolites.
(d) An HHS-certified laboratory may
conduct a second initial drug test using
a method with different specificity, to
rule out cross-reacting compounds. This
second initial drug test must satisfy the
batch quality control requirements
specified in Section 11.12.
(b) A confirmatory drug test must be
validated before it can be used to test
federally regulated specimens.
(c) Confirmatory drug tests must be
accurate and reliable for the testing of a
hair specimen when identifying and
quantifying drugs or their metabolites.
(d) The laboratory must subject each
confirmatory drug test specimen to a
validated and effective decontamination
procedure prior to testing.
Section 11.12 What must an HHScertified laboratory do to validate an
initial drug test?
Section 11.15 What must an HHScertified laboratory do to validate a
confirmatory drug test?
(a) An HHS-certified laboratory must
demonstrate and document the
following for each initial drug test:
(1) The ability to differentiate negative
specimens from those requiring further
testing;
(2) The performance of the test around
the cutoff concentration, using samples
at several concentrations between 0 and
150 percent of the cutoff concentration;
(3) The effective concentration range
of the test (linearity);
(4) The potential for carryover;
(5) The potential for interfering
substances; and
(6) The potential matrix effects if
using an alternate technology.
(b) Each new lot of reagent must be
verified prior to being placed into
service.
(c) Each initial drug test using an
alternate technology must be re-verified
periodically or at least annually.
(a) An HHS-certified laboratory must
demonstrate and document the
following for each confirmatory drug
test:
(1) The linear range of the analysis;
(2) The limit of detection;
(3) The limit of quantification;
(4) The accuracy and precision at the
cutoff concentration;
(5) The accuracy (bias) and precision
at 40 percent of the cutoff concentration;
(6) The potential for interfering
substances;
(7) The potential for carryover;
(8) The effectiveness of the
decontamination procedure; and
(9) The potential matrix effects if
using liquid chromatography coupled
with mass spectrometry.
(b) Each new lot of reagent must be
verified prior to being placed into
service.
(c) HHS-certified laboratories must reverify each confirmatory drug test
method periodically or at least annually.
Section 11.13 What are the batch
quality control requirements when
conducting an initial drug test?
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
(a) Each batch of specimens must
contain the following controls:
(1) At least one control certified to
contain no drug or drug metabolite;
(2) At least one positive control with
the drug or drug metabolite targeted at
a concentration 25 percent above the
cutoff;
(3) At least one control with the drug
or drug metabolite targeted at a
concentration 75 percent of the cutoff;
and
(4) At least one control that appears
as a donor specimen to the analysts.
(b) Calibrators and controls must total
at least 10 percent of the aliquots
analyzed in each batch.
Section 11.14 What are the
requirements for a confirmatory drug
test?
(a) The analytical method must use
mass spectrometric identification [e.g.,
gas chromatography/mass spectrometry
(GC/MS), liquid chromatography/mass
spectrometry (LC/MS), GC/MS/MS, LC/
MS/MS] or equivalent.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
Section 11.16 What are the batch
quality control requirements when
conducting a confirmatory drug test?
(a) At a minimum, each batch of
specimens must contain the following
calibrators and controls:
(1) A calibrator at the cutoff
concentration;
(2) At least one control certified to
contain no drug or drug metabolite;
(3) At least one positive control with
the drug or drug metabolite targeted at
25 percent above the cutoff;
(4) At least one control targeted at or
less than 40 percent of the cutoff; and
(5) At least one control contaminated
with drug analyte to monitor the
effectiveness of the decontamination
procedure.
(b) Calibrators and controls must total
at least 10 percent of the aliquots
analyzed in each batch.
Section 11.17 What are the analytical
and quality control requirements for
conducting specimen validity tests?
An HHS-certified laboratory must
perform specimen validity testing to
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
identify hair that has been damaged to
the extent that the drug test may be
affected, and may perform other
specimen validity tests in accordance
with Sections 3.1 and 3.5.
(a) Each invalid, adulterated, or
substituted specimen validity result
must be based on an initial specimen
validity test on one aliquot and a
confirmatory specimen validity test on a
second aliquot;
(b) The HHS-certified laboratory must
establish acceptance criteria and
analyze calibrators and controls as
appropriate to verify and document the
validity of the test results; and
(c) Controls must be analyzed
concurrently with specimens.
Section 11.18 What must an HHScertified laboratory do to validate a
specimen validity test?
An HHS-certified laboratory must
demonstrate and document for each
specimen validity test the appropriate
performance characteristics of the test,
and must re-verify the test periodically,
or at least annually. Each new lot of
reagent must be verified prior to being
placed into service.
Section 11.19 What are the
requirements for an HHS-certified
laboratory to report a test result?
(a) Laboratories must report a test
result to the agency’s MRO within an
average of 5 working days after receipt
of the specimen. Reports must use the
Federal CCF and/or an electronic report,
as described in items (l) and (m) below.
Before any test result can be reported, it
must be certified by a certifying scientist
or a certifying technician (as
appropriate).
(b) A primary (A) specimen is
reported negative when each initial drug
test is negative or if the specimen is
negative upon confirmatory drug
testing, and the specimen does not meet
invalid criteria as described in items
(e)(1) through (e)(5) below.
(c) A primary (A) specimen is
reported positive for a specific drug or
drug metabolite when both the initial
drug test is positive and the
confirmatory drug test is positive in
accordance with Section 3.4.
(d) For a specimen that has an invalid
result for one of the reasons stated in
items (e)(1) or (e)(2) below, the HHScertified laboratory shall contact the
MRO and both will decide if testing by
another HHS-certified laboratory would
be useful in being able to report a
positive, adulterated, or substituted
result. If no further testing is necessary,
the HHS-certified laboratory then
reports the invalid result to the MRO.
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
(e) A primary (A) hair specimen is
reported as an invalid result when:
(1) The color of the A and B
specimens are clearly different (note: A
is tested);
(2) Interference occurs on the initial
drug tests on two separate aliquots (i.e.,
valid initial drug test results cannot be
obtained);
(3) Interference with the confirmatory
drug test occurs on at least two separate
aliquots of the specimen and the HHScertified laboratory is unable to identify
the interfering substance;
(4) The hair is damaged to the extent
that the drug test result may be affected
(i.e., based on at least two separate
aliquots of the specimen tested using a
validated method to assess damage); or
(5) The laboratory obtains a positive
confirmatory drug test result and is
unable to definitively remove external
contamination from the specimen using
a validated decontamination procedure.
(f) An HHS-certified laboratory shall
reject a primary (A) specimen for testing
when a fatal flaw occurs as described in
Section 15.1 or when a correctable flaw
as described in Section 15.2 is not
recovered. The HHS-certified laboratory
will indicate on the Federal CCF that
the specimen was rejected for testing
and provide the reason for reporting the
rejected for testing result.
(g) An HHS-certified laboratory must
report all positive, adulterated,
substituted, and invalid test results for
a hair specimen, with the exceptions
noted below. For example, a specimen
can be positive for a drug and invalid
because of interference on the
confirmatory test for a different drug
analyte. The following exceptions
apply:
(1) When a specimen is positive and
invalid because the hair is damaged as
described in item (e)(4) above, the
laboratory does not report the positive
result.
(2) When a specimen is invalid
because the laboratory cannot
definitively remove a drug present from
external contamination as described in
item (e)(5) above, the laboratory does
not report the positive result for that
drug. If the specimen is also positive for
another drug and the laboratory was
able to remove external contamination
for that drug, the laboratory reports that
positive result in addition to the invalid
result.
(h) An HHS-certified laboratory must
report the confirmatory concentration of
each drug or drug metabolite reported
for a positive result.
(i) An HHS-certified laboratory must
report numerical values of the specimen
validity test results that support an
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
adulterated, substituted, or invalid
result (as appropriate).
(j) When the concentration of a drug
or drug metabolite exceeds the validated
linear range of the confirmatory test,
HHS-certified laboratories may report to
the MRO that the quantitative value
exceeds the linear range of the test or
that the quantitative value is greater
than ‘‘insert the actual value for the
upper limit of the linear range,’’ or
laboratories may report a quantitative
value above the upper limit of the linear
range that was obtained by diluting an
aliquot of the specimen to achieve a
result within the method’s linear range
and multiplying the result by the
appropriate dilution factor.
(k) HHS-certified laboratories may
transmit test results to the MRO by
various electronic means (e.g.,
teleprinter, fax, or computer).
Transmissions of the reports must
ensure confidentiality and the results
may not be reported verbally by
telephone. Laboratories and external
service providers must ensure the
confidentiality, integrity, and
availability of the data and limit access
to any data transmission, storage, and
retrieval system.
(l) HHS-certified laboratories must
fax, courier, mail, or electronically
transmit a legible image or copy of the
completed Federal CCF and/or forward
a computer-generated electronic report.
The computer-generated report must
contain sufficient information to ensure
that the test results can accurately
represent the content of the custody and
control form that the MRO received
from the collector. HHS-certified
laboratories must use the drug/
metabolite names in Section 3.4 and/or
the drug/metabolite abbreviations on the
Federal CCF on computer-generated
electronic reports.
(m) For positive, adulterated,
substituted, invalid, and rejected
specimens, laboratories must fax,
courier, mail, or electronically transmit
a legible image or copy of the completed
Federal CCF.
Section 11.20 How long must an HHScertified laboratory retain specimens?
(a) An HHS-certified laboratory must
retain specimens that were reported as
positive, adulterated, or as an invalid
result for a minimum of 1 year.
(b) Retained hair specimens must be
kept in secured storage at room
temperature and out of direct light, to
ensure their availability for retesting
during an administrative or judicial
proceeding.
(c) Alternate specimens (i.e., urine or
oral fluid) must be kept in appropriate
long-term storage conditions, as
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
56143
specified by the Mandatory Guidelines
for Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs for that specimen type.
(d) The laboratory must retain the
alternate specimen for the same period
of time that the associated hair
specimen is retained.
(e) Federal agencies may request that
the HHS-certified laboratory retain a
specimen for an additional specified
period of time and must make that
request within the 1-year period
following the laboratory’s receipt of the
specimen.
Section 11.21 How long must an HHScertified laboratory retain records?
(a) An HHS-certified laboratory must
retain all records generated to support
test results for at least 2 years. The
laboratory may convert hardcopy
records to electronic records for storage
and then discard the hardcopy records
after 6 months.
(b) A federal agency may request the
HHS-certified laboratory to maintain a
documentation package (as described in
Section 11.23) that supports the chain of
custody, testing, and reporting of a
donor’s specimen that is under legal
challenge by a donor. The federal
agency’s request to the laboratory must
be in writing and must specify the
period of time to maintain the
documentation package.
(c) An HHS-certified laboratory may
retain records other than those included
in the documentation package beyond
the normal 2-year period of time.
Section 11.22 What statistical
summary reports must an HHS-certified
laboratory provide for hair testing?
(a) HHS-certified laboratories must
provide to each federal agency for
which they perform testing a
semiannual statistical summary report
that must be submitted by mail, fax, or
email within 14 working days after the
end of the semiannual period. The
summary report must not include any
personally identifiable information. A
copy of the semiannual statistical
summary report will also be sent to the
Secretary or designated HHS
representative. The semiannual
statistical report contains the following
information:
(1) Reporting period (inclusive dates);
(2) HHS-certified laboratory name and
address;
(3) Federal agency name;
(4) Number of specimen results
reported;
(5) Number of specimens collected by
reason for test;
(6) Number of specimens reported
negative;
(7) Number of specimens rejected for
testing because of a fatal flaw;
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
56144
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
(8) Number of specimens rejected for
testing because of an uncorrected flaw;
(9) Number of specimens tested
positive by each initial drug test;
(10) Number of specimens reported
positive;
(11) Number of specimens reported
positive for each drug and drug
metabolite;
(12) Number of specimens reported
adulterated;
(13) Number of specimens reported
substituted; and
(14) Number of specimens reported as
invalid result.
(b) An HHS-certified laboratory must
make copies of an agency’s test results
available when requested to do so by the
Secretary or by the federal agency for
which the laboratory is performing
drug-testing services.
(c) An HHS-certified laboratory must
ensure that a qualified individual is
available to testify in a proceeding
against a federal employee when the
proceeding is based on a test result
reported by the laboratory.
Section 11.23 What HHS-certified
laboratory information is available to a
federal agency?
(a) Following a federal agency’s
receipt of a positive, adulterated, or
substituted drug test report, the federal
agency may submit a written request for
copies of the records relating to the drug
test results or a documentation package
or any relevant certification, review, or
revocation of certification records.
(b) Standard documentation packages
provided by an HHS-certified laboratory
must contain the following items:
(1) A cover sheet providing a brief
description of the procedures and tests
performed on the donor’s specimen;
(2) A table of contents that lists all
documents and materials in the package
by page number;
(3) A copy of the Federal CCF with
any attachments, internal chain of
custody records for the specimen,
memoranda (if any) generated by the
HHS-certified laboratory, and a copy of
the electronic report (if any) generated
by the HHS-certified laboratory;
(4) A brief description of the HHScertified laboratory’s initial drug (and
specimen validity, if applicable) testing
procedures, instrumentation, and batch
quality control requirements;
(5) Copies of the initial test data for
the donor’s specimen with all
calibrators and controls and copies of all
internal chain of custody documents
related to the initial tests;
(6) A brief description of the HHScertified laboratory’s confirmatory drug
(and specimen validity, if applicable)
testing procedures, instrumentation, and
batch quality control requirements;
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
(7) Copies of the confirmatory test
data for the donor’s specimen with all
calibrators and controls and copies of all
internal chain of custody documents
related to the confirmatory tests; and
(8) Copies of the re´sume´ or
curriculum vitae for the RP(s) and the
certifying technician or certifying
scientist of record.
Subpart M—Medical Review Officer
(MRO)
Section 13.1
MRO?
Who may serve as an
Federal applicants or employees who
are subject of a workplace drug test may
submit a written request through the
MRO and/or the federal agency
requesting copies of any records relating
to their drug test results or a
documentation package as described in
Section 11.23(b) and any relevant
certification, review, or revocation of
certification records. Federal applicants
or employees, or their designees, are not
permitted access to their specimens
collected pursuant to Executive Order
12564, Public Law 100–71, and these
Guidelines.
(a) A currently licensed physician
who has:
(1) A Doctor of Medicine (M.D.) or
Doctor of Osteopathy (D.O.) degree;
(2) Knowledge regarding the
pharmacology and toxicology of illicit
drugs;
(3) The training necessary to serve as
an MRO as set out in Section 13.3;
(4) Satisfactorily passed an initial
examination administered by a
nationally recognized entity or
subspecialty board that has been
approved by the Secretary to certify
MROs; and
(5) At least every five years from
initial certification, completed
requalification training on the topics in
Section 13.3 and satisfactorily passed a
requalification examination
administered by a nationally recognized
entity or a subspecialty board that has
been approved by the Secretary to
certify MROs.
Section 11.25 What types of
relationships are prohibited between an
HHS-certified laboratory and an MRO?
Section 13.2 How are nationally
recognized entities or subspecialty
boards that certify MROs approved?
Section 11.24 What HHS-certified
laboratory information is available to a
federal applicant or employee?
An HHS-certified laboratory must not
enter into any relationship with a
federal agency’s MRO that may be
construed as a potential conflict of
interest or derive any financial benefit
by having a federal agency use a specific
MRO.
This means an MRO may be an
employee of the agency or a contractor
for the agency; however, an MRO shall
not be an employee or agent of or have
any financial interest in the HHScertified laboratory for which the MRO
is reviewing drug testing results.
Additionally, an MRO shall not derive
any financial benefit by having an
agency use a specific HHS-certified
laboratory or have any agreement with
an HHS-certified laboratory that may be
construed as a potential conflict of
interest.
Subpart L—Instrumented Initial Test
Facility (IITF)
Section 12.1 May an IITF test hair
specimens for a federal agency’s
workplace drug testing program?
No, only HHS-certified laboratories
are authorized to test hair specimens for
federal agency workplace drug testing
programs in accordance with these
Guidelines.
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
All nationally recognized entities or
subspecialty boards which seek
approval by the Secretary to certify
physicians as MROs for federal
workplace drug testing programs must
submit their qualifications, a sample
examination, and other necessary
supporting examination materials (e.g.,
answers, previous examination statistics
or other background examination
information, if requested). Approval
will be based on an objective review of
qualifications that include a copy of the
MRO applicant application form,
documentation that the continuing
education courses are accredited by a
professional organization, and the
delivery method and content of the
examination. Each approved MRO
certification entity must resubmit their
qualifications for approval every two
years. The Secretary shall publish at
least every two years a notice in the
Federal Register listing those entities
and subspecialty boards that have been
approved. This notice is also available
on the internet at https://
www.samhsa.gov/workplace/drugtesting.
Section 13.3 What training is
required before a physician may serve as
an MRO?
(a) A physician must receive training
that includes a thorough review of the
following:
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
(1) The collection procedures used to
collect federal agency specimens;
(2) How to interpret test results
reported by HHS-certified IITFs and
laboratories (e.g., negative, negative/
dilute, positive, adulterated, substituted,
rejected for testing, and invalid);
(3) Chain of custody, reporting, and
recordkeeping requirements for federal
agency specimens;
(4) The HHS Mandatory Guidelines
for Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs for all authorized specimen
types; and
(5) Procedures for interpretation,
review (e.g., donor interview for
legitimate medical explanations, review
of documentation provided by the donor
to support a legitimate medical
explanation), and reporting of results
specified by any federal agency for
which the individual may serve as an
MRO.
(b) Certified MROs must complete
training on any revisions to these
Guidelines prior to their effective date,
to continue serving as an MRO for
federal agency specimens.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Section 13.4 What are the
responsibilities of an MRO?
(a) The MRO must review all positive,
adulterated, rejected for testing, invalid,
and substituted test results.
(b) Staff under the direct, personal
supervision of the MRO may review and
report negative and (for urine) negative/
dilute test results to the agency’s
designated representative. The MRO
must review at least 5 percent of all
negative results reported by the MRO
staff to ensure that the MRO staff are
properly performing the review process.
(c) The MRO must discuss potential
invalid results with the HHS-certified
laboratory, as addressed in Section
11.19(d) to determine whether testing at
another HHS-certified laboratory may be
warranted.
(d) After receiving a report from an
HHS-certified laboratory or (for urine)
HHS-certified IITF, the MRO must:
(1) Review the information on the
MRO copy of the Federal CCF that was
received from the collector and the
report received from the HHS-certified
laboratory or HHS-certified IITF;
(2) Interview the donor when
required;
(3) Make a determination regarding
the test result; and
(4) Report the verified result to the
federal agency.
(e) The MRO must maintain records
for a minimum of 2 years while
maintaining the confidentiality of the
information. The MRO may convert
hardcopy records to electronic records
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
for storage and discard the hardcopy
records after 6 months.
Section 13.5 What must an MRO do
when reviewing a hair specimen’s test
results?
(a) When the HHS-certified laboratory
reports a negative result for the primary
(A) hair specimen, the MRO reports a
negative result to the agency.
(b) When the HHS-certified laboratory
reports multiple results for the primary
(A) hair specimen, the MRO must follow
the verification procedures described in
13.5(c) through (g) and:
(1) The MRO reports all verified
refusal to test results to the federal
agency.
(2) If an invalid result was reported in
conjunction with a positive, adulterated,
or substituted result, the MRO does not
report the verified invalid result to the
federal agency at this time. The MRO
takes action for the verified invalid
result(s) for the primary (A) specimen as
described in 13.5(f) only when:
(i) The MRO verifies the positive or
adulterated result as negative based on
a legitimate medical explanation as
described in 13.5(c)(2) and 13.5(d)(1); or
(ii) The split (B) specimen is tested
and reported as a failure to reconfirm
the adulterated or substituted result
reported for the primary (A) specimen
as described in Section 14.5(b) and
14.5(c).
(c) When the HHS-certified laboratory
reports a positive result for the primary
(A) specimen, the MRO must contact the
donor to determine if there is an
explanation for the positive result.
(1) If the donor admits illicit use of
the drug(s) that caused the positive
result, the MRO reports the test result as
positive to the agency.
(2) If the donor provides
documentation (e.g., a valid
prescription) to support a legitimate
medical explanation for the positive
result, the MRO reports the test result as
negative to the agency.
(i) Passive exposure to a drug (e.g.,
exposure to marijuana smoke) is not a
legitimate medical explanation for a
positive drug test result.
(ii) Ingestion of food products
containing marijuana is not a legitimate
medical explanation for a positive
marijuana test result.
(3) If the donor is unable to provide
a legitimate medical explanation and
there is no admission of illicit use
supporting the positive hair test result,
the MRO reports a test cancelled result
to the agency and takes actions as
follows:
(i) If an alternate specimen was
collected at the same time as the hair
specimen, the MRO directs (in writing)
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
56145
the laboratory who has custody of the
donor’s alternate specimen to test the
specimen. The laboratory and MRO
follow the procedures in the Mandatory
Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug
Testing Programs for that specimen
type.
(ii) If an alternate specimen was not
collected at the same time as the hair
specimen, the MRO directs the agency
to immediately collect an alternate
specimen from the donor. The collector,
laboratory and MRO follow the
procedures in the Mandatory Guidelines
for Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs for the alternate specimen
type.
(d) When the HHS-certified laboratory
reports an adulterated result for the
primary (A) hair specimen, the MRO
contacts the donor to determine if the
donor has a legitimate medical
explanation for the adulterated result.
(1) If the donor provides a legitimate
medical explanation, the MRO reports a
negative result to the federal agency.
(2) If the donor is unable to provide
a legitimate medical explanation, the
MRO reports a refusal to test to the
federal agency because the hair
specimen was adulterated.
(e) When the HHS-certified laboratory
reports a substituted result for the
primary (A) hair specimen, the MRO
reports a refusal to test to the federal
agency because the hair specimen was
substituted.
(f) When the HHS-certified laboratory
reports an invalid result for the primary
(A) hair specimen, the MRO reports a
test cancelled result to the agency and
takes action as follows:
(1) If an alternate specimen was
collected at the same time as the hair
specimen, the MRO directs (in writing)
the laboratory who has custody of the
donor’s alternate specimen to test the
specimen. The laboratory and MRO
follow the procedures in the Mandatory
Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug
Testing Programs for the alternate
specimen type.
(2) If an alternate specimen was not
collected at the same time as the hair
specimen, the MRO directs the agency
to immediately collect an alternate
specimen from the donor. The collector,
laboratory and MRO follow the
procedures in the Mandatory Guidelines
for Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs for the alternate specimen
type.
(g) When the HHS-certified laboratory
reports a rejected for testing result for
the primary (A) specimen, the MRO
reports a test cancelled result to the
agency and takes action as follows:
(1) If an alternate specimen was
collected at the same time as the hair
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
56146
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
specimen, the MRO directs (in writing)
the laboratory who has custody of the
donor’s alternate specimen to test the
specimen. The laboratory and MRO
follow the procedures in the Mandatory
Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug
Testing Programs for the alternate
specimen type.
(2) If an alternate specimen was not
collected at the same time as the hair
specimen, the MRO directs the agency
to immediately collect an alternate
specimen from the donor. The collector,
laboratory and MRO follow the
procedures in the Mandatory Guidelines
for Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs for the alternate specimen
type.
Section 13.6 What action does the
MRO take when the collector reports
that the donor did not provide a
sufficient amount of hair for a drug test?
(a) When another specimen type (e.g.,
urine, oral fluid) was collected in
accordance with section 8.6, the MRO
reviews and reports the alternate
specimen’s test result in accordance
with the Mandatory Guidelines for
Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs using the alternate specimen.
(b) If the donor is unable to provide
a sufficient amount of the alternate
specimen authorized by the federal
agency, the MRO consults with the
federal agency. The federal agency
follows the required procedures in the
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs using
the alternate specimen. This includes
immediately directing the donor to
obtain, within five days, an evaluation
from a licensed physician, acceptable to
the MRO, who has expertise in the
medical issues raised by the donor’s
failure to provide a specimen. The MRO
may perform this evaluation if the MRO
has appropriate expertise.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Section 13.7 Who may request a test of
a split (B) hair specimen?
(a) For an adulterated or substituted
result reported on a primary (A) hair
specimen, a donor may request through
the MRO that the split (B) specimen be
tested by a second HHS-certified
laboratory to verify the result reported
by the first HHS-certified laboratory.
(b) The donor has 72 hours (from the
time the MRO notified the donor that
his or her specimen was reported
adulterated or substituted to request a
test of the split (B) specimen. The MRO
must inform the donor that the donor
has the opportunity to request a test of
the split (B) specimen when the MRO
informs the donor that an adulterated or
substituted result is being reported to
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
the federal agency on the primary (A)
specimen.
Section 13.8 How does an MRO report
a primary (A) specimen test result to an
agency?
(a) The MRO must report all verified
results to an agency using the completed
MRO copy of the Federal CCF or a
separate report using a letter/
memorandum format. The MRO may
use various electronic means for
reporting (e.g., teleprinter, fax, or
computer). Transmissions of the reports
must ensure confidentiality. The MRO
and external service providers must
ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and
availability of the data and limit access
to any data transmission, storage, and
retrieval system.
(b) A verified result may not be
reported to the agency until the MRO
has completed the review process.
(c) The MRO must send a copy of
either the completed MRO copy of the
Federal CCF or the separate letter/
memorandum report for all adulterated
and substituted results.
(d) The MRO must not disclose
numerical values of drug test results to
the agency.
Section 13.9 What types of
relationships are prohibited between an
MRO and an HHS-certified laboratory?
An MRO must not be an employee,
agent of, or have any financial interest
in an HHS-certified laboratory for which
the MRO is reviewing drug test results.
This means an MRO must not derive
any financial benefit by having an
agency use a specific HHS-certified
laboratory or have any agreement with
the HHS-certified laboratory that may be
construed as a potential conflict of
interest.
Subpart N—Split Specimen Tests
Section 14.1 When may a split (B) hair
specimen be tested?
(a) The donor may request, verbally or
in writing, through the MRO that the
split (B) hair specimen be tested at a
different (i.e., second) HHS-certified
laboratory when the primary (A)
specimen was determined by the MRO
to be adulterated or substituted.
(b) A donor has 72 hours to initiate
the request after being informed of the
result by the MRO. The MRO must
document in the MRO’s records the
verbal request from the donor to have
the split (B) specimen tested.
(c) If a split (B) hair specimen cannot
be tested by a second HHS-certified
laboratory (e.g., insufficient specimen,
lost in transit, split not available, no
second HHS-certified laboratory to
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
perform the test), the MRO reports a
cancelled test to the federal agency and
takes action as follows:
(i) If an alternate specimen was
collected at the same time as the hair
specimen, the MRO directs (in writing)
the laboratory who has custody of the
donor’s alternate specimen to test the
specimen. The laboratory and MRO
follow the procedures in the Mandatory
Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug
Testing Programs for the alternate
specimen type.
(ii) If an alternate specimen was not
collected at the same time as the hair
specimen, the MRO directs the agency
to collect an alternate specimen from
the donor. The collector, laboratory and
MRO follow the procedures in the
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs for
the alternate specimen type.
(d) If a donor chooses not to have the
split (B) specimen tested by a second
HHS-certified hair laboratory, a federal
agency may have a split (B) specimen
retested as part of a legal or
administrative proceeding to defend an
original adulterated or substituted
result.
Section 14.2 How does an HHScertified laboratory test a split (B) hair
specimen when the primary (A)
specimen was reported adulterated?
(a) The HHS-certified laboratory must
use its confirmatory specimen validity
test at an established limit of
quantification (LOQ) to reconfirm the
presence of the adulterant.
(b) The second HHS-certified
laboratory may only conduct the
confirmatory specimen validity test(s)
needed to reconfirm the adulterated
result reported by the first HHS-certified
laboratory.
Section 14.3 How does an HHScertified laboratory test a split (B) hair
specimen when the primary (A)
specimen was reported substituted?
The second HHS-certified laboratory
may only conduct the confirmatory
specimen validity test(s) needed to
reconfirm the substituted result reported
by the first HHS-certified laboratory.
Section 14.4 Who receives the split (B)
specimen result?
The second HHS-certified laboratory
must report the result to the MRO.
Section 14.5 What action(s) does an
MRO take after receiving the split (B)
hair specimen result from the second
HHS-certified laboratory?
The MRO takes the following actions
when the second HHS-certified
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
laboratory reports the result for the split
(B) hair specimen as:
(a) Reconfirmed adulteration and/or
substitution result. The MRO reports
reconfirmed to the agency.
(b) Failed to reconfirm adulteration or
substitution. The MRO reports to the
agency a failed to reconfirm result
(specify adulterant or not substituted)
and cancels both tests. The MRO shall
notify the HHS office responsible for
coordination of the Drug Free
Workplace Program regarding the test
results for the specimen.
(c) Failed to reconfirm an adulterated
result and failed to reconfirm a
substituted result. The MRO reports to
the agency a failed to reconfirm result
[(specify adulterant) and not
substituted]. The MRO shall notify the
HHS office responsible for coordination
of the Drug Free Workplace Program
regarding the test results for the
specimen.
(d) Failed to reconfirm an adulterated
result and reconfirmed a substituted
result. The MRO reports to the agency
a reconfirmed result (substituted) and a
failed to reconfirm result (specify
adulterant). The MRO tells the agency
that it may take action based on the
substituted result although Laboratory B
failed to reconfirm the adulterated
result.
(e) Failed to reconfirm a substituted
result and reconfirmed an adulterated
result. The MRO reports to the agency
a reconfirmed result (adulterated) and a
failed to reconfirm result (not
substituted). The MRO tells the agency
that it may take action based on the
adulterated result although Laboratory B
failed to reconfirm the substituted
result.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Section 14.6 How does an MRO report
a split (B) specimen test result to an
agency?
(a) The MRO must report all verified
results to an agency using the completed
MRO copy of the Federal CCF or a
separate report using a letter/
memorandum format. The MRO may
use various electronic means for
reporting (e.g., teleprinter, fax, or
computer). Transmissions of the reports
must ensure confidentiality. The MRO
and external service providers must
ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and
availability of the data and limit access
to any data transmission, storage, and
retrieval system.
(b) A verified result may not be
reported to the agency until the MRO
has completed the review process.
(c) The MRO must send a copy of
either the completed MRO copy of the
Federal CCF or the separate letter/
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:59 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
memorandum report for all split
specimen results.
(d) The MRO must not disclose the
numerical values of the drug test results
to the agency.
Section 14.7 How long must an HHScertified laboratory retain a split (B)
specimen?
A split (B) specimen is retained for
the same period of time that a primary
(A) specimen is retained and under the
same storage conditions, in accordance
with Section 11.20. This applies even
for those cases when the split (B)
specimen is tested by a second HHScertified laboratory and the second
HHS-certified laboratory does not
confirm the original result reported by
the first HHS-certified laboratory for the
primary (A) specimen.
Subpart O—Criteria for Rejecting a
Specimen for Testing
Section 15.1 What discrepancies
require an HHS-certified laboratory to
report a hair specimen as rejected for
testing?
The following discrepancies are
considered to be fatal flaws. The HHScertified laboratory must stop the testing
process, reject the specimen for testing,
and indicate the reason for rejecting the
specimen on the Federal CCF when:
(a) The specimen ID number on the
primary (A) or split (B) specimen label/
seal does not match the ID number on
the Federal CCF, or the ID number is
missing either on the Federal CCF or on
either specimen label/seal;
(b) The primary (A) specimen label/
seal is misapplied, broken or shows
evidence of tampering and the split (B)
specimen cannot be re-designated as the
primary (A) specimen;
(c) The collector’s printed name and
signature are omitted on the Federal
CCF;
(d) There is an insufficient amount of
specimen for analysis in the primary (A)
specimen unless the split (B) specimen
can be re-designated as the primary (A)
specimen; or
(e) The accessioner failed to
document the primary (A) specimen
seal condition on the Federal CCF at the
time of accessioning, and the split (B)
specimen cannot be re-designated as the
primary (A) specimen.
(f) The specimen was received at the
HHS-certified laboratory without a CCF;
(g) The CCF was received at the HHScertified laboratory without a specimen;
(h) The collector performed two
separate collections using one CCF;
(i) The physical appearances (other
than color) of the primary (A) and split
(B) specimen are clearly different;
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
56147
(j) The laboratory identifies lice or a
similar infestation in the hair; or
(k) The HHS-certified laboratory
identifies a flaw (other than those
specified above) that prevents testing or
affects the forensic defensibility of the
drug test and cannot be corrected.
Section 15.2 What discrepancies
require an HHS-certified laboratory to
report a specimen as rejected for testing
unless the discrepancy is corrected?
The following discrepancies are
considered to be correctable:
(a) If a collector failed to sign the
Federal CCF, the HHS-certified
laboratory must attempt to recover the
collector’s signature before reporting the
test result. If the collector can provide
a memorandum for record recovering
the signature, the HHS-certified
laboratory may report the test result for
the specimen. If, after holding the
specimen for at least 5 business days,
the HHS-certified laboratory cannot
recover the collector’s signature, the
laboratory must report a rejected for
testing result and indicate the reason for
the rejected for testing result on the
Federal CCF.
(b) If a specimen is submitted using a
non-federal form or an expired Federal
CCF, the HHS-certified laboratory must
test the specimen and also attempt to
obtain a memorandum for record
explaining why a non-federal form or an
expired Federal CCF was used and
ensure that the form used contains all
the required information. If, after
holding the specimen for at least 5
business days, the HHS-certified
laboratory cannot obtain a
memorandum for record from the
collector, the laboratory must report a
rejected for testing result and indicate
the reason for the rejected for testing
result on the report to the MRO.
Section 15.3 What discrepancies are
not sufficient to require an HHScertified laboratory to reject a hair
specimen for testing or an MRO to
cancel a test?
(a) The following omissions and
discrepancies on the Federal CCF that
are received by the HHS-certified
laboratory should not cause an HHScertified laboratory to reject a hair
specimen or cause an MRO to cancel a
test:
(1) An incorrect laboratory name and
address appearing at the top of the form;
(2) Incomplete/incorrect/unreadable
employer name or address;
(3) MRO name is missing;
(4) Incomplete/incorrect MRO
address;
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
56148
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
(5) A transposition of numbers in the
donor’s Social Security Number or
employee identification number;
(6) A telephone number is missing/
incorrect;
(7) A fax number is missing/incorrect;
(8) A ‘‘drug tests to be performed’’ box
is not marked;
(9) A ‘‘specimen collection’’ box is not
marked;
(10) The collection site address is
missing;
(11) The collector’s printed name is
missing but the collector’s signature is
properly recorded;
(13) The time of collection is not
indicated;
(14) The date of collection is not
indicated;
(15) Incorrect name of delivery
service;
(16) The collector has changed or
corrected information by crossing out
the original information on either the
Federal CCF or specimen label/seal
without dating and initialing the
change; or
(17) The donor’s name inadvertently
appears on the HHS-certified laboratory
copy of the Federal CCF or on the
tamper-evident labels used to seal the
specimens.
(b) The following omissions and
discrepancies on the Federal CCF that
are made at the HHS-certified laboratory
should not cause an MRO to cancel a
test:
(1) The testing laboratory fails to
indicate the correct name and address in
the results section when a different
laboratory name and address is printed
at the top of the Federal CCF;
(2) The accessioner fails to print his
or her name;
(3) The certifying scientist or
certifying technician fails to print his or
her name;
(4) The certifying scientist or
certifying technician accidentally
initials the Federal CCF rather than
signing for a specimen reported as
rejected for testing;
(c) The above omissions and
discrepancies should occur no more
than once a month. The expectation is
that each trained collector and HHScertified laboratory will make every
effort to ensure that the Federal CCF is
properly completed and that all the
information is correct. When an error
occurs more than once a month, the
MRO must direct the collector or HHScertified laboratory (whichever is
responsible for the error) to immediately
take corrective action to prevent the
recurrence of the error.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
18:59 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
Section 15.4 What discrepancies may
require an MRO to cancel a test?
(a) An MRO must attempt to correct
the following errors:
(1) The donor’s signature is missing
on the MRO copy of the Federal CCF
and the collector failed to provide a
comment that the donor refused to sign
the form;
(2) The certifying scientist failed to
sign the Federal CCF for a specimen
being reported adulterated, invalid, or
substituted; or
(3) The electronic report provided by
the HHS-certified laboratory does not
contain all the data elements required
for the HHS standard laboratory
electronic report for a specimen being
reported adulterated, invalid result, or
substituted.
(b) If error (a)(1) occurs, the MRO
must contact the collector to obtain a
statement to verify that the donor
refused to sign the MRO copy. If, after
at least 5 business days, the collector
cannot provide such a statement, the
MRO must cancel the test.
(c) If error (a)(2) occurs, the MRO
must obtain a statement from the
certifying scientist that they forgot to
sign the Federal CCF, but did, in fact,
properly conduct the certification
review. If, after at least 5 business days,
the MRO cannot get a statement from
the certifying scientist, the MRO must
cancel the test.
(d) If error (a)(3) occurs, the MRO
must contact the HHS-certified
laboratory. If, after at least 5 business
days, the laboratory does not retransmit
a corrected electronic report, the MRO
must cancel the test.
Subpart P—Laboratory Suspension/
Revocation Procedures
Section 16.1 When may the HHS
certification of a laboratory be
suspended?
These procedures apply when:
(a) The Secretary has notified an HHScertified laboratory in writing that its
certification to perform drug testing
under these Guidelines has been
suspended or that the Secretary
proposes to revoke such certification.
(b) The HHS-certified laboratory has,
within 30 days of the date of such
notification or within 3 days of the date
of such notification when seeking an
expedited review of a suspension,
requested in writing an opportunity for
an informal review of the suspension or
proposed revocation.
Section 16.2 What definitions are used
for this subpart?
Appellant. Means the HHS-certified
laboratory which has been notified of its
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
suspension or proposed revocation of its
certification to perform testing and has
requested an informal review thereof.
Respondent. Means the person or
persons designated by the Secretary in
implementing these Guidelines.
Reviewing Official. Means the person
or persons designated by the Secretary
who will review the suspension or
proposed revocation. The reviewing
official may be assisted by one or more
of the official’s employees or
consultants in assessing and weighing
the scientific and technical evidence
and other information submitted by the
appellant and respondent on the reasons
for the suspension and proposed
revocation.
Section 16.3 Are there any limitations
on issues subject to review?
The scope of review shall be limited
to the facts relevant to any suspension
or proposed revocation, the necessary
interpretations of those facts, the
relevant Mandatory Guidelines for
Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs, and other relevant law. The
legal validity of these Guidelines shall
not be subject to review under these
procedures.
Section 16.4
parties?
Who represents the
The appellant’s request for review
shall specify the name, address, and
telephone number of the appellant’s
representative. In its first written
submission to the reviewing official, the
respondent shall specify the name,
address, and telephone number of the
respondent’s representative.
Section 16.5 When must a request for
informal review be submitted?
(a) Within 30 days of the date of the
notice of the suspension or proposed
revocation, the appellant must submit a
written request to the reviewing official
seeking review, unless some other time
period is agreed to by the parties. A
copy must also be sent to the
respondent. The request for review must
include a copy of the notice of
suspension or proposed revocation, a
brief statement of why the decision to
suspend or propose revocation is wrong,
and the appellant’s request for an oral
presentation, if desired.
(b) Within 5 days after receiving the
request for review, the reviewing official
will send an acknowledgment and
advise the appellant of the next steps.
The reviewing official will also send a
copy of the acknowledgment to the
respondent.
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
Section 16.6
agreement?
What is an abeyance
Upon mutual agreement of the parties
to hold these procedures in abeyance,
the reviewing official will stay these
procedures for a reasonable time while
the laboratory attempts to regain
compliance with the Guidelines or the
parties otherwise attempt to settle the
dispute. As part of an abeyance
agreement, the parties can agree to
extend the time period for requesting
review of the suspension or proposed
revocation. If abeyance begins after a
request for review has been filed, the
appellant shall notify the reviewing
official at the end of the abeyance
period, advising whether the dispute
has been resolved. If the dispute has
been resolved, the request for review
will be dismissed. If the dispute has not
been resolved, the review procedures
will begin at the point at which they
were interrupted by the abeyance
agreement with such modifications to
the procedures as the reviewing official
deems appropriate.
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Section 16.7 What procedures are used
to prepare the review file and written
argument?
The appellant and the respondent
each participate in developing the file
for the reviewing official and in
submitting written arguments. The
procedures for development of the
review file and submission of written
argument are:
(a) Appellant’s Documents and Brief.
Within 15 days after receiving the
acknowledgment of the request for
review, the appellant shall submit to the
reviewing official the following (with a
copy to the respondent):
(1) A review file containing the
documents supporting appellant’s
argument, tabbed and organized
chronologically, and accompanied by an
index identifying each document. Only
essential documents should be
submitted to the reviewing official.
(2) A written statement, not to exceed
20 double-spaced pages, explaining why
respondent’s decision to suspend or
propose revocation of appellant’s
certification is wrong (appellant’s brief).
(b) Respondent’s Documents and
Brief. Within 15 days after receiving a
copy of the acknowledgment of the
request for review, the respondent shall
submit to the reviewing official the
following (with a copy to the appellant):
(1) A review file containing
documents supporting respondent’s
decision to suspend or revoke
appellant’s certification to perform drug
testing, which is tabbed and organized
chronologically, and accompanied by an
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
index identifying each document. Only
essential documents should be
submitted to the reviewing official.
(2) A written statement, not exceeding
20 double-spaced pages in length,
explaining the basis for suspension or
proposed revocation (respondent’s
brief).
(c) Reply Briefs. Within 5 days after
receiving the opposing party’s
submission, or 20 days after receiving
acknowledgment of the request for
review, whichever is later, each party
may submit a short reply not to exceed
10 double-spaced pages.
(d) Cooperative Efforts. Whenever
feasible, the parties should attempt to
develop a joint review file.
(e) Excessive Documentation. The
reviewing official may take any
appropriate step to reduce excessive
documentation, including the return of
or refusal to consider documentation
found to be irrelevant, redundant, or
unnecessary.
Section 16.8 When is there an
opportunity for oral presentation?
(a) Electing Oral Presentation. If an
opportunity for an oral presentation is
desired, the appellant shall request it at
the time it submits its written request
for review to the reviewing official. The
reviewing official will grant the request
if the official determines that the
decision-making process will be
substantially aided by oral presentations
and arguments. The reviewing official
may also provide for an oral
presentation at the official’s own
initiative or at the request of the
respondent.
(b) Presiding Official. The reviewing
official or designee will be the presiding
official responsible for conducting the
oral presentation.
(c) Preliminary Conference. The
presiding official may hold a prehearing
conference (usually a telephone
conference call) to consider any of the
following: simplifying and clarifying
issues, stipulations and admissions,
limitations on evidence and witnesses
that will be presented at the hearing,
time allotted for each witness and the
hearing altogether, scheduling the
hearing, and any other matter that will
assist in the review process. Normally,
this conference will be conducted
informally and off the record; however,
the presiding official may, at their
discretion, produce a written document
summarizing the conference or
transcribe the conference, either of
which will be made a part of the record.
(d) Time and Place of the Oral
Presentation. The presiding official will
attempt to schedule the oral
presentation within 30 days of the date
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
56149
the appellant’s request for review is
received or within 10 days of
submission of the last reply brief,
whichever is later. The oral presentation
will be held at a time and place
determined by the presiding official
following consultation with the parties.
(e) Conduct of the Oral Presentation.
(1) General. The presiding official is
responsible for conducting the oral
presentation. The presiding official may
be assisted by one or more of the
official’s employees or consultants in
conducting the oral presentation and
reviewing the evidence. While the oral
presentation will be kept as informal as
possible, the presiding official may take
all necessary steps to ensure an orderly
proceeding.
(2) Burden of Proof/Standard of Proof.
In all cases, the respondent bears the
burden of proving by a preponderance
of the evidence that its decision to
suspend or propose revocation is
appropriate. The appellant, however,
has a responsibility to respond to the
respondent’s allegations with evidence
and argument to show that the
respondent is wrong.
(3) Admission of Evidence. The
Federal Rules of Evidence do not apply
and the presiding official will generally
admit all testimonial evidence unless it
is clearly irrelevant, immaterial, or
unduly repetitious. Each party may
make an opening and closing statement,
may present witnesses as agreed upon
in the prehearing conference or
otherwise, and may question the
opposing party’s witnesses. Since the
parties have ample opportunity to
prepare the review file, a party may
introduce additional documentation
during the oral presentation only with
the permission of the presiding official.
The presiding official may question
witnesses directly and take such other
steps necessary to ensure an effective
and efficient consideration of the
evidence, including setting time
limitations on direct and crossexaminations.
(4) Motions. The presiding official
may rule on motions including, for
example, motions to exclude or strike
redundant or immaterial evidence,
motions to dismiss the case for
insufficient evidence, or motions for
summary judgment. Except for those
made during the hearing, all motions
and opposition to motions, including
argument, must be in writing and be no
more than 10 double-spaced pages in
length. The presiding official will set a
reasonable time for the party opposing
the motion to reply.
(5) Transcripts. The presiding official
shall have the oral presentation
transcribed and the transcript shall be
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
56150
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
made a part of the record. Either party
may request a copy of the transcript and
the requesting party shall be responsible
for paying for its copy of the transcript.
(f) Obstruction of Justice or Making of
False Statements. Obstruction of justice
or the making of false statements by a
witness or any other person may be the
basis for a criminal prosecution under
18 U.S.C. 1505 or 1001.
(g) Post-hearing Procedures. At their
discretion, the presiding official may
require or permit the parties to submit
post-hearing briefs or proposed findings
and conclusions. Each party may submit
comments on any major prejudicial
errors in the transcript.
Section 16.9 Are there expedited
procedures for review of immediate
suspension?
(a) Applicability. When the Secretary
notifies an HHS-certified laboratory in
writing that its certification to perform
drug testing has been immediately
suspended, the appellant may request
an expedited review of the suspension
and any proposed revocation. The
appellant must submit this request in
writing to the reviewing official within
3 days of the date the HHS-certified
laboratory received notice of the
suspension. The request for review must
include a copy of the suspension and
any proposed revocation, a brief
statement of why the decision to
suspend and propose revocation is
wrong, and the appellant’s request for
an oral presentation, if desired. A copy
of the request for review must also be
sent to the respondent.
(b) Reviewing Official’s Response. As
soon as practicable after the request for
review is received, the reviewing official
will send an acknowledgment with a
copy to the respondent.
(c) Review File and Briefs. Within 7
days of the date the request for review
is received, but no later than 2 days
before an oral presentation, each party
shall submit to the reviewing official the
following:
(1) A review file containing essential
documents relevant to the review,
which is tabbed, indexed, and organized
chronologically; and
(2) A written statement, not to exceed
20 double-spaced pages, explaining the
party’s position concerning the
suspension and any proposed
revocation. No reply brief is permitted.
(d) Oral Presentation. If an oral
presentation is requested by the
appellant or otherwise granted by the
reviewing official, the presiding official
will attempt to schedule the oral
presentation within 7–10 days of the
date of appellant’s request for review at
a time and place determined by the
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
presiding official following consultation
with the parties. The presiding official
may hold a prehearing conference in
accordance with Section 16.8(c) and
will conduct the oral presentation in
accordance with the procedures of
Sections 16.8(e), (f), and (g).
(e) Written Decision. The reviewing
official shall issue a written decision
upholding or denying the suspension or
proposed revocation and will attempt to
issue the decision within 7–10 days of
the date of the oral presentation or
within 3 days of the date on which the
transcript is received or the date of the
last submission by either party,
whichever is later. All other provisions
set forth in Section 16.14 will apply.
(f) Transmission of Written
Communications. Because of the
importance of timeliness for these
expedited procedures, all written
communications between the parties
and between both party and the
reviewing official shall be by fax,
secured electronic transmissions, or
overnight mail.
Section 16.10 Are any types of
communications prohibited?
Except for routine administrative and
procedural matters, a party shall not
communicate with the reviewing or
presiding official without notice to the
other party.
Section 16.11 How are
communications transmitted by the
reviewing official?
(a) Because of the importance of a
timely review, the reviewing official
should normally transmit written
communications to either party by fax,
secured electronic transmissions, or
overnight mail in which case the date of
transmission or day following mailing
will be considered the date of receipt. In
the case of communications sent by
regular mail, the date of receipt will be
considered 3 days after the date of
mailing.
(b) In counting days, include
Saturdays, Sundays, and federal
holidays. However, if a due date falls on
a Saturday, Sunday, or federal holiday,
then the due date is the next federal
working day.
Section 16.12 What are the authority
and responsibilities of the reviewing
official?
In addition to any other authority
specified in these procedures, the
reviewing official and the presiding
official, with respect to those authorities
involving the oral presentation, shall
have the authority to issue orders;
examine witnesses; take all steps
necessary for the conduct of an orderly
PO 00000
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4702
hearing; rule on requests and motions;
grant extensions of time for good
reasons; dismiss for failure to meet
deadlines or other requirements; order
the parties to submit relevant
information or witnesses; remand a case
for further action by the respondent;
waive or modify these procedures in a
specific case, usually with notice to the
parties; reconsider a decision of the
reviewing official where a party
promptly alleges a clear error of fact or
law; and to take any other action
necessary to resolve disputes in
accordance with the objectives of these
procedures.
Section 16.13 What administrative
records are maintained?
The administrative record of review
consists of the review file; other
submissions by the parties; transcripts
or other records of any meetings,
conference calls, or oral presentation;
evidence submitted at the oral
presentation; and orders and other
documents issued by the reviewing and
presiding officials.
Section 16.14 What are the
requirements for a written decision?
(a) Issuance of Decision. The
reviewing official shall issue a written
decision upholding or denying the
suspension or proposed revocation. The
decision will set forth the reasons for
the decision and describe the basis
therefore in the record. Furthermore, the
reviewing official may remand the
matter to the respondent for such
further action as the reviewing official
deems appropriate.
(b) Date of Decision. The reviewing
official will attempt to issue their
decision within 15 days of the date of
the oral presentation, the date on which
the transcript is received, or the date of
the last submission by either party,
whichever is later. If there is no oral
presentation, the decision will normally
be issued within 15 days of the date of
receipt of the last reply brief. Once
issued, the reviewing official will
immediately communicate the decision
to each party.
(c) Public Notice. If the suspension
and proposed revocation are upheld, the
revocation will become effective
immediately and the public will be
notified by publication of a notice in the
Federal Register. If the suspension and
proposed revocation are denied, the
revocation will not take effect and the
suspension will be lifted immediately.
Public notice will be given by
publication in the Federal Register.
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
Federal Register / Vol. 85, No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 / Proposed Rules
khammond on DSKJM1Z7X2PROD with PROPOSALS3
Section 16.15 Is there a review of the
final administrative action?
Before any legal action is filed in
court challenging the suspension or
proposed revocation, respondent shall
VerDate Sep<11>2014
17:54 Sep 09, 2020
Jkt 250001
exhaust administrative remedies
provided under this subpart, unless
otherwise provided by Federal Law. The
reviewing official’s decision, under
Section 16.9(e) or 16.14(a) constitutes
PO 00000
Frm 00045
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
56151
final agency action and is ripe for
judicial review as of the date of the
decision.
[FR Doc. 2020–16432 Filed 9–4–20; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4162–20–P
E:\FR\FM\10SEP3.SGM
10SEP3
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 176 (Thursday, September 10, 2020)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 56108-56151]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2020-16432]
[[Page 56107]]
Vol. 85
Thursday,
No. 176
September 10, 2020
Part IV
Department of Health and Human Services
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
42 CFR Chapter I
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs;
Proposed Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 85 , No. 176 / Thursday, September 10, 2020 /
Proposed Rules
[[Page 56108]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
42 CFR Chapter I
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs
AGENCY: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
(SAMHSA), HHS.
ACTION: Notification of mandatory guidelines.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Health and Human Services (``HHS'' or
``Department'') is proposing to establish scientific and technical
guidelines for the inclusion of hair specimens in the Mandatory
Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs (Guidelines).
DATES: Submit comments on or before November 9, 2020.
ADDRESSES: In commenting, please refer to file code [SAMHSA-2020-0001].
Because of staff and resource limitations, SAMHSA cannot accept
comments by facsimile (fax) transmission.
You may submit comments in one of four ways (please choose only one
of the ways listed):
Electronically. You may submit electronic comments on this
regulation to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow ``Submit a comment''
instructions.
By regular mail. You may mail written comments to the
following address: SAMHSA, Center for Substance Abuse Prevention
(CSAP), Division of Workplace Programs (DWP), 5600 Fishers Lane, Room
16N02, Rockville, MD 20857. Please allow sufficient time for mailed
comments to be received before the close of the comment period.
By express or overnight mail. You may send written comments
to the following address: SAMHSA, CSAP, DWP, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room
16N02, Rockville, MD 20857.
By hand or courier. You may deliver your written comments
by hand or courier to the following address prior to the close of the
comment period: SAMHSA, CSAP, DWP, 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 16N02,
Rockville, MD 20857. If you intend to deliver your comments to the
Rockville address, please call (240) 276-2600 in advance to schedule
your arrival with one of our staff members. Because access to the
SAMHSA building is secure, persons without federal government
identification are encouraged to schedule their delivery or to leave
comments with the security guard at the front desk located in the main
lobby of the building.
All comments received before the close of the comment period will
be available for viewing by the public. Please note that all comments
are posted in their entirety, including personal or confidential
business information that is included in the comment. SAMHSA will post
all comments before the close of the comment period on the following
website: https://www.regulations.gov. Use the website's search function
to view the associated comments.
Comments received before the close of the comment period will also
be available for public inspection as they are received, generally
beginning approximately three weeks after publication of a document, at
SAMHSA, CSAP, DWP, 5600 Fishers Lane, Rockville, MD 20857, Monday
through Friday of each week, excluding federal holidays, from 8:30 a.m.
to 4:00 p.m. To schedule an appointment to view public comments, please
call (240) 276-2600.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eugene D. Hayes, Ph.D., MBA, SAMHSA,
CSAP, DWP; 5600 Fishers Lane, Room 16N02, Rockville, MD 20857, by
telephone (240) 276-1459 or by email: [email protected].
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Executive Summary
This notice of proposed Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace
Drug Testing Programs using Hair (HMG) will allow federal executive
branch agencies to collect and test a hair specimen as part of their
drug testing programs with the limitation that hair specimens be used
for pre-employment (i.e., for applicants applying for federal testing
designated positions) and random testing. A federal agency choosing to
test hair specimens must authorize collection and testing of at least
one other specimen type (e.g., urine or oral fluid) that is authorized
under the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs, and provide procedures whereby the alternate specimen is used
in the event that a donor is unable to provide a sufficient amount of
hair for faith-based or medical reasons, or due to an insufficient
amount or length of hair. The proposed HMG require collection of an
alternate authorized drug testing specimen in addition to the hair
specimen, either simultaneously (i.e., at the same collection event) or
when directed by the Medical Review Officer (MRO) after review and
verification of laboratory-reported results for the hair specimen. This
alternate specimen would be tested and reported in place of a donor's
positive hair specimen only in certain circumstances, as described
below.
These proposed HMG establish standards and technical requirements
for hair collection and collection materials, initial hair drug test
analytes and methods, confirmatory hair drug test analytes and methods,
processes for review by an MRO, standards for certification of
laboratories engaged in hair drug testing for federal agencies' drug-
free workplace programs, and requirements for federal agency actions
that are covered by these Guidelines. The HMG provide flexibility for
federal agency workplace drug testing programs to address testing needs
by allowing hair as an alternative specimen type.
The Department of Health and Human Services, pursuant to the
Department's authority under Section 503 of Public Law 100-71, 5 U.S.C.
Section 7301, and Executive Order No. 12564, establishes the scientific
and technical guidelines for federal workplace drug testing programs
and establishes standards for certification of laboratories engaged in
drug testing for federal agencies.
Summary of the Major Provisions of the Proposed HMG
The promulgation of the HMG allows federal agencies to collect and
test hair specimens in their workplace drug testing programs. The
collection process provides that the specimen will be collected by a
trained collector under direct observation. The HMG collection
procedure requires that a single hair specimen be obtained from the
donor's head and divided into two specimens (A and B). The collector
places the A and B specimens into separate specimen collection
containers. Unlike the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug
Testing Programs using Urine (UrMG), the HMG do not allow Instrumented
Initial Test Facilities (IITFs), primarily because of the limited
amount of hair collected from the donor.
The Department is proposing that an alternate authorized drug
testing specimen be collected (i.e., simultaneously collected or
collected and tested at the direction of the MRO after verification of
a positive hair test result). As described in greater detail below,
this two-test approach is intended to protect federal workers from
issues that have been identified as limitations of hair testing, and
related legal deficiencies identified in Jones v. City of Boston, 845
F.3d 28 (1st Cir. 2016) and Thompson v. Civil Service Com'n, 90
Mass.App.Ct. 462 (Oct. 7, 2016). Both cases indicate that an employment
action taken on the basis of a positive hair test alone, without other
corroborating evidence, may be
[[Page 56109]]
vulnerable to legal challenge. The Department is specifically
requesting comments, including support from recent peer-reviewed
scientific literature, on advances in the science of hair testing that
adequately address these limitations and elucidate the extent to which
hair color, external contamination and other factors (e.g., hair
treatments, hygiene) will affect hair tests and the interpretation of
hair drug test results. The Department will continue to monitor the
science of hair testing and will carefully review peer-reviewed
literature and other valid scientific information submitted by federal
agencies and the public for scientific support of hair testing. Based
on this evaluation, the Department will decide whether performance
standards can be established to mitigate identified limitations and
obviate the requirement to collect an alternate authorized specimen.
The Department is also soliciting public comment on the potential added
burden to federal agencies and specimen donors should an alternate
specimen be necessary. As noted under Executive Orders 13563 and 12866
in the Regulatory Impact and Notices section of this Notice, the
Department does not find these proposed mandatory guidelines to be a
significant burden for federal agencies or incur a significant cost. In
addition, a federal agency is not required to adopt hair testing in
their Drug-free Workplace Programs. However, comments provided by the
public on the subject of potential added burden could be useful to
federal agencies deciding whether to test hair in addition to other
specimen types in their federal workplace drug testing programs.
In addition, the Department is specifically requesting comments,
including support from the recent scientific literature, on whether
hair tests that are positive for the marijuana analyte, delta-9-
tetrahydrocannabinol-9-carboxylic acid (THCA), should be excluded from
the requirement to test an alternate authorized specimen (i.e., MROs
would report verified positive THCA hair results to the federal
agency).
Costs and Benefits
Using data obtained from the Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs and HHS-certified laboratories, the Department estimates that
275,000 urine specimens are tested annually by federal agencies. HHS
projects that approximately 1% (or 2,750) of the 275,000 specimens
tested per year will be hair specimens and 89% (or 244,750) will be
urine specimens, with the remaining approximately 10% being oral fluid
specimens (27,500). The approximate annual numbers of regulated
specimens for the Department of Transportation (DOT) and the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC) are 6.1 million and 150,000, respectively.
It should be noted that the NRC-related information in this notice only
pertains to individuals subject to drug testing conducted pursuant to
10 CFR part 26, ``Fitness for Duty Programs'' (i.e., employees of
certain NRC-regulated entities). Should DOT and NRC allow hair testing
in their regulated workplace programs, the estimated annual numbers of
specimens for DOT would be 50% (3,050,000) hair specimens for pre-
employment testing, 7% (427,000) oral fluid specimens, and 43%
(2,623,000) urine specimens; and numbers of specimens for NRC would be
10% (15,000) hair, 7% (10,500) oral fluid, and 83% (124,500) urine.
These projected numbers are based on existing annual pre-employment
testing in the regulated industries and hair testing currently
conducted in the private sector for commercial drivers.
An HHS-certified laboratory may group analytes for initial testing
as shown in the table in Section 3.4 (i.e., use a single test for two
or more analytes that are in the same drug class and have the same
initial test cutoff), or may use multiple tests. In Section 3.4, the
Department is proposing criteria for calibrating initial tests for
grouped analytes and is specifying the minimum cross-reactivity of the
immunoassay to the non-target analytes(s) within the group (i.e., those
not used for calibration). An immunoassay manufacturer may incur costs
if they choose to alter their existing product and resubmit the
immunoassay for Food and Drug Administration (FDA) clearance.
Costs associated with hair testing are greater than for urine or
oral fluid testing based on information from commercial laboratories
currently testing hair specimens. Costs of initial testing will not
pose a significant increase for laboratories currently testing hair if
the laboratory can use currently available immunoassay testing kits
cleared by the FDA for hair testing. All confirmatory testing can be
achieved using commercially available instrumentation. Prior to testing
regulated hair specimens, laboratories must be specifically certified
for hair testing by the Department through the National Laboratory
Certification Program (NLCP). Laboratories choosing to apply for HHS
certification may incur additional costs associated with adding the
matrix and/or validating and implementing assays using different
cutoffs and analytes. The estimated laboratory cost to complete and
submit a certification application is $3,000 and the estimated cost for
the Department to process the application is $10,200. The initial HHS
hair testing certification includes the requirement for the laboratory
to demonstrate that their performance meets Guidelines analytical
requirements by testing three (3) sets of performance testing (PT) hair
samples. The Department will provide the three groups of PT samples
through the NLCP at no cost to laboratories participating in the NLCP
Pilot Proficiency Testing Program for hair. This pilot PT program is
described in the History and Proposed Changes to the HHS Mandatory
Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs section below.
Based on estimated fees charged for hair specimen testing, laboratory
costs to conduct the PT testing would range from $3,000 to $3,375 for
each applicant laboratory.
Based on information from current commercial hair testing
laboratories, once hair testing is implemented, the average cost per
specimen will range from $40.00 to $45.00. Information from current
HHS-certified laboratories indicates that the average cost of testing a
urine specimen ranges from approximately $6.50 to $11.00 per specimen.
Once hair testing is implemented, the estimated cost per specimen for
each initial test will range from $2.50 to $6.00 including costs for
initial test reagents and sample preparation (e.g., washing,
digestion). Estimated additional costs for each confirmatory test will
range from $20.00 to $35.00, primarily due to the costs of sample
preparation (including decontamination procedures as defined in Section
1.5) and analysis. Therefore, the estimated cost of a commercial hair
testing laboratory using both initial testing with confirmation will
range from $40.00 to $80.00 per specimen. These costs for the
laboratories or federal agencies choosing to use hair in their drug
testing programs will be incorporated into the overall testing cost for
the federal agency submitting the specimen to the laboratory.
As described earlier, a federal agency choosing to use hair for
pre-employment and/or random testing may collect an alternate specimen
type at the same collection event or later, at the direction of the
MRO. Agencies choosing not to collect an alternate specimen at the same
time as hair would save upfront collection and handling costs, and
would pay for alternate specimen collection and testing only when
directed by the MRO (i.e., when the donor has no legitimate medical
[[Page 56110]]
explanation for a positive hair test, when the hair specimen was
reported by the laboratory as invalid or rejected, or when the donor
requests testing of the split specimen and the split specimen cannot be
tested). A federal agency that chooses to collect an alternate specimen
type at the same time as hair for a pre-employment or random test would
incur additional upfront costs for collection and handling of the
alternate specimen, but would only pay for testing of those alternate
specimens when directed by the MRO, and would save time on recollection
in those instances. Agencies choosing to use hair in their drug testing
programs may also incur some costs for training of federal employees
such as drug program coordinators.
As explained in more detail below, hair testing potentially offers
several benefits when compared to urine, including directly observed
collections, ease of transport and storage, increased specimen
stability, and a longer window of drug detection. The Department
believes these benefits justify pursuing hair testing in federal
workplace programs.
Background
The Department of Health and Human Services, pursuant to the
Department's authority under Section 503 of Public Law 100-71, 5 U.S.C.
Section 7301, and Executive Order No. 12564, establishes the scientific
and technical guidelines for federal workplace drug testing programs
and establishes standards for certification of laboratories engaged in
drug testing for federal agencies. As required, HHS originally
published the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs (Guidelines) in the Federal Register [FR] on April 11, 1988
[53 FR 11979]. The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services
Administration (SAMHSA) subsequently revised the Guidelines on June 9,
1994 [59 FR 29908], September 30, 1997 [62 FR 51118], November 13, 1998
[63 FR 63483], April 13, 2004 [69 FR 19644], and November 25, 2008 [73
FR 71858]. SAMHSA published the revised Mandatory Guidelines for
Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs using Urine (UrMG) on January
23, 2017 [82 FR 7920] and published the proposed Mandatory Guidelines
for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs using Oral Fluid (OFMG) on
May 15, 2015 [80 FR 28054].
On December 4, 2015, the President signed the Fixing America's
Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, which required HHS to ``issue
scientific and technical guidance for hair testing as a method of
detecting the use of a controlled substance for purposes of section
31306 of title 49, United States Code.'' Public Law 114-94, section
5402(b).
History and Proposed Changes to the HHS Mandatory Guidelines for
Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs
A focus of the HHS mission is to maintain the integrity and ensure
the quality of federal drug-free workplace programs by a commitment to
identify and mandate the use of the most accurate, reliable drug tests
and testing methods available. To accomplish these goals, the
Department implements ongoing scientific reviews and program
collaboration with federal regulators, researchers, drug testing
laboratories, and public and private sector employers. As the use of
alternative specimens (other than urine) and new analytical test
technologies increased over the previous years, the Department, through
SAMHSA's Center for Substance Abuse and Prevention (CSAP) Drug Testing
Advisory Board (DTAB), responded by reviewing new technologies and
assessing drug testing using other specimen types, such as oral fluid
(saliva), hair, and sweat for possible use in federal agency workplace
testing programs.
The proposed HMG are the result of a directed Departmental
assessment that began in 1997 with a 3-day scientific meeting of the
DTAB. During that public meeting, DTAB members discussed drug testing
using alternative specimens and the use of new and developing drug
testing technologies with potential applicability to workplace drug
testing programs. Following the initial meeting, members of the DTAB
continued to review and analyze all available information on
alternative specimens and testing technologies. These efforts
identified specific scientific, administrative, and procedural
requirements necessary for a comprehensive federal workplace drug
testing program that included alternative specimens and technologies.
The first working draft of new Guidelines that included the testing
of alternative specimens including hair was presented at the June 2000
DTAB meeting. These ``work-in-progress'' draft Guidelines were placed
on the SAMHSA website and the public was invited to submit information
and comments to improve the draft document and further SAMHSA's
knowledge of the analysis of alternative specimens. Twenty-eight
separate comments were received. Those comments were summarized,
incorporated into the draft Guidelines and the updated document was
presented at the DTAB meeting in September 2000. Again, comments were
requested from all interested parties. At the December 2000 DTAB
meeting, a third working draft of the Guidelines was presented that
included public comments resulting from the September meeting. SAMHSA,
in consultation with subject matter experts including researchers and
drug testing industry professionals, continued to assess the scientific
supportability of testing alternative specimens in the Drug-Free
Workplace Program (DFWP). Areas of specimen collection, specimen
validity, initial testing, confirmation, medical review, and
performance testing were examined to evaluate the integrity,
reliability, and defensibility of drug testing using alternate
matrices.
To assess laboratory performance and utility of alternative
specimen testing in federal drug-free workplace programs, the
Department initiated a voluntary pilot proficiency testing (PT) program
for hair. The Hair Pilot PT program ran from 2000 to 2007 and resumed
in 2014 based on DTAB's recommendation. The program was developed, and
the samples were prepared using government funding. This pilot PT
program was established to determine if it was possible to prepare
stable and accurate hair PT samples, and to develop criteria for the PT
program. Participating laboratories used their established procedures
to test the PT samples and shared their results with SAMHSA. Based on
data obtained from the pilot PT program, it appeared that valid and
stable hair PT samples could be prepared. The results of the pilot PT
program showed that the technology used by participant laboratories for
confirmatory testing could meet requirements for sensitivity and
specificity. Also, inter-laboratory precision improved during the pilot
PT program for most drug analytes.
Based on the pilot PT results from 2000 to 2003 and input from
subject matter experts for all alternate matrices, the Department
issued a Federal Register notice [69 FR 19673] on April 13, 2004
proposing inclusion of oral fluid, hair, and sweat specimens in federal
workplace drug testing programs. Following publication of the proposed
Guidelines, the public and federal agencies identified significant
scientific, legal, and public policy concerns about the use of the
alternative specimens. As a result of the review, the Department issued
a Final Notice of Revisions to the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs on November 25, 2008 [73 FR 71858] that
concluded the scientific, technical, and legal information for the
[[Page 56111]]
testing of alternative specimens (oral fluid, hair, and sweat) was
insufficient to include these specimens in the federal programs at that
time. As noted above, the purposes of the Hair Pilot PT Program were to
determine if it was possible to prepare stable and accurate hair PT
samples, and to develop criteria for the PT program. Many of the issues
raised by commenters (e.g., concerns over external contamination) were
not addressed in the pilot PT program. The Department committed to
monitoring developments in alternative specimen testing and has
continued to do so since 2008.
The complexity of responses to the 2004 notice made it clear that
if the Department were to subsequently authorize alternative specimens
for the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs, each specimen matrix would need a separate set of Guidelines.
Additionally, the Department proposed to stagger the timeline for the
review and potential incorporation of alternative specimens, and to
begin with oral fluid. The decision to begin with oral fluid was
supported by fewer legal and policy concerns, and current peer-reviewed
literature that existed with oral fluid. The Department published the
proposed OFMG on May 15, 2015 [80 FR 28054].
Since 2004, methodology developed for non-regulated private sector
workplace alternate matrix testing has evolved, leading to enhanced
analytical sensitivity and specificity for hair testing. The scientific
literature for hair testing and interpretation of results has grown.
Many non-regulated private sector organizations have incorporated hair
testing into their workplace drug testing programs.
At the open session of the January 2012 DTAB meeting, SAMHSA shared
updated information on hair testing with DTAB and the public. During
the meeting, experts made scientific presentations concerning hair
specimens for workplace drug testing, including physiological
composition of hair, tested drugs and cutoffs, wash procedures,
decontamination procedures, hair testing results and best practices in
laboratory methodologies (initial and confirmatory testing). Wash
procedures consisted of a rinse with organic solvents to remove oils
and residue on the hair prior to initial testing. Decontamination
procedures were more extensive methods (e.g., multiple organic and
aqueous washes) designed to remove drug present due to environmental
contamination prior to confirmatory testing.
In May 2015, SAMHSA solicited comments regarding the science and
practice of hair testing via a Request for Information (RFI) [80 FR
30689], and subsequently extended the due date for comments [80 FR
34921]. The notice requested comments from the public and industry
stakeholders regarding a variety of hair testing issues (e.g.,
specimens, collection, specimen preparation, analytes/cutoffs, specimen
validity, and testing methods). The RFI gave the public and industry
stakeholders an opportunity to provide information and comments for
consideration during the development of the proposed Guidelines for
hair testing. The Department received 37 comments from drug testing
laboratories, MROs, manufacturers, drug testing industry associations,
and the public. All submitted comments were reviewed and were presented
to the DTAB members for consideration during SAMHSA's continuing
assessment of hair as an alternative specimen.
Following the August 2015 meeting of the DTAB, the Board submitted
the following recommendation to SAMHSA: ``Based on the review of the
science, DTAB recommends that SAMHSA pursue hair as an alternative
specimen in the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs, including performance standards that sufficiently address
external contamination and hair color impact.''
Thereafter, SAMHSA continued to critically review the state-of-the-
science and technology for forensic drug testing of hair and the
utility of hair as a specimen in federal workplace drug testing
programs. SAMHSA also consulted subject matter experts with expertise
in biochemistry, toxicology, laboratory operations, MRO practices and
workplace policy. The input of these experts was considered along with
Department officials at quarterly DTAB meetings.
Rationale for Pursuing Hair Testing in the Mandatory Guidelines for
Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs
Hair has been used in non-regulated testing programs including the
transportation and casino industries (i.e., for pre-employment and
random testing), and other situations when longer detection periods may
be needed. Corresponding developments have led to analytical
technologies that provide the needed sensitivity and accuracy for
testing hair specimens at the levels required to determine a positive
test result, as demonstrated in the Hair Pilot PT Program.
Hair and urine pre-employment test results have been shown to be
somewhat dissimilar because each matrix has a different time window of
drug detection. Typically, positivity rates are higher in hair due to
hair's longer window of detection.\1\ Hair is easily collected,
transported and stored, and is also more difficult to substitute and/or
adulterate than urine since collections are performed under direct
observation. Separation, detection, and identification techniques have
improved such that scientists are now able to detect and quantify drugs
and/or metabolites in hair at picogram per milligram (pg/mg)
concentrations. A forensic workplace testing program for hair can be
modeled after the existing federal program: Specimens are first tested
using an initial test (e.g., immunoassay or an alternate technology),
and specimens with positive initial test results are confirmed using
mass spectrometric identification.
What is hair?
Unlike urine and oral fluid, hair is a solid, heterogenous matrix
that is exposed to the environment. Hair color and structure differ by
individual and within the same individual. Hair consists of a hair
follicle and hair shaft. At the base of the follicle (bulb) are highly
vascularized matrix cells. As matrix cells in the dermis of the skin
move outward during growth, they form layers of a hair shaft that
include the outer protectant cuticle, central cortex and inner medulla.
Hair grows in three stages: About 85 percent of hair follicles in the
posterior vertex region of the head are in active growth phase
(anagen), while the others are in a transition phase (catagen) before
the resting phase (telogen). At the vertex region of the scalp, the
average growth rate of hair is about 0.4 millimeters per day or
approximately 1 centimeter per month.2-5 The Department is
proposing to permit agencies as part of their federal drug-free
workplace programs to test head hair specimens between 0.5 and 1.0
inches (approximately 2.5 cm) long, representing a detection time
period of approximately 30-60 days, for pre-employment and random
testing.
What is the mechanism of drug disposition in hair?
Drugs and drug metabolites may be incorporated into hair by several
pathways.6-10 As drugs and their metabolites travel through
the body in blood, they diffuse from the bloodstream into the base of
the hair follicle. The amount of drug in the hair is related to the
drug concentration in the blood when the hair was formed and depends on
the chemical structure of the drug or metabolite. Drugs and/or
metabolites may also be incorporated
[[Page 56112]]
into hair via secretions of the sweat glands and sebaceous glands,
which are in close contact with hair as it develops and emerges from
the skin. Sweat and sebum can deposit drugs and/or metabolites on the
hair shaft that are absorbed into the hair during and after its
formation. As hair grows and emerges from the skin, the location of
drug and metabolite in the hair shaft can be used to generally assess
the timeframe of drug use. However, sweat can contribute to drug and/or
metabolite incorporation across the entire length of the hair.
Therefore, segmental analysis (i.e., analysis of multiple short
longitudinal segments to determine a time profile of use) must be done
with caution and is not recommended for workplace drug testing.
6-10
What are some of the known issues with drug testing using hair?
Numerous factors influence the amount of drug incorporated into
hair (e.g., drug dose, length of exposure, physical and chemical
properties of hair, and factors associated with the chemical structure
of the drug). Of concern are environmental contamination, the impact of
natural hair color on drug incorporation, and the effects of hygiene
and cosmetic hair treatments. These issues may confound the results and
interpretation of hair tests as explained in more detail below.
Environmental Contamination and Decontamination
Concerns have been raised over environmental contamination of
hair.2 4 11-15 There can be opportunities for hair to be
contaminated from drugs in the environment.\14\ For example, a donor
may claim they tested positive for a drug because they were in the
presence of others using the drug, or were in an environment in which
drug particulates were in the air or on contaminated surfaces.
Effective decontamination procedures are a key issue in hair
testing, because the inability to rule out external contamination
presents legal challenges. In one relevant case, a state court upheld a
state commission's finding that hair testing did not adequately rule
out the possibility of a false positive drug test resulting from
external contamination such that an employer could rely on hair testing
as the sole basis for an employee's termination. See Thompson v. Civil
Service Com'n, 90 Mass.App.Ct. 462 (Oct. 7, 2016). Notably, the court
in Thompson v. Civil Service Com'n stated the following regarding the
reliability of hair testing:
A threshold issue before the commission was the scientific
reliability of the hair testing, and its ability to distinguish
between voluntary ingestion and environmental exposure. The ten
officers and the department held competing views as to whether the
testing alone was reliable enough to establish just cause supporting
the officers' terminations . . . . Ultimately, the commission found
that the hair testing methodology was not sufficiently reliable to
be the sole basis for an officer's termination, concluding that
``[a] reported positive test result . . . is not necessarily
conclusive of ingestion and, depending on the preponderance of
evidence in a particular case, may or may not justify termination or
other appropriate discipline of a tenured [department] officer.''
Nonetheless, the commission found that hair testing is an
appropriate tool to enforce the department's substance abuse policy
and that hair test results could be used as some evidence of drug
use.
Id. at 465--466 (internal citations omitted) (emphasis added). The
Thompson court also stated that:
Here, after an exhaustive inquiry on the scientific reliability
of the . . . hair testing methodology, the commission reached the
conclusion that a positive test was not conclusive on the question
of voluntary ingestion, as the positive test may also represent
sample contamination by environmental exposure. In other words, the
commission found that the risk of a false positive test was great
enough to require additional evidence to terminate an officer for
just cause. That conclusion is well supported by the record, which
includes evidence of shifting cutoff levels through the years since
the testing had been implemented, a lack of general acceptance in
the scientific and law enforcement communities, and a lack of
universally recognized industry standards.
Id. at 467--468. The Thompson court went on to hold that, ``the
evidence amply supported the commission decision.'' Id. at 470.
Many laboratories use wash procedures to remove oils and residue on
the hair prior to initial testing. Approximately 90% of specimens are
negative upon initial testing, and are subsequently reported
negative.\16\ Depending upon the analyte, external contamination is of
the most concern for the remaining 10% of hair specimens submitted for
confirmation testing. Therefore, some laboratories use decontamination
procedures designed to remove drug present due to environmental
contamination prior to performing confirmatory testing.
Decontamination procedures that adequately remove externally
deposited drug and drug metabolites prior to confirmation testing are
the subject of much scientific inquiry. It is likely that hair from
individuals who use drugs is also externally
contaminated.6 17 In other words, drugs and some drug
metabolites (e.g., benzoylecgonine) detected during testing of a drug
user's hair can be from drug ingestion and/or external contamination.
This is mainly because of drug users' exposure to drugs in their
environment as well as drugs and/or metabolites in the individual's own
sweat and sebum coming into contact with their hair.
A variety of decontamination procedures have been reported in the
literature with varying effectiveness.11-13 Decontamination
procedures employing multiple washes with analysis of the final wash
solution may be a useful tool to identify external
contamination.11 12 15 However, it has been shown that some
externally deposited drug may remain, even after extensive washing.\11\
To address this issue, some laboratories have developed procedures
employing a wash ``factor'' for some drugs (e.g., cocaine), whereby the
concentration of the final wash solution is multiplied by a factor to
simulate the effect of additional washes and the product is subtracted
from the concentration of the drug measured in the hair.\12\ The factor
used in these calculations varies and is dependent upon the drug and
the laboratory. For some drugs (e.g., cocaine), the factor alone was
not found to be effective at discriminating external contamination from
drug use, so laboratories have employed additional criteria (e.g.,
presence of multiple metabolites, metabolite to parent drug
ratios).\12\ One study proposed using a wash-to-hair concentration
ratio to designate results as either indicative of drug use, indicative
of drug use in combination with external contamination or indicative
that the source of the drug was external contamination and inconclusive
as to drug use.\15\ In that study, 11% of all test results had ratios
indicative of external contamination and inconclusive for drug use.
While the use of wash factors or ratios has shown promise in mitigating
the effect of external contamination on hair drug testing, the
Department is not proposing that such procedures be used in federal
agency testing programs, in part because of the difficulty in
development of performance testing samples to assess their
effectiveness in the certified laboratories.
Laboratories that have researched the validity and efficacy of
decontamination procedures recommend utilizing aqueous and organic
solvents in these decontamination procedures.\11\ Both the Society of
Hair Testing and United Nations Office of Drugs and Crime recommend a
hair decontamination procedure that includes both an organic and
aqueous washing step, whereas the European Workplace Drug Testing
[[Page 56113]]
Society recommends an organic and/or aqueous wash. The proposed
inclusion of both organic and aqueous solvent wash steps is in
accordance with current peer reviewed literature. As opposed to
requiring a single method for decontamination to be used by all testing
laboratories, SAMHSA proposes that minimum performance standards be
established for the efficacy of decontamination procedures that are
followed in all HHS-certified hair drug testing laboratories.
However, although there is scientific evidence that suggests that
wash and decontamination procedures may be effective in ensuring that
the outer protectant cuticle and inner medulla portions of the hair
shaft are decontaminated, there are no published studies that prove
that external contamination cannot reach the central cortex of the
hair. Further, one published study concludes that drug-contaminated
hair when washed with water and methanol is indistinguishable from drug
user hair because the drug migrates into the cortex and medulla due to
swelling effects of these solvents.\13\ If this issue is not addressed,
a donor may claim that, even if hair is washed and decontaminated in
accordance with the most vigorous washing methodologies utilized by
laboratories, a hair test result could remain influenced by
contamination and potentially result in a false positive test.
Therefore, more time and research are needed for the development of
performance standards that address this and other issues. The
Department is currently in the process of developing performance
standards for decontamination of hair and is seeking public comment on
what such standards should be and how performance test samples could be
developed to assess these standards. When the decontamination
performance standards are fully developed, it is the Department's
intention to add them to the HMG through the notice and comment process
rather than delay publishing of the proposed HMG until such standards
are developed. Compliance with these mandatory minimum standards, when
fully developed and included in these Guidelines, will be evaluated
through the NLCP Performance Testing (PT) program.
After relevant performance testing standards are developed, the HMG
require laboratories to perform a valid and effective decontamination
procedure prior to confirmatory drug testing in order to address the
external contamination issue. The Department is requesting comments and
information about decontamination procedures that remove drug present
as a result of external contamination. All decontamination and test
methods must meet the validation, quality control, and review
requirements specified by the HMG. Furthermore, the NLCP Performance
Testing (PT) program would challenge those methods using drug user
hair, hair contaminated with drug analytes, hair subjected to cosmetic
treatments, and blind quality controls. The laboratories will also be
required to prepare decontamination controls that challenge their
decontamination procedures and are analyzed with each confirmatory drug
analysis. The Department is specifically requesting comments on the
types of samples to be included in the hair PT program and procedures
used to prepare decontamination controls.
Identification of Unique Metabolites
Identification of a unique drug metabolite would distinguish drug
use from environmental contamination as long as strict criteria for
defining a unique metabolite are established.\11\ The proposed HMG
define a unique metabolite as ``a drug metabolite present in a hair
specimen only as a result of biotransformation following drug use'' and
which ``does not occur as a contaminant in licit and illicit drug
products and is not produced from the drug as an artifact.''
To date, only one unique metabolite (i.e., THCA) meets the above
definition and has been included for the proposed drugs. However, while
the use of a unique metabolite addresses the external contamination
issue, the Department is not aware of any controlled dosing studies
that demonstrate the lack of a hair color impact on THCA results. See
additional discussion on the impact of hair color on hair test results
below. Accordingly, the Department is requesting comments including
support from the scientific literature on whether THCA positive hair
tests can be excluded from the requirement to test an alternate
authorized specimen (i.e., MROs would report verified positive THCA
hair results to the federal agency).
The Department is also requesting information including, at a
minimum, support from the scientific literature about unique
metabolites that can be analyzed on a stand-alone basis for the other
proposed drugs listed in Section 3.4. For example, one recent study
analyzing opioids in hair indicates that unique glucuronide metabolites
of opioid drugs may be reliably detected in hair.\18\ In addition,
although hydroxylated metabolites of cocaine and benzoylecgonine do not
meet the Guidelines definition of a unique metabolite for hair, these
analytes have been touted in the literature as being diagnostic of
cocaine use when ratio criteria are applied to the quantitative
results.12 19-22 Hydroxy-metabolites of cocaine were
originally thought to be unique metabolites as defined in the HMG,
until these compounds were identified in street cocaine samples and
found to be produced during hair treatment experiments.21 22
More recently, hydroxy-metabolites of benzoylecgonine were identified
in hair and thought to represent a new opportunity to reliably identify
cocaine use.19-21 However, these analytes also have been
detected in a limited study of street cocaine samples, and were found
to form and increase in concentration over a period of eight weeks
after contamination of seven subjects' hair with cocaine.\20\ To
compensate for these issues, researchers have proposed the use of
ratios and criteria schemes (i.e., detection of multiple metabolites at
or above proposed cutoff concentrations and within certain ratios to
each other).20 21 These schemes require the analysis of
cocaine and multiple hydroxylated metabolites to be effective, thereby
increasing the costs of testing and the NLCP performance testing used
to monitor the accuracy and reliability of laboratory results.
Impact of Hair Color on Hair Test Results
The natural color of human hair ranges from shades of black, brown,
red, yellow, gray and white. Hair color is controlled, in part, by the
biochemistry of two major groups of melanin pigments. The eumelanins
are black to brown and the pheomelanins are reddish in color.\23\ The
presence of eumelanin appears to be the major determinant of drug
binding and incorporation of drug into the hair shaft. One of the
postulated mechanisms for drug uptake in hair is ionic binding of drugs
containing basic nitrogen moieties in their molecular structure (e.g.,
amphetamines, cocaine, opioids, and phencyclidine) with melanins.\24\
Neutral and acidic drugs appear to bind to hair by other poorly
understood means. Direct evidence of binding of various drugs with
melanin and with human hair has been demonstrated.25-27 In
one in vitro study, cocaine binding experiments with black, brown, and
blonde human hair demonstrated up to 34-fold differences in cocaine
binding with dark hair as compared to blonde hair.\26\ These findings
have raised concerns that selective drug binding with the wide
variation of color
[[Page 56114]]
pigments distributed amongst the population may introduce bias in drug
test results.
A number of laboratory animal studies indicate that some drugs are
differentially incorporated into hair based on color. Following
administration of the same dose, higher drug concentrations were
demonstrated in dark hair versus light hair in animals administered
amphetamine,\28\ methamphetamine,\29\ methadone,\30\ and
phencyclidine.\31\ Several controlled dosing studies in humans are
consistent with the findings in animals.
In one human study, administration of the same dose of isotopically
labeled cocaine to Caucasians (hair color primarily brown) and non-
Caucasians (hair color primarily black) resulted in approximately 2.7
times more cocaine being incorporated into non-Caucasian hair than
Caucasian hair.\32\ In another study, codeine was administered to male
and female participants with black (Caucasians, non-Caucasian, American
Indian, Hispanic, Asian), brown (Caucasians), blond (Caucasians) and
red hair (Caucasians).\33\ Codeine concentrations in black hair were
seven-fold higher than those in brown hair and 14-15-fold higher than
those in blond hair. Using the proposed confirmatory cutoff of 200 pg/
mg, 100% of subjects with black hair and 50% subjects with brown hair
in this study would have been reported as positive. In contrast,
subjects with blond or red hair would have tested negative. The authors
suggested a direct relationship between codeine concentration and
melanin concentration in hair. In another study of codeine
administration to participants with different hair colors, a strong
correlation was observed between codeine concentrations in hair and
melanin concentrations.\34\
Some of these investigators conducting controlled drug dosing
studies measured melanin pigments as well as the amount of drug
incorporation in hair and suggested that normalization of drug
concentration to pigment content would effectively reduce potential
bias in test results.33 34
However, it remains unclear how the effect of pigmentation
differences on drug amount in hair translates to a broader population
as a whole, given the many other sources of variability (e.g.,
individual differences in amount and frequency of drug use and rates of
drug metabolism and disposition). Epidemiology studies have suggested
no significant hair color impact exists for THCA,\35\ heroin, cocaine,
and amphetamines.\36\ The THCA result is consistent with studies of
other acidic and neutral drugs and metabolites in hair. However, the
Department is unaware of any controlled dosing studies that evaluated
THCA in hair and therefore without this objective data the question of
whether THCA exhibits a hair color impact remains. As noted earlier,
the Department is requesting comments including support from the recent
scientific literature on whether THCA positive hair tests should be
excluded from the requirement to test an alternate authorized specimen
(i.e., MROs would report verified positive THCA hair results to the
federal agency). It is unknown for the other drugs whether the absence
of an objective and scientific measure of hair color and differences in
how hair color was categorized between these epidemiological and
controlled human dosing studies played a role in the lack of
concordance in results. Another study found that black arrestees tested
positive for cocaine more often than white arrestees in both urine and
hair.\37\ The authors suggested that, given the consistency between
self-reported cocaine use and test outcome, there was no bias in the
hair or urine tests based on racial group. A recent prepublication
article by researchers from the University of Arkansas was provided to
the Department for review. Similar to the Mieczkowski studies
referenced above, the article attempts to consider hair pigmentation
difference by dividing donors into ethnic groups and comparing urine
and hair specimen testing results. The authors suggest that ethnic
groups are significantly different irrespective of testing procedure.
As noted, the Department wishes to solicit feedback on scientific
studies comparing drug results and hair color and results comparing
urine to hair.
In addition, in vitro binding studies, animal studies, and
controlled human dosing studies for certain drug classes (i.e.,
amphetamines, cocaine, opioids, and phencyclidine) provide scientific
evidence that melanin pigments may influence the amount of drug
incorporated into hair. However, it is unclear whether this influence
would lead to significant bias in different populations of workers
undergoing drug tests, given variabilities described herein, that could
be introduced into test results from other sources and within the time
frame of 30-60 days based on a 0.5 to 1.0 inch hair test. The
Department is requesting information, including support from the recent
scientific literature to address the impact of hair color on drug test
results.
The hair color impact/bias issue also presents legal challenges. It
should be highlighted in this regard that the United States Court of
Appeals for the First Circuit found that certain African-American
police officers who were terminated from their positions on the basis
of hair testing results were able to prove a ``prima facie case of
disparate impact under Title VII.'' See Jones v. City of Boston, 752
F.3d 38, 60 (1st Cir. 2014).) The First Circuit reiterated this finding
in a subsequent 2016 proceeding and remanded the matter to the district
court for further proceedings on the remaining prongs of the disparate
impact analysis. See Jones v. City of Boston, 845 F.3d 28 (1st Cir.
2016). The First Circuit held that:
[t]he record contains sufficient evidence from which a
reasonable factfinder could conclude that hair testing plus a
follow-up series of random urinalysis tests for those few officers
who tested positive on the hair test would have been as accurate as
the hair test alone at detecting the non-presence of cocaine
metabolites while simultaneously yielding a smaller share of false
positives in a manner that would have reduced the disparate impact
of the hair test. We also think that, on the present record, a
reasonable factfinder could conclude that the [Boston Police]
Department in 2003 refused to adopt this alternative.
Jones v. City of Boston, 845 F.3d 28, 38 (1st Cir. 2016).
Thus, the First Circuit characterized ``a follow-up series of
random urinalysis tests'' for officers who tested positive using hair
as being just ``as accurate as the hair test alone at detecting the
non-presence of cocaine metabolites while simultaneously yielding a
smaller share of false positives in a manner that would have reduced
the disparate impact of the hair test.'' Id. Accordingly, the
Department is proposing to include testing using an alternate specimen
when directed by the MRO for individuals who test positive on a hair
test, unless the donor has a legitimate medical explanation for the
positive test or the MRO has corroborating evidence to support the
positive hair test (i.e., donor admission of illicit drug use). In
addition, testing of an alternative matrix could also prove to be an
effective measure to mitigate the external contamination issue because
it would supply additional evidence to support an adverse action when
premised on a positive drug test, which the Thompson court found to be
needed when hair specimens are used for drug testing. As noted earlier,
the Department is specifically requesting comments, including support
from recent peer-reviewed scientific literature, on advances in the
science of hair testing that may mitigate the requirement for an
alternate authorized specimen in place of a donor's positive hair
specimen in certain circumstances. The Department
[[Page 56115]]
is also seeking comments from the public on the potential for added
burden should the alternate specimen requirement be necessary.
Specifically, the Department is soliciting comments on potential burden
that this approach could place on the federal agency employers and
specimen donors. Information from the public could be useful to federal
agencies evaluating hair testing as compared to using urine or oral
fluid testing in their workplace drug testing programs.
Effects of Cosmetic Hair Treatments
Hair treatments such as bleaching, straightening, relaxing,
frequent washing, and vigorous brushing may; (1) decrease the hair
concentrations of incorporated drug, (2) have effects that are drug,
metabolite, target marker and profile dependent, and (3) because of the
physical and chemical damage caused by these processes, they may
increase the susceptibility of the hair to environmental
contamination.38-42 The Department is proposing that each
laboratory have a scientifically validated method to identify hair that
has been damaged to the extent a drug test may be affected. One method
for identification of damaged or porous hair has been published in the
scientific literature but further information on this topic is
needed.\43\ Therefore, the Department is requesting information
including, at a minimum, support from the scientific literature to
address these issues. Examples of requested information might include
published scientific studies, internal laboratory study procedures or
protocols, or reviews conducted by outside stakeholders to identify
damaged hair. The Department is also requesting comments on whether
this testing should be performed routinely on all specimens, or only on
certain specimens (e.g., based on initial test results). The Department
is also seeking comment on the extent to which (based upon scientific
studies) hair specimens can be impacted by hair treatments and whether
such specimens should be reported as invalid and an alternate specimen
be collected and tested.
Rationale for Hair for Pre-Employment and Random Testing
The Department is proposing the use of hair for pre-employment and
random drug testing. Because drugs/metabolites are not detected in hair
for 5 to 7 days after ingestion, it is not an appropriate specimen to
detect recent use. Thus, hair is not an appropriate specimen for post-
accident and reasonable suspicion testing. The Department is requesting
comments on whether hair may be used for follow-up or return to duty
testing.
How were analytes and cutoffs selected?
The selection of analytes for testing was based on known drug
disposition patterns in hair. Analytes for the regulated drugs tested
in hair are marijuana metabolite (delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol-9-
carboxylic acid, THCA), cocaine (parent drug and metabolite,
benzoylecgonine), phencyclidine (PCP), opioids (codeine, morphine,
hydrocodone, hydromorphone, oxycodone, oxymorphone), heroin metabolite
(6-acetylmorphine, 6-AM), and amphetamines (amphetamine,
methamphetamine, methylenedioxymethamphetamine [MDMA], and
methylenedioxyamphetamine [MDA]).
Cutoffs were based on those proposed by the Department in 2004 (69
FR 19673). The Department has added the same prescription opioids
(i.e., hydrocodone, hydromorphone, oxycodone, and oxymorphone)
specified in the UrMG and OFMG, with the same hair cutoffs as proposed
for codeine and morphine. The codeine and morphine cutoffs are
consistent with those recommended by the European Workplace Drug
Testing Society and the Society of Hair Testing.44 45
Will there be specimen validity tests for hair?
The Department is not aware of any objective methods in use to
assess hair specimen validity (e.g., to distinguish synthetic from
human hair or to identify hair that has been damaged to the extent a
drug test result may be affected). As noted earlier, the Department is
proposing that each laboratory use a validated method to identify
damaged hair; therefore, the Department is seeking information on such
methods and comments on whether all or only certain hair specimens
should be subjected to such testing. The Department is also seeking
comments on whether other validity testing is necessary for hair and,
if so, what tests could be used.
National Laboratory Certification Program (NLCP)
The functions of the National Laboratory Certification Program
include maintaining laboratory inspection and PT programs as described
in these Guidelines. Activities within these functions also include,
but are not limited to, reviewing inspection reports and PT results,
preparing summary reports of inspection and PT results, and making
decisions regarding laboratory certification, suspension or revocation.
Organization of Proposed Guidelines
This preamble describes the differences between the UrMG and the
proposed HMG. In addition, it provides the rationale for the
differences between the two Guidelines. The preamble also presents a
number of issues raised during the development of the HMG. These issues
are presented first in summary form as they appear in the proposed HMG
and second as issues for which the Department is seeking specific
public comment.
References to Instrumented Initial Test Facilities (IITFs) have
been removed in multiple sections, because IITFs are not practical for
hair testing and will not be allowed to test hair specimens (see
discussion under Subpart L, section 12.1 below).
Subpart A--Applicability
Section 1.1 contains the same policies as described in the UrMG
regarding who is covered by the Guidelines, except that instrumented
initial test facilities will not be allowed to test hair specimens.
Sections 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4 contain the same policies as described
in the UrMG regarding who is responsible for the development and
implementation of the Guidelines, how a federal agency requests a
change from these Guidelines, and how these Guidelines are revised.
In Section 1.5, where terms are defined, the Department proposes to
add terms that apply specifically to hair (e.g., artificial hair, false
hair, wash procedures, decontamination, unique metabolite).
Section 1.6 contains the same policies as described in the UrMG
regarding what an agency is required to do to protect federal applicant
and employee records.
Section 1.7 contains the conditions that constitute a refusal to
take a federally regulated drug test. The Department has removed UrMG
items that are not applicable to hair (e.g., situations involving
observed or monitored urine collections) and is proposing conditions
specific to hair. For example, in the event a donor is unable to
provide a sufficient amount of hair for faith-based or medical reasons,
or due to an insufficient amount or length of hair, the federal agency
would be required to collect another authorized specimen type (e.g.,
urine, oral fluid). In addition, the Department is proposing in Section
8.4 that the collector ask the donor whether the donor is wearing false
hair (i.e., artificial or natural hair that is not the donor's
[[Page 56116]]
own such as a wig, weave, or extensions). If the donor states that they
are wearing false hair, or the collector otherwise identifies its
presence, this does not constitute a refusal to test. If the collector
can collect a sufficient amount of the donor's own hair, the collector
will proceed with the hair test. If the donor is unable to provide a
sufficient amount of hair because of the false hair or for faith-based
or medical reasons, or due to an insufficient amount or length of hair,
the collector will collect an alternate authorized specimen.
Section 1.8 contains the same policies as described in the UrMG
with regard to the consequences of a refusal to take a federally
regulated drug test.
Subpart B--Hair Specimen
In section 2.1, the Department proposes to expand the drug testing
program for federal agencies to permit the use of hair specimens. There
is no requirement for federal agencies to use hair as part of their
program. A federal agency may choose to use urine, oral fluid, hair, or
any combination of authorized specimen types in their drug testing
program. However, any agency choosing to use hair is required to follow
the HMG. For example, for pre-employment or random drug tests, an
agency program can randomly assign individuals for urine, oral fluid,
or hair collection. The Department is proposing to allow federal
agencies the option to collect an alternate authorized specimen (e.g.,
urine, oral fluid) either: (1) At the same time as the hair specimen or
(2) at the direction of the MRO, following verification of a hair test
as positive or invalid, or when the laboratory rejected the hair
specimen. Under both options, the MRO would direct testing of the
alternate specimen after completing the review and verification of the
hair test results. Under these procedures, MROs would only be
authorized to report a positive result for a hair test when the donor
admits illicit use of the drug(s) that caused the positive test. To be
clear, the results of a positive hair test cannot be reported to a
federal agency without this corroborating evidence to support the
positive test result. This hair testing approach best addresses the
current disparate impact and external contamination legal issues
discussed in the Jones v. City of Boston and Thompson v. Civil Service
Com'n. cases. As noted earlier, the Department is specifically
requesting comments including support from the scientific literature on
advances in the science of hair testing that address these issues and
obviate the need for the alternate specimen collection, as well as
whether THCA should be excluded from this requirement (i.e., MROs would
report verified positive THCA hair results to the federal agency). In
the event a donor was unable to provide a sufficient amount of head
hair for faith-based or medical reasons, or due to an insufficient
amount or length of hair, the federal agency would be required to
collect an alternate authorized specimen.
Section 2.2 describes the circumstances under which a hair specimen
may be collected. The Department proposes that hair tests be used in
the pre-employment and random drug testing contexts only. Because drug
analytes do not appear in hair for 5-7 days after use, hair is not an
appropriate specimen to detect recent use. The Department is proposing
to allow hair testing for pre-employment and random testing, and is
requesting comments on whether hair may be used for follow-up or return
to duty testing. In addition, due to different growth rates and drug
detection windows based on the location of hair on the body, as well as
privacy concerns, the Department is proposing to limit collection to
head hair only and require federal agencies to authorize another
specimen type for collection when head hair cannot be collected.
Section 2.3 describes how each hair specimen is collected for
testing. This section is consistent with the established requirement
for all specimens to be collected as a split specimen. The Department
proposes that the collector subdivide the collected hair specimen into
the primary (A) and split (B) specimens.
Section 2.4 establishes the amount of hair that must be collected
for each specimen.
Section 2.5 describes how a hair specimen is split.
Section 2.6 includes the same requirement as the UrMG, that all
entities and individuals identified in Section 1.1 of these Guidelines
are prohibited from releasing specimens collected under the federal
workplace drug testing program to any individual or entity unless
expressly authorized by these Guidelines or in accordance with
applicable federal law.
While the HMG do not authorize the release of specimens, or
portions thereof, to donors, the Guidelines afford donors a variety of
protections that ensure the identity, security and integrity of their
specimens from the time of collection through final disposition of the
specimen. There are also procedures that allow donors to request the
retesting of their specimen (for drugs or adulteration) at a different
certified laboratory. Furthermore, the Guidelines grant donors access
to a wide variety of information and records related to the testing of
their specimens, including a documentation package that includes, among
other items, a copy of the Federal Custody and Control Form (CCF) with
any attachments, internal chain of custody records for the specimen,
and any memoranda generated by the laboratory regarding the donor's
drug test.
Therefore, the procedures in these Guidelines offer federal
employees and federal agencies transparent and definitive evidence of a
specimen's identity, security, control and chain of custody. However,
the Guidelines do not entitle employees to access the specimen itself
or a portion thereof. The reason for this prohibition is that specimens
collected under the Guidelines are for the purpose of drug testing
only. They are not intended or designed to be used for other purposes
such as deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) testing. Furthermore, conducting
additional testing outside the parameters of the Guidelines would not
guarantee incorporation of the safeguards, quality control protocols,
and the exacting scientific standards developed under the Guidelines to
ensure the security, reliability and accuracy of the drug testing
process.
Subpart C--Hair Specimen Tests
Section 3.1 describes the tests to be performed on each hair
specimen. This is the same policy that is in the UrMG regarding which
drug tests must be performed on a specimen. A federal agency is
required to test all specimens for marijuana and cocaine and is
authorized to also test specimens for opioids, amphetamines, and
phencyclidine. The Department realizes that most federal agencies
typically test for all five drug classes authorized by the existing
Guidelines, but has not made this a mandatory requirement, and will
continue to rely on the individual agencies and departments to
determine their testing needs above the required minimum. The
Department is not aware of any currently used hair tests for a
biomarker or specific adulterant. However, the HMG authorize specimen
validity testing (e.g., for a biomarker, for a specific adulterant)
upon request of the MRO as is allowed in the URMG. All tests must be
properly validated and include appropriate quality control samples in
accordance with these Guidelines. Specimen validity testing methods
must be reviewed and approved by SAMHSA prior to use with federally
regulated specimens. The Department is seeking comments on
[[Page 56117]]
whether validity testing is necessary for hair and, if so, what tests
could be used.
The policy in Section 3.2 does not differ from that for urine
testing in that an agency may test a donor's hair specimen for
additional drugs on a case-by-case basis. For reasons outlined above,
hair may be used for pre-employment and random testing purposes but
cannot be used for other reasons (e.g., reasonable suspicion and post-
accident testing). A federal agency must consider collecting another
authorized specimen type (e.g., urine or oral fluid) in such cases.
The Department has included the same policy as the UrMG for a
federal agency that wishes to routinely test its specimens for any drug
not included in the Guidelines, in that the agency must obtain approval
from the Department before expanding its program. The HHS-certified
laboratory performing such additional testing must validate the test
methods and meet the quality control requirements as described in the
Guidelines for the other drug analyses.
Section 3.3 states that specimens must only be tested for drugs and
to determine their validity in accordance with Subpart C of these
Guidelines. Additional explanation is provided above, in the
description of Section 2.6.
The table in Section 3.4 lists the proposed analytes and cutoff
concentrations for hair. Most of the analytes and cutoffs are the same
as those proposed in 2004. The Department has added the same
prescription opioids (i.e., hydrocodone, hydromorphone, oxycodone, and
oxymorphone) as the UrMG, with the same hair cutoffs as codeine and
morphine. The codeine and morphine cutoffs are consistent with those
recommended by the European Workplace Drug Testing Society and the
Society of Hair Testing.44 45 The Department is specifically
requesting comments on the appropriateness of these analytes and
cutoffs.
Due to issues of possible external contamination and possible
concerns of hair color impact, SAMHSA is continuing to evaluate
standards regarding these issues. The Department is soliciting
comments, with supporting scientific information, on unique metabolites
as defined in these Guidelines that show use, or ingestion, of a drug,
thereby eliminating external contamination as a concern.
Other footnotes in the Section 3.4 table include the same
calibration and immunoassay cross-reactivity requirements as the UrMG
for the initial tests. This includes the requirement for a laboratory
to use the confirmatory test cutoff as the cutoff for an alternate
technology initial test that is specific for THCA. Immunoassays for
cannabinoids react with multiple compounds that may be incorporated
into hair as a result of marijuana use. Therefore, it is necessary to
use an immunoassay cutoff higher than that of the confirmatory test in
order to detect the target analyte (THCA) at or above the confirmatory
test cutoff. An initial test using an alternate technology with
specificity comparable to the confirmatory test requires use of the
confirmatory test cutoff.
Section 3.5 has the same policy as the UrMG regarding additional
tests to provide information that the MRO would use to report a
verified drug test result. HHS-certified laboratories are authorized to
perform additional tests upon MRO request on a case-by-case basis, but
are not authorized to routinely perform such tests without prior
authorization from the Secretary or designated HHS representative, with
the exception of the determination of D, L stereoisomers of amphetamine
and methamphetamine. The Department is requesting comments including
supporting data from the scientific literature on specimen validity
tests and tests for additional analytes (e.g., metabolites) that may be
performed on a case-by-case basis or routinely upon MRO request.
Section 3.6 includes criteria for reporting a hair specimen as
adulterated. While there are no known hair adulterants at this time,
the Department is proposing to establish criteria similar to that for
urine specimens, to ensure procedures that are forensically acceptable
and scientifically sound, while allowing laboratories the flexibility
necessary to develop specific testing requirements for an adulterant.
Section 3.7 includes criteria applicable for reporting a hair
specimen as substituted (i.e., the laboratory has identified physical
or chemical characteristics inconsistent with human hair).
Section 3.8 incorporates criteria from the UrMG that are applicable
for reporting an invalid result for a hair specimen and includes
additional criteria specific for hair specimens. As noted previously,
the Department is proposing that laboratories subject each confirmatory
drug test specimen to a validated and effective decontamination
procedure prior to testing for the confirmatory test analyte(s) listed
in Section 3.4. If a laboratory has used its validated decontamination
procedure for a specimen with a positive confirmatory drug test and was
unable to distinguish external contamination from drug ingestion based
on its test results, the laboratory would report the specimen as
invalid. Additionally, a hair specimen may be damaged to the extent
that the drug test is invalid (i.e., the damaged hair is susceptible to
incorporation of drug from external contamination or to loss of
incorporated drug). Therefore, the Department is also proposing that
each laboratory use a validated specimen validity test to identify
damaged specimens and report specimens as invalid when the damage may
affect the drug test result. The Department is requesting comments on
whether testing for hair damage should be routinely performed on all
specimens or only on certain specimens (e.g., based on initial test
results).
Subpart D--Collectors
Sections 4.1 through 4.5 contain the same policies as described in
the UrMG regarding who may or may not collect a specimen, the
requirements to be a collector, the requirements to be a trainer for
collectors, and what a federal agency must do before a collector is
permitted to collect a specimen.
Subpart E--Collection Sites
Sections 5.1 through 5.6 address requirements for collection sites,
collection site records, how a collector ensures the security and
integrity of a specimen at the collection site, and the privacy
requirements when collecting a specimen. These are the same
requirements as in the UrMG.
Subpart F--Federal Drug Testing Custody and Control Form
Sections 6.1 and 6.2 are the same as in the UrMG, requiring the
OMB-approved Federal CCF be used to document custody and control of
each specimen at the collection site, and specifying what should occur
if the correct OMB-approved CCF is not used.
Subpart G--Hair Specimen Collection Materials
Section 7.1 describes the collection materials that must be used to
collect a hair specimen. The Department is proposing that either
single-use or reusable scissors may be used to cut the hair. If
reusable scissors are used, the collector must use an individually
packaged isopropyl alcohol wipe to clean the scissors in the presence
of the donor. Materials also must include two specimen guides, as
defined in Section 1.5, and two sealable collection containers for the
A and B specimens.
Section 7.2 describes specific requirements for the hair collection
materials, to maintain the integrity of the specimen. All collection
materials that come into contact with the hair
[[Page 56118]]
must not substantially affect the composition of drug and/or drug
metabolites in the specimen. The specimen guides and containers must be
sufficiently transparent to enable an objective assessment of specimen
appearance and identification of abnormal physical characteristics
without opening the container. This is the same requirement as in the
UrMG for urine collection bottles.
Section 7.3 details the minimum performance requirements for hair
collection materials. Specimen guides must be capable of holding the
hair specimen as positioned by the collector, and have an indication of
the orientation (i.e., root or distal end) of the hair specimen
collected. The specimen guides or the containers must have graduated
markings or guides for collectors to verify the minimum width (i.e.,
0.5 inches wide) and length (i.e., 1.0 inch, approximately 2.5 cm,
long) of hair that would equate to 100 mg of hair or 50 mg of hair in
each container labeled A and B.
Subpart H--Hair Specimen Collection Procedure
This subpart addresses the same topics, in the same order, as the
UrMG procedures for urine specimen collection, but excludes UrMG
requirements that are specific for observed or monitored urine
collection.
Section 8.1 includes the procedures required to provide privacy for
the hair donor during the collection procedure.
Sections 8.2 through 8.5 describe the responsibilities and
procedures the collector must follow before, during, and after a hair
collection. Sections 8.3 and 8.5 specify how hair is to be selected,
collected, and packaged. Section 8.3 requires the collector to stop the
collection if lice or a similar infestation is present in the donor's
hair and Section 8.4 requires the collector to stop the collection if
the donor has false hair and the collector cannot collect a sufficient
amount of the donor's own hair. In these cases, the collector proceeds
with collection of another specimen type authorized by the federal
agency. Section 8.5 specifies that only head hair should be collected.
Section 8.6 describes the procedures the collector must follow when
a donor is unable to provide a hair specimen (i.e., as described in
Sections 2.1, 8.3, and 8.4). In these cases, the collector proceeds
with collection of another specimen type authorized by the federal
agency.
Section 8.7 requires collection of an alternate specimen when a
donor is unable to provide a sufficient amount of hair for faith-based
or medical reasons, or due to an insufficient amount or length of hair.
As noted earlier, if a federal agency authorizes the collection of hair
specimens in its workplace drug testing program, it must also authorize
the collection of one or more alternate specimen types in the event
that hair cannot be collected, in accordance with the Mandatory
Guidelines for the alternate specimen type. Enabling collection of
another specimen without delay should facilitate the pre-employment
process and may help reduce attempts to subvert the drug test.
Section 8.8 describes how the collector prepares the hair
specimens, including the description of the hair split specimen
collection.
Section 8.9 specifies how a collector is to report a refusal to
test. The procedures are the same as in the UrMG.
Section 8.10 is the same as that in the UrMG in regard to federal
agency responsibilities for ensuring that each collection site complies
with all provisions of the Mandatory Guidelines. An example of
appropriate action that may be taken in response to a reported
collection site deficiency is self-assessment using the Collection Site
Checklist for the Collection of Hair Specimens for Federal Agency
Workplace Drug Testing Programs. This document will be available on the
SAMHSA website https://www.samhsa.gov/workplace/drug-testing.
Subpart I--HHS-Certification of Laboratories
This subpart addresses the same topics for HHS certification of
laboratories to test hair specimens, as are included in the UrMG for
HHS certification of laboratories to test urine specimens.
Sections 9.1 through 9.4 contain the same policies as in the UrMG
for laboratories to become HHS-certified and to maintain HHS
certification to conduct hair testing for a federal agency, as well as
what a laboratory must do when certification is not maintained.
Section 9.5 contains specifications for NLCP PT samples, Section
9.6 contains PT requirements for an applicant laboratory, and Section
9.7 contains PT requirements for an HHS-certified laboratory. These
sections incorporate the applicable requirements from the current UrMG,
but exclude UrMG requirements that are specific for urine testing. In
Sections 9.6 and 9.7, the Department also added a requirement for
laboratories to correctly identify a sample that has been contaminated
with one or more drugs.
As noted earlier, the Department plans to use multiple types of
head hair (e.g., drug user hair, hair contaminated with drug analytes,
hair subjected to cosmetic treatments, bleached hair) in the NLCP PT
Program. These samples will be used to challenge the laboratories'
abilities to identify and quantify drug analytes, to remove external
contamination, and to identify damaged hair. The Department will use
additional PT materials (e.g., spiked reference materials) as part of a
multi-pronged approach to assess accuracy and precision of HHS
certified hair testing laboratories. The Department is specifically
requesting comments on the types of samples and multi-pronged approach
to be included in the hair PT program.
The remaining Sections 9.8 through 9.17 contain the same policies
as the UrMG. These sections address inspection requirements for
applicant and HHS-certified laboratories, inspectors, consequences of
an applicant or HHS-certified laboratory failing to meet PT or
inspection performance requirements, factors considered by the
Secretary in determining the revocation or suspension of HHS-
certification, the procedure for notifying a laboratory that adverse
action (e.g., suspension or revocation) is being taken by HHS, and the
process for re-application once a laboratory's certification has been
revoked by the Department.
Section 9.17 states that a list of laboratories certified by HHS to
conduct forensic drug testing for federal agencies will be published
monthly in the Federal Register. The list will indicate the type of
specimens (e.g., hair, oral fluid, and/or urine) that each laboratory
is certified to test.
Subpart J--Blind Samples Submitted by an Agency
This subpart (Sections 10.1 through 10.4) describes the same
policies for federal agency blind samples as the UrMG, with two
exceptions. Hair blind samples that challenge specimen validity tests
are not required, and the concentration of drug positive blind samples
must be at least 1.5 times the initial drug test cutoff concentration
(i.e., no upper limit as in the UrMG).
Subpart K--Laboratory
This subpart addresses the same topics, in the same order, as the
UrMG procedures for laboratories testing urine specimens. As
appropriate, the section includes requirements that are specific for
hair testing.
Sections 11.1 through 11.8 include the same requirements that are
contained in the UrMG for the laboratory standard operating procedure
[[Page 56119]]
(SOP) manual; responsibilities and scientific qualifications of the
responsible person (RP); procedures in the event of the RP's extended
absence from the laboratory; qualifications of the certifying
scientists, certifying technicians, and other HHS-certified laboratory
staff; security; and chain of custody requirements for specimens and
aliquots.
A new Section 11.9 has been added to describe how an HHS-certified
laboratory processes the alternate authorized specimen that was
collected at the same time as a hair specimen in accordance with
Section 8.5(e).
A new Section 11.10 has been added to describe the amount of hair
tested. This section specifies that 1.0 inch of the hair specimen from
the root end is tested, when the collector has identified the root end.
Sections 11.11 through 11.16 include the same requirements as in
the UrMG in regard to initial and confirmatory drug test requirements,
validation, and batch quality control as described in each section
below.
Section 11.11 describes the requirements for the initial drug test
which permit the use of an immunoassay or alternate technology (e.g.,
spectrometry or spectroscopy).
Sections 11.12 and 11.13 cover validation and quality control
requirements for the initial tests.
Section 11.14 describes the same requirements for a confirmatory
drug test as the UrMG with one exception. This section requires
laboratories to perform a decontamination procedure prior to
confirmatory drug testing.
Sections 11.15 and 11.16 cover validation and quality control
requirements for the confirmatory tests. Section 11.15 includes the
requirement to demonstrate and document the effectiveness of
decontamination procedures and Section 11.16 requires at least one
control in each batch to monitor the effectiveness of the
decontamination procedure.
Sections 11.17 and 11.18 address specimen validity tests that a
laboratory performs for hair specimens. The Department is proposing
that each laboratory have a validated specimen validity test that
identifies hair that has been damaged to the extent that a drug test
may be affected. The HMG allow, but do not require, other specimen
validity testing for hair. The HMG collection procedures greatly
minimize the risks of donor attempts to tamper with the specimen. To
avoid prohibiting use of scientifically supportable hair biomarker or
adulterant tests that may become available, the Department is
authorizing specimen validity testing upon request of the Medical
Review Officer as described in Sections 3.1 and 3.5. All tests must be
properly validated and include appropriate quality control samples in
accordance with these Guidelines. Specimen validity testing methods
must be approved by SAMHSA prior to use with federally regulated
specimens. As noted earlier, the Department is requesting information
on procedures to identify damaged hair and other specimen validity
tests for hair. The Department is also requesting comments on whether
testing for hair damage should be routinely performed on all specimens
or only on certain specimens (e.g., based on initial test results).
Section 11.19 describes in detail, requirements for how a certified
laboratory reports test results to the MRO for hair specimens. This
section has requirements specific to hair.
Sections 11.20 and 11.21 contain the same requirements as the UrMG
for length of time of specimen and record retention and specifies that
hair specimens must be stored at room temperature and out of direct
light. As noted in Section 11.9, the collector forwards the alternate
authorized specimen collected at the same time as the hair specimen to
a laboratory that is certified by HHS for that specimen type. Section
11.20 also requires that alternate authorized specimens (e.g., urine,
oral fluid) be retained under appropriate storage conditions as
specified by the Mandatory Guidelines for that specimen type, for the
same period of time that the associated hair specimen is retained.
Section 11.22 describes the statistical summary report that a
laboratory must provide to a federal agency for hair testing. This
section is comparable to the same section in the UrMG, differing only
in that the statistical report elements are specific for hair testing.
Section 11.23 addresses the laboratory information to be made
available to a federal agency and describes the contents of a standard
laboratory documentation package. This is the same policy as in the
UrMG.
Section 11.24 addresses the laboratory information to be made
available to an applicant or employee upon written request through the
MRO, and clarifies that specimens are not a part of the information
package that donors can receive from HHS-certified laboratories. This
is the same policy as in the UrMG.
The remaining section, Section 11.25, describes the relationships
that are prohibited between an HHS-certified laboratory and an MRO.
These are the same as in the UrMG.
Subpart L--Instrumented Initial Test Facility (IITF)
This subpart emphasizes that federal agencies may choose to use
IITFs for urine testing but not for hair testing. Section 12.1 clearly
states that only HHS-certified laboratories are authorized to test hair
specimens for federal agency workplace drug testing programs.
Instrumented Initial Test Facilities will not be allowed, primarily
because of the limited amount of hair collected from the donor.
Subpart M--Medical Review Officer (MRO)
MROs play a key role in the federal safety program and maintain the
balance between the safety and privacy objectives of the program. This
subpart addresses the same topics, in the same order, as the UrMG
procedures for MROs.
The proposed requirements in Section 13.1 through 13.3 are the same
as in the UrMG, including training requirements in Section 13.3 for a
physician to receive training on the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs for all authorized specimen types prior
to serving as an MRO, and for a certified MRO to complete training on
any revisions to the Guidelines prior to their effective date, to
continue serving as an MRO for federal agency specimens. Section 13.4
includes the same requirements as the UrMG except the HMG do not permit
an MRO to conduct a medical evaluation or review the examining
physician's findings to determine clinical evidence of opioid abuse
when codeine or morphine is positive below a specified concentration in
hair. Because of the longer detection time for hair, the medical
evaluation would not be useful after limited drug use (e.g., injection
site healing). Furthermore, this requirement would have significant
effects on the costs of the program and the turnaround time of the
result. The Department would like to clarify that the Mandatory
Guidelines, including the HMG, authorize testing that detects illicit
drug use, not drug ``abuse.'' Therefore, an MRO's inquiry in this
context is limited to whether a legitimate medical explanation exists
for the positive result, not whether the donor has ``abused'' opioids.
Section 13.5 describes an MRO's actions when reviewing a hair
specimen's test results. This section includes procedures that are
specific to hair specimen results. The review and verification
procedures for negative, adulterated, and substituted results are the
same as those for urine. The review
[[Page 56120]]
and verification procedures for invalid results and rejected specimens
are the same as those for urine, except that the HMG specifically
requires testing of an alternate specimen type in these cases. MRO
actions required for a positive hair test are described below.
When an HHS-certified laboratory reports a positive result for the
primary (A) hair specimen, the MRO must contact the donor to determine
if there is an explanation for the positive test. If the donor provides
a legitimate medical explanation (e.g., a valid prescription), the MRO
reports the hair test result as negative to the federal agency. If the
donor admits illicit use of the drug(s) that caused the positive test,
the MRO reports the hair test result as positive to the federal agency.
If the donor is unable to provide a legitimate medical explanation and
does not admit illicit drug use, the MRO cancels the test and directs
testing of an alternate authorized specimen from the donor.
If an alternate authorized specimen was collected at the same time
as the hair specimen, the MRO directs (in writing) the laboratory who
has custody of the specimen to proceed with testing. If an alternate
specimen was not collected, the MRO directs the agency to collect an
alternate authorized specimen from the donor. The collector,
laboratory, and MRO must follow the applicable Mandatory Guidelines for
Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs for that specimen type.
The MRO would also direct testing of the alternate authorized
specimen for invalid and rejected for testing hair results.
The Department had considered specifying a morphine or codeine
confirmatory concentration that could be used as a decision point to
rule out consumption of food products as a legitimate explanation for
the donor having morphine or codeine at or above the specified
concentration in his or her hair. There is limited information in the
scientific literature on the codeine and/or morphine concentrations
seen in hair after consumption of poppy seed food products. One study
found morphine concentrations ranging from 0.05 -0.48 ng/10 mg (5.0-
48.0 pg/mg) in the hair of 10 poppy seed consumers.\46\ The Department
had chosen a conservative concentration of 2000 pg/mg (i.e., 10 times
the confirmatory test cutoff) as the decision point. Because the HMG
require testing of an alternate specimen when a hair test is positive
(i.e., unless the donor has a legitimate medical explanation or admits
illicit drug use), the additional decision point for codeine and
morphine results is not needed. However, in the event that this is
needed in the final HMG, the Department specifically requests public
comment on the appropriateness of this concentration.
Section 13.6 describes what an MRO must do when the collector
reports that a donor did not provide a sufficient amount of hair for a
drug test. In the event a donor was unable to provide a sufficient
amount of hair, the collector should direct the donor to submit another
authorized specimen type consistent with the respective federal
agency's policies and procedures.
Sections 13.7 and 13.8 are similar to the UrMG, addressing who may
request a test of the split (B) specimen and how an MRO reports a
primary (A) specimen result. However, because the MRO does not report
positive hair test results to the federal agency without corroborating
evidence (i.e., donor admission of illicit drug use); the split
specimen is not tested to reconfirm a positive hair test result. Split
hair specimens are only retested to reconfirm adulterated or
substituted results at the donor's request.
Section 13.9 is the same as in the UrMG, addressing the types of
relationships that are prohibited between an MRO and an HHS- certified
laboratory.
Subpart N--Split Specimen Tests
Section 14.1 includes the same policies as the UrMG in regard to
when a split (B) specimen may be tested. As noted previously in this
preamble, because the MRO does not report positive hair test results to
the federal agency without corroborating evidence (i.e., donor
admission of illicit drug use), split specimens are not tested to
reconfirm positive hair test results. A split hair specimen may be
tested only to reconfirm an adulterated or substituted result reported
for the primary hair specimen.
Section 14.2 specifies how the split testing laboratory tests a
split (B) hair specimen when the primary (A) specimen was reported as
adulterated. As noted previously in this Preamble, the Department is
not aware of any adulterants being used for hair specimens, but has
included policies in these Guidelines to allow for the testing and
reporting of adulterants in hair.
Section 14.3 specifies how the split testing laboratory tests a
split (B) hair specimen when the primary (A) specimen was reported as
substituted. As noted previously in this Preamble, the Department is
requesting information from the public on specimen validity tests for
hair, and has included policies in these Guidelines to allow for the
testing and reporting of hair as substituted.
Section 14.4 includes the same policy as the UrMG, requiring the
laboratory to report the split (B) specimen result to the MRO.
In Section 14.5, the Department is proposing the actions an MRO
must take after receiving the split (B) specimen result. This section
is analogous to the corresponding section in the UrMG with differences,
where applicable, for hair specimen reports.
Section 14.6 is the same as the UrMG in regard to how an MRO
reports a split (B) specimen result to an agency.
Section 14.7 is the same as the UrMG, requiring the HHS-certified
laboratory to retain a split hair specimen for the same length of time
that the primary specimen is retained.
Subpart O--Criteria for Rejecting a Specimen for Testing
Section 15.1 specifies the same fatal flaws as the UrMG that
require the laboratory to reject the specimen, with one addition
specific to hair specimens. Section 15.1, item (i) requires the
laboratory to reject the specimen when the physical characteristics of
the primary (A) and split (B) specimen are clearly different (i.e.,
could not be from the same individual). An example of a hair specimen
that would be rejected is a short straight hair sample labeled as A and
a long curly hair labeled as B. However, this requirement does not
apply to A and B specimens that only have different hair color, because
an individual may have different colored hair. Sections 3.8(c) and
11.19(e) address reporting as invalid when A and B specimens have
clearly different colors, and the A specimen has been tested.
Section 15.3 lists those discrepancies that would not affect either
testing or reporting of a hair specimen result. These are similar to
the corresponding section in the UrMG, with differences where
applicable for hair specimens.
The other sections in this Subpart (i.e., Sections 15.2 and 15.4)
contain the same policies as the UrMG concerning correctable
discrepancies and fatal flaws that may require the MRO to cancel the
test.
Subpart P--Laboratory Suspension/Revocation Procedures
In this subpart, the Department proposes the same procedures that
are described in the UrMG to revoke or suspend the HHS certification of
laboratories.
[[Page 56121]]
Impact of These Guidelines on Government Regulated Industries
The Department is aware that these proposed new Guidelines may
impact the Department of Transportation (DOT) and Nuclear Regulatory
Commission (NRC) regulated industries depending on these agencies'
decisions to incorporate the final HMG into each of their programs
under their own authority.
Topics of Special Interest
The Department requests public comment on all aspects of this
notice. However, the Department is providing the following list of
areas for which specific comments are requested.
The continuing questions and concerns on the impact of hair color
on drug test results are discussed in this preamble. The Department is
requesting information including, at a minimum, support from the
scientific literature to address the impact of hair color on hair drug
test results.
To address the potential issues of both disparate impact and
external contamination, Section 2.1 includes the requirement to collect
a second biological specimen (i.e., urine or other authorized specimen
type) at the same time as the hair specimen or as directed by the MRO
after verification of a hair specimen as positive, invalid, or when the
laboratory rejected the hair specimen. Under these procedures, MROs
would only be authorized to report the results of a positive hair test
to an agency when the donor admits to the MRO the illicit use of the
drug(s) that caused the positive test. The Department is specifically
requesting comments including support from the recent scientific
literature on advances in the science of hair testing that adequately
address these issues and elucidate the extent to which hair color,
external contamination as well as other factors (e.g., hair treatments,
hygiene) will affect hair tests and the interpretation of hair drug
test results. The Department is also requesting comment with scientific
support on whether THCA positive hair tests should be excluded from the
requirement to test an alternate authorized specimen (i.e., MROs would
report verified positive THCA hair results to the federal agency) and
information on other unique metabolites that can be analyzed on a
stand-alone basis for the other proposed drugs listed in Section 3.4.
Section 2.2 describes the circumstances under which a hair specimen
may be collected. The Department proposes to limit the reasons for
testing to pre-employment and random. Because drug analytes do not
appear in hair for 5-7 days after use, hair is not an appropriate
specimen to detect recent use. However, the longer window of detection
makes hair an appropriate choice for pre-employment and random. The
Department is requesting comments on whether hair may be used for other
reasons (e.g., return to duty, follow-up,).
In Sections 3.1 and 3.5, the Department allows laboratories to
perform specimen validity testing for hair specimens. The Department is
seeking comments on whether validity testing is necessary for hair and,
if so, what tests could be used.
Section 3.4 lists the proposed test analytes and cutoff
concentrations. The Department is specifically requesting comments on
the appropriateness of these analytes and cutoffs.
Section 3.5 allows laboratories to perform additional tests to
provide information that the MRO would use to report a verified drug
test result. The Department is specifically requesting comments
including supporting data from the scientific literature on additional
analytes (e.g., metabolites) that may be tested on a case-by-case basis
or routinely upon MRO request.
Section 9.5 contains the specifications for PT samples. The
Department is specifically requesting comments on the types of samples
and the multi-pronged approach that should be included in a hair PT
program.
In Section 11.14, the Department is proposing that laboratories
implement procedures to distinguish external contamination from drug
use using a validated and effective decontamination procedure prior to
confirmatory testing. The Department is requesting comment on (1)
decontamination procedures that remove drug present as a result of
external contamination, (2) procedures used to prepare decontamination
controls, and (3) drug metabolites that are uniquely found in hair
after drug use.
In Section 11.17, the Department is proposing that laboratories
implement procedures to identify damaged hair specimens. The Department
is requesting information including, at a minimum, support from the
scientific literature, on procedures to identify damaged hair. The
Department is also requesting comments on whether testing for hair
damage should be routinely performed on all specimens or only on
certain specimens (e.g., based on initial test results).
In Section 13.5, the Department had considered a concentration
equal to or greater than 2000 pg/mg morphine or codeine be used by the
MRO to report a positive hair test result for these drugs in the
absence of a legitimate medical explanation (i.e., prescription), to
rule out the possibility of a positive result due to consumption of
food products. The proposal for testing an alternate specimen type for
all positive hair tests negates the need for this procedure. However,
the Department is requesting specific comments on this proposed
concentration if it is included in the final HMG.
Regulatory Impact and Notices
The Department welcomes public comment on all figures and
assumptions described in this section.
Executive Orders 13563 and 12866
Executive Order 13563 of January 18, 2011 (Improving Regulation and
Regulatory Review) states ``Our regulatory system must protect public
health, welfare, safety, and our environment while promoting economic
growth, innovation, competitiveness, and job creation.'' Consistent
with this mandate, Executive Order 13563 requires agencies to tailor
``regulations to impose the least burden on society, consistent with
obtaining regulatory objectives.'' Executive Order 13563 also requires
agencies to ``identify and consider regulatory approaches that reduce
burdens and maintain flexibility and freedom of choice'' while
selecting ``those approaches that maximize net benefits.'' This notice
proposes a regulatory approach that will reduce burdens to providers
and to consumers while continuing to provide adequate protections for
public health and welfare.
The Secretary has examined the impact of the proposed Guidelines
under Executive Order 12866, which directs federal agencies to assess
all costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, when
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety, and other advantages; distributive impacts; and
equity).
According to Executive Order 12866, a regulatory action is
``significant'' if it meets any one of a number of specified
conditions, including having an annual effect on the economy of $100
million; adversely affecting in a material way a sector of the economy,
competition, or jobs; or if it raises novel legal or policy issues. The
proposed Guidelines do establish additional regulatory requirements and
allow an activity that was otherwise prohibited. While this is a
significant regulatory action as defined
[[Page 56122]]
by Executive Order 12866, the Secretary finds that it does not confer
significant costs to regulated entities warranting a regulatory
flexibility analysis. Therefore, the Department does not find these
proposed mandatory guidelines to be a significant burden for federal
agencies or incur a significant cost. In addition, a federal agency is
not required to adopt hair testing in their Drug-free Workplace
Programs.
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
For the reasons outlined above, the Secretary has determined that
the proposed Guidelines will not have a significant impact upon a
substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act [5 U.S.C. 605(b)]. The flexibility added by
the HMG will not require additional expenditures. Therefore, an initial
regulatory flexibility analysis is not required for this notice.
Need for Regulation
Enhances Flexibility
The proposed Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug
Testing Programs using Hair (HMG) will provide flexibility to address
workplace drug testing needs of federal agencies and federally
regulated entities while continuing to promulgate established standards
to ensure the full reliability and accuracy of drug test results.
Enhances Versatility
Medical conditions exist that may prevent a federal employee or
applicant from providing sufficient urine or oral fluid for a drug
test. When the HMG are implemented, in the event that an individual is
unable to provide a urine or oral fluid specimen, the federal agency
may authorize the collection of a hair specimen. In the event a federal
agency adopts hair testing and the donor is unable to provide a hair
specimen for faith-based or medical reasons, or due to an insufficient
amount or length of hair, the federal agency would be required to
collect an alternate specimen. Thus, the inclusion of hair in federal
workplace drug testing programs will reduce both the need to reschedule
collections and the need for the Medical Review Officer (MRO) to
arrange a medical evaluation of a donor's inability to provide a urine
or oral fluid specimen.
Urine collection requires use of a specialized collection facility,
secured restrooms, observers of the same gender as the donor for
observed collections, and other special requirements. Hair may be
collected in various settings and may not necessarily require a
specialized collection facility, but if a second authorized specimen is
collected at the same time then the collection facility must meet the
requirements for a collection facility for the alternate specimen. An
acceptable hair collection site must allow the collector to observe the
donor, maintain control of the collection materials during the process,
maintain record storage, and protect donor privacy.
Decreases Invalid Tests
Hair collections will occur under direct observation, which should
substantially lessen the risks of invalid results due to specimen
substitution and adulteration. The Department is also proposing that
each laboratory have a method to identify damaged hair as invalid
specimens, which would further decrease the risk of invalid results.
Saves Time
The requirement to collect a urine or oral fluid specimen in the
event that the donor cannot provide a hair specimen (and vice versa)
will reduce both the need to reschedule a collection and the need for
the MRO to arrange a medical evaluation of a donor's inability to
provide a urine or oral fluid specimen.
Versatility in Detection
The time course of drugs and metabolites differs between hair,
urine, and oral fluid, resulting in some differences in analytes and
detection times. A federal agency may wish to pursue hair testing if
they want to use a longer detection window and retain the ability to
use other specimen types for circumstances necessitating more recent
use, such as post-accident situations.
Current Testing in the Drug-Free Workplace Program
Urine was the original specimen of choice for forensic workplace
drug testing, and urine testing is expected to remain an established
and reliable component of federal workplace drug testing programs.
Urine testing provides scientifically accurate and legally defensible
results and has proven to be an effective deterrent to drug use in the
workplace. However, urine testing is not observed in all cases. Hair
testing, like oral fluid testing, is observed, and therefore, less
susceptible to substitution or adulteration.
Time Horizon of this Analysis
The transition to the testing of hair will be gradual over the
course of four years, when it should plateau. By that time, it is
expected that hair tests will account for 25-30% of all regulated drug
testing. This estimate is based on the current percentage of regulated
pre-employment and random tests using urine and the non-regulated
sector's time course of the testing of hair, oral fluid, and urine in
the past four years.
Cost and Benefit
Using data obtained from the Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs and HHS certified laboratories, the Department estimates that
275,000 specimens are will be tested annually by federal agencies. HHS
projects that approximately 1% (or 2,750) of the 275,000 specimens
tested per year will be hair specimens and 92% (or 253,000) will be
urine specimens, with the remainder being oral fluid specimens
(19,250). The approximate annual number of regulated specimens for the
Department of Transportation (DOT) and Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC) is 6.1 million and 150,000, respectively. Should DOT and NRC
allow hair testing in their regulated workplace programs, the estimated
annual numbers of specimens for DOT would be 25% (1.53 million) hair
specimens for pre-employment, 7% (427,000) oral fluid specimens and 68%
(4.15 million) urine, and numbers of specimens for NRC would be 10%
(15,000) hair, 7% (10,500) oral fluid and 83% (124,500) urine. These
projected numbers are based on existing annual pre-employment testing
that currently occurs in the regulated industries and current hair
testing being conducted.
In Section 3.4, the Department is proposing criteria for
calibrating initial tests for grouped analytes such as opiates and
amphetamines, and specifying the cross-reactivity of the immunoassay to
the other analytes(s) within the group. These proposed Guidelines allow
the use of methods other than immunoassay for initial testing. An
immunoassay manufacturer may incur costs if they choose to alter their
existing product and resubmit the immunoassay for FDA clearance.
Costs associated with the addition of hair testing and testing for
oxycodone, oxymorphone, hydrocodone and hydromorphone will be minimal
based on information from some HHS-certified laboratories currently
testing non-regulated hair specimens. Likewise, there will be minimal
costs associated with changing initial testing to include MDA and MDMA
since current immunoassays can be adapted to test for these analytes.
Prior to being allowed to test regulated hair specimens, laboratories
must be certified by the Department through the NLCP. Estimated
laboratory costs to complete and submit the application are $3,000, and
estimated costs for the Department to process the application are
$10,200.
[[Page 56123]]
These estimates are based on the NLCP fee schedule and historical
costs. The initial certification process includes the requirement to
demonstrate that their performance meets Guidelines requirements by
testing three (3) groups of PT samples. The Department will provide the
three groups of PT samples through the NLCP at no cost to laboratories
participating in the NLCP Hair Pilot PT Program. Based on costs charged
for urine specimen testing, laboratory costs to conduct the PT testing
would range from $900 to $1,800 for each applicant laboratory.
Agencies choosing to use hair in their drug testing programs may
also incur some costs for training of federal employees such as drug
program coordinators. Based on current training modules offered to drug
program coordinators, and other associated costs including travel for
90% of drug program coordinators, the estimated total training cost for
a one-day training session would be between $108,000 and $138,000
(i.e., assuming 8 hours of time multiplied by a GS 12/13 wage including
benefits and overhead adjustments). This training cost is included in
the costs of the proposed HMG. The Department will offer the choice of
online or in-person training. This will eliminate travel costs for
those federal agencies who choose to use online training.
Summary of One-Time Costs
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lower bound Upper bound Primary
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost of Application *........................................... .............. .............. $12,000.00
Application Processing *........................................ .............. .............. 40,800.00
Performance Testing *........................................... $3,600.00 $7,200.00
Training *...................................................... 54,000.00 69,000.00
-----------------------------------------------
Total....................................................... 110,400.00 129,000.00
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Estimated using costs presented above multiplied by the number of laboratories (4).
Costs and Benefits
Thus, the Department estimates one-time, upfront costs of between
$110,400 and $129,000 for hair testing laboratories. While the
Department has only monetized a small portion of the benefits to a
small subset of the workplace drug testing programs that could be
affected by the HMG (i.e., federal employee testing programs and not
drug testing programs conducted under NRC and DOT regulations), the
Department is confident that the benefits would outweigh the one-time
upfront costs. Even if NRC and DOT do not implement hair testing, the
benefits to federal workplace testing programs could be a cost savings,
which would recur on annual basis.
Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
For the reasons outlined above, the Secretary has determined that
the proposed Guidelines will not have a significant impact upon a
substantial number of small entities within the meaning of the
Regulatory Flexibility Act [5 U.S.C. 605(b)]. The flexibility added by
the HMG will not require addition expenditures. Therefore, an initial
regulatory flexibility analysis is not required for this notice.
As mentioned in the section on Executive Orders 13563 and 12866,
the Secretary anticipates that there will be no reduction in costs if
drug testing is expanded under the HMG. The costs to implement this
change to regulations are negligible. The added flexibility will permit
federal agencies to select the specimen type best suited for their
needs and to authorize collection of an alternate specimen type when an
applicant or employee is unable to provide the originally authorized
specimen type. The added flexibility will also benefit federal
applicants and employees, who should be able to provide one of the
specimen types, thereby facilitating the drug test required for their
employment.
Unfunded Mandates
The Secretary has examined the impact of the proposed Guidelines
under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4).
This notice does not trigger the requirement for a written statement
under section 202(a) of the UMRA because the proposed Guidelines do not
impose a mandate that results in an expenditure of $100 million
(adjusted annually for inflation) or more by either state, local, and
tribal governments in the aggregate or by the private sector in any one
year.
Environmental Impact
The Secretary has considered the environmental effects of the HMG.
No information or comments have been received that would affect the
agency's determination there would be a significant impact on the human
environment and that neither an environmental assessment nor an
environmental impact statement is required.
Executive Order 13132: Federalism
The Secretary has analyzed the proposed Guidelines in accordance
with Executive Order 13132: Federalism. Executive Order 13132 requires
federal agencies to carefully examine actions to determine if they
contain policies that have federalism implications or that preempt
state law. As defined in the Order, ``policies that have federalism
implications'' refer to regulations, legislative comments or proposed
legislation, and other policy statements or actions 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.
Because the Mandatory Guidelines govern standards applicable to the
management of federal agency personnel, there should be little, if any,
direct effect 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. Accordingly,
the Secretary has determined that the Guidelines do not contain
policies that have federalism implications.
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
The proposed Guidelines contain information collection requirements
which are subject to review by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 [the PRA 44 U.S.C.
3507(d)]. Information collection and recordkeeping requirements which
would be imposed on laboratories engaged in drug testing for federal
agencies concern quality assurance and quality control documentation,
reports, performance testing, and inspections as
[[Page 56124]]
set out in subparts H, I, K, L, M and N. To facilitate ease of use and
uniform reporting, a Federal CCF for each type of specimen collected
will be developed as referenced in Section 6.1. The Department has
submitted the information collection and recordkeeping requirements
contained in the proposed Guidelines to OMB for review and approval.
Privacy Act
The Secretary has determined that the Guidelines do not contain
information collection requirements constituting a system of records
under the Privacy Act. The Federal Register notice announcing the
proposed Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs using Hair is not a system of records as noted in the
information collection/recordkeeping requirements below.
Note the collection of information on the Federal Chain of Custody
Form as required by the Mandatory Guidelines are discussed below under
information collection and record keeping and are a separate submission
and approval by the Office of Management and Budget.
Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal
Governments
Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000) requires
SAMHSA to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and
timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory
policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal
implications'' as defined in the Executive Order, include regulations
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on
the relationship between the federal government and the Indian tribes,
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the
federal government and Indian tribes.'' The proposed Guidelines do not
have tribal implications. The Guidelines will not have substantial
direct effects on tribal governments, on the relationship between the
federal government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power
and responsibilities between the federal government and Indian tribes,
as specified in Executive Order 13175.
Information Collection/Record Keeping Requirements
The information collection requirements (i.e., reporting and
recordkeeping) in the current Guidelines (82 FR 7920 for urine, 84 FR
57554 for oral fluid), which establish the scientific and technical
guidelines for federal workplace drug testing programs and establish
standards for certification of laboratories engaged in urine and oral
fluid drug testing for federal agencies under authority of 5 U.S.C.
7301 and Executive Order 12564, are approved by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB) under control number 0930-0158. The Federal
Drug Testing Custody and Control Form used to document the collection
and chain of custody of urine and oral fluid specimens at the
collection site, for laboratories to report results, and for Medical
Review Officers to make a determination; the National Laboratory
Certification Program (NLCP) application; the NLCP Laboratory
Information Checklist; and recordkeeping requirements in the current
Guidelines, as approved under control number 0930-0158, will be revised
for the use of hair specimens when the final Guidelines using hair are
issued.
The title, description and respondent description of the
information collections are shown in the following paragraphs with an
estimate of the annual reporting, disclosure and recordkeeping burden.
Included in the estimate is the time for reviewing instructions,
searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data
needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information.
Title: The Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs using Hair.
Description: The Guidelines establish the scientific and technical
guidelines for federal drug testing programs and establish standards
for certification of laboratories engaged in drug testing for federal
agencies under authority of Public Law 100-71, 5 U.S.C. 7301 note, and
Executive Order No. 12564. Federal drug testing programs test
applicants to sensitive positions, individuals involved in accidents,
individuals for cause, and random testing of persons in sensitive
positions. The program has depended on urine specimen testing since
1988; the reporting, recordkeeping and disclosure requirements
associated with urine specimen testing are approved under OMB control
number 0930-0158. Since 1988, several products have appeared on the
market making it easier for individuals to adulterate or substitute the
urine specimen. Scientific advances in the use of hair in detecting
drugs have made it possible for this alternative specimen to be pursued
in federal programs. The proposed Guidelines establish when hair
specimens may be collected, the procedures that must be used in
collecting a hair specimen, and the certification process for approving
a laboratory to test hair specimens.
Description of Respondents: Individuals or households; businesses;
or other-for-profit; not-for-profit institutions.
The burden estimates in the tables below are based on the following
number of respondents: 38,000 donors who apply for employment in
testing designated positions, 100 collectors, 10 hair specimen testing
laboratories, and 100 MROs.
Estimate of Annual Reporting Burden
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Responses/ Hours/
Section Purpose respondents respondent response Total hours
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
9.2(a)(1)...................................... Laboratory required to submit 10 1 3 30
application for certification.
9.10(a)(3)..................................... Materials to submit to become an HHS 10 1 2 20
inspector.
11.3........................................... Laboratory submits qualifications of RP 10 1 2 20
to HHS.
11.4(c)........................................ Laboratory submits information to HHS 10 1 2 20
on new RP or alternate RP.
11.21.......................................... Specifications for laboratory semi- 10 5 0.5 25
annual statistical report of test
results to each federal agency.
14.7........................................... Specifies that MRO must report all 100 5 0.05 (3 min) 25
verified split specimen test results
to the federal agency.
16.1(b) & 16.5(a).............................. Specifies content of request for 1 1 3 3
informal review of suspension/proposed
revocation of certification.
16.4........................................... Specifies information appellant 1 1 0.5 0.5
provides in first written submission
when laboratory suspension/revocation
is proposed.
[[Page 56125]]
16.6........................................... Requires appellant to notify reviewing 1 1 0.5 0.5
official of resolution status at end
of abeyance period.
16.7(a)........................................ Specifies contents of appellant 1 1 50 50
submission for review.
16.9(a)........................................ Specifies content of appellant request 1 1 3 3
for expedited review of suspension or
proposed revocation.
16.9(c)........................................ Specifies contents of review file and 1 1 50 50
briefs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total...................................... ....................................... 156 .............. .............. 247
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following reporting requirements are also in the proposed
Guidelines, but have not been addressed in the above reporting burden
table: Collector must report any unusual donor behavior or refusal to
participate in the collection process on the Federal CCF (Sections 1.8,
8.9); collector annotates the Federal CCF when a sample is a blind
sample (Section 10.3(a)); MRO notifies the federal agency and HHS when
an error occurs on a blind sample (Section 10.4(d)); Section 13.5
describes the actions an MRO takes to report a primary specimen result;
and Section 14.6 describes the actions an MRO takes to report a split
specimen result. SAMHSA has not calculated a separate reporting burden
for these requirements because they are included in the burden hours
estimated for collectors to complete Federal CCFs and for MROs to
report results to federal agencies.
Estimate of Annual Disclosure Burden
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Responses/ Hours/
Section Purpose respondents respondent response Total hours
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8.3(a) & 8.6................................... Collector must contact federal agency 100 1 0.05 (3 min) 5
point of contact.
11.23 & 11.24.................................. Information on drug test that 10 10 3 300
laboratory must provide to federal
agency upon request or to donor
through MRO.
13.7(b)........................................ MRO must inform donor of right to 100 5 3 1,500
request split specimen test when an
adulterated or substituted result is
reported.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total...................................... ....................................... 210 .............. .............. 1,805
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following disclosure requirements are also included in the
proposed Guidelines, but have not been addressed in the above
disclosure burden table: The collector must explain the basic
collection procedure to the donor and answer any questions (Section
8.3(h), and must review the procedures for the hair specimen collection
materials used with the donor (Section 8.4(c)). SAMHSA believes having
the collector explain the collection procedure to the donor and answer
any questions is a standard business practice and not a disclosure
burden.
Estimate of Annual Recordkeeping Burden
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number of Responses/
Section Purpose respondents respondent Hours/ response Total hours
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8.3, 8.4, & 8.8......................... Collector completes Federal CCF 100 380 0.07 (4 min)................ 2,534
for specimen collected.
8.8(c) & (e)............................ Donor initials specimen labels/ 38,000 1 0.08 (5 min)................ 3,167
seals and signs statement on
the Federal CCF.
11.8(a) & 11.18......................... Laboratory completes Federal CCF 10 3,800 0.05 (3 min)................ 1,900
upon receipt of specimen and
before reporting result.
13.4(d) (4), 13.8 (c), & 14.7(c)........ MRO completes Federal CCF before 100 380 0.05 (3 min)................ 1,900
reporting the result.
14.1(b)................................. MRO documents donor's request to 300 1 0.05 (3 min)................ 15
have split hair specimen tested.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total............................... ................................ 38,510 .............. ............................ 9,516
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The proposed Guidelines contain a number of recordkeeping
requirements that SAMHSA considers not to be an additional
recordkeeping burden. In subpart D, a trainer is required to document
the training of an individual to be a collector [Section 4.3(a)(3)] and
the documentation must be maintained in the collector's training file
[Section 4.3(c)]. SAMHSA believes this training documentation is common
practice and is not considered an additional burden. In subpart F, if a
collector uses an incorrect form to collect a federal agency specimen,
the collector is required to provide a statement [Section 6.2(b)]
explaining why an incorrect form was used to document collecting the
specimen. SAMHSA believes this is an extremely infrequent occurrence
and does not create a significant additional
[[Page 56126]]
recordkeeping burden. Subpart H [Sections 8.3 (f), and 8.4 (d), (f)]
requires collectors to enter any information on the Federal CCF of any
unusual findings during the hair specimen collection procedure. These
recordkeeping requirements are an integral part of the collection
procedure and are essential to documenting the chain of custody for the
specimens collected. The burden for these entries is included in the
recordkeeping burden estimated to complete the Federal CCF and is,
therefore, not considered an additional recordkeeping burden. Subpart K
describes a number of recordkeeping requirements for laboratories
associated with their testing procedures, maintaining chain of custody,
and keeping records (i.e., Sections 11.1(a) and (d); 11.2(b), (c), and
(d); 11.6(b); 11.7(c); 11.8; 11.12(a); 11.15(a); 11.18; 11.19(a), (b),
and (c); 11.22; 11.23, and 11.24. These recordkeeping requirements are
necessary for any laboratory to conduct forensic drug testing and to
ensure the scientific supportability of the test results. Therefore,
they are considered to be standard business practice and are not
considered a burden for this analysis.
Thus, the total annual response burden associated with the testing
of hair specimens by the laboratories is estimated to be 13,268 hours
(that is, the sum of the total hours from the above tables). This is in
addition to the 1,788,809 hours currently approved by OMB under control
number 0930-0158 for urine testing under the current Guidelines.
As required by Section 3507(d) of the PRA, the Secretary has
submitted a copy of these proposed Guidelines to OMB for its review.
Comments on the information collection requirements are specifically
solicited in order to: (1) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper performance of HHS's functions,
including whether the information will have practical utility; (2)
evaluate the accuracy of HHS's estimate of the burden of the proposed
collection of information, including the validity of the methodology
and assumptions used; (3) enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of
the information to be collected; and (4) minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who are to respond, including
through the use of appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or
other technological collection techniques or other forms of information
technology.
OMB is required to make a decision concerning the collection of
information contained in these proposed Guidelines 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. This does not affect
the deadline for the public to comment to HHS on the proposed
Guidelines.
Organizations and individuals desiring to submit comments on the
information collection requirements should direct them to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, OMB, New Executive Office Building,
725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20502, Attn: Desk Officer for
SAMHSA. Because of delays in receipt of mail, comments may also be sent
to (202) 395-6974 (fax).
References
1. DuPont RL, Baumgartner WA. 1995. Drug testing by urine and hair
analysis: complementary features and scientific issues. Forensic Sci
Int. 70:63-76.
2. Barroso M, Gallardo E, Vieira DN, Lopez-Rivadulla M, Queiroz JA.
2011. Hair: a complementary source of bioanalytical information in
forensic toxicology. Bioanalysis. 3:67-79.
3. LeBeau MA, Montgomery MA, Brewer JD. 2011. The role of variations
in growth rate and sample collection on interpreting results of
segmental analyses of hair. Forensic Sci Int. 210:110-6.
4. Boumba VA, Ziavrou KS, Vougiouklakis T. 2006. Hair as a
biological indicator of drug use, drug abuse or chronic exposure to
environmental toxicants. Int J Toxicol. 25:143-63.
5. de Berker D, Higgins CA, Johoda C, Christiano AM. 2012. Biology
of hair and nails. In: Bolognia, JL, Jorizzo, JL, Schaffer, JV,
editors. Dermatology. 3rd ed. China: Elsevier Saunders.
6. P[ouml]tsch L, Skopp G, Moeller MR. 1997. Biochemical approach on
the conservation of drug molecules during hair fiber formation.
Forensic Sci Int. 84:25-35.
7. Caplan YH, Goldberger BA. 2001. Alternative specimens for
workplace drug testing. J Anal Toxicol, 25:396-399.
8. Henderson GL. 1993. Mechanisms of drug incorporation into hair.
For Sci Int. 63:19-29.
9. Mak WC, Patzelt A, Richter H, Renneberg R, Lai KK, Ruhl E, Sterry
W, Lademann J. 2012. Triggering of drug release of particles in hair
follicles. J.Control Release. 160:509-514.
10. Auwarter V, Wohlfarth A, Traber, J, Thieme D, Weinmann W. 2010.
Hair analysis for delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinolic acid A-new insights
into the mechanism of drug incorporation of cannabinoids into hair.
Forensic Sci Int. 196:10-13.
11. Mantinieks D, Gerostamoulos D, Wright P, Drummer, O. 2018. The
effectiveness of decontamination procedures used in forensic hair
analysis. Forensic Sci Med Pathol. 14:349-357.
12. Morris-Kukoski C, Montgomery MA, Hammer RI. 2014. Analysis of
extensively washed hair from cocaine users and drug chemists to
establish new reporting criteria. J Anal Toxicol. 38:628-36.
13. Cuypers E, Flinders B, Boone CM, Bosman IJ, Lusthof KL, Van
Asten AC, Tygat J Heeren RMA. 2016. Consequences of Decontamination
Procedures in Forensic Hair Analysis Using Metal-Assisted Secondary
Ion Mass Spectrometry Analysis. Anal Chem. 88:3091-3097.
14 Wright J, Kenneally M, Edwards J, Walker S. 2017. Adverse Health
Effects Associated with Living in a Former Methamphetamine Drug
Laboratory-Victoria, Australia, 2015. MMWR. 65 (52): 1470-1473.
15 Tsanaclis L, Wicks J. 2008. Differentiation between Drug Use and
Environmental Contamination when Testing for Drugs in Hair. Forensic
Sci Int. 176:19-22.
16. de La Torre R, Civit E, Svaizer F, Lotti A, Gottardi M, Miozzo
M. 2010. High throughput analysis of drugs of abuse in hair by
combining purposely designed sample extraction compatible with
immunometric methods used for drug testing in urine. Forensic Sci
Int. 196:18-21.
17. Kamata T, Shima N, Sasaki K, Matsuta S, Takei S, Katagi M, Miki
A, Zaitsu K, Nakanishi T, Sato T, Suzuki K, Tsuchihashi H. 2015.
Time-course mass spectrometry imaging for depicting drug
incorporation into hair. Anal Chem. 87:5476-81.
18. Grabenauer M, Bynum N, Moore K, White R, Mitchell J, Hayes E,
Flegel R. 2018. Detection and quantification of codeine-6-
glucuronide, hydromorphone-3-glucuronide, oxymorphone-3-glucuronide,
morphine 3-glucuronide and morphine-6-glucuronide in human hair from
opioid users by LC-MS-MS. J Anal Toxicol. 42(2):115-125.
19. Musshoff F, Thieme D, Schwarz G, Sachs H, Skopp G, Franz T.
2018. Determination of hydroxy metabolites of cocaine in hair
samples for proof of consumption. Drug Test Anal. 10(4):681-688.
20. Scholz C, Quednow B, Herdener M, Kraemer T, Baumgartner M. 2019.
Cocaine Hydroxy Metabolites in Hair: Indicators for Cocaine Use
Versus External Contamination. J Anal Toxicol. 43(7):543-552.
21. Franz T, Scheufler F, Stein K, Uhl M, Dame T, Schwarz G, Sachs
H, Skopp G, Musshoff F. 2018. Determination of hydroxy metabolites
of cocaine from hair samples and comparison with street cocaine
samples. Forensic Sci Int. 288:223-226.
22. Schaffer M, Cheng C, Chao O, Hill V, Matsui P. 2016. Analysis of
cocaine and metabolites in hair: validation and application of
measurement of hydroxycocaine metabolites as evidence of cocaine
ingestion. Anal Bioanal Chem. 408(8):2043-54.
23. Castanet J, Ortonne JP. 1997. Hair melanin and hair color. In:
Jolles P, Zahn
[[Page 56127]]
H, Hoecker H, editors. Formation and structure of human hair. Basel,
Switzerland: Birkhauser Verlag. Pp. 209-225.
24. Rollins DE, Wilkins DG, Gygi SP, Slawson MH, Nagasawa PR. 1997.
Testing for drugs of abuse in hair--experimental observations and
indications for future research. Forensic Sci Rev. 9:24-35.
25. Borges CR, Martin SD, Meyer LJ, Wilkins DG, Rollins DE. 2002.
Influx and efflux of amphetamine and N-acetylamphetamine in
keratinocytes, pigmented melanocytes, and nonpigmented melanocytes.
J. Pharm. Sci. 91:1523-1535.
26. Joseph RE Jr, Su TP, Cone EJ. 1996. In vitro binding studies of
drugs to hair: influence of melanin and lipids on cocaine binding to
Caucasoid and Africoid hair. J Anal Toxicol. 20:338-344.
27. Borges CR, Roberts JC, Wilkins DG, Rollins DE. 2003. Cocaine,
benzoylecgonine, amphetamine, and N-acetylamphetamine binding to
melanin subtypes. J Anal Toxicol. 27:125-134.
28. Borges R, Wilkins DG, Rollins DE. 2001. Amphetamine and N-
acetylamphetamine incorporation into hair: an investigation of the
potential role of drug basicity in hair color bias. J Anal Toxicol.
25:221-227.
29. Stout PR, Claffey DJ, Ruth JA. 2000. Incorporation and retention
of radiolabeled S-(+)-and R-(-)-methamphetamine and S(+)- and R(-)-
N-(n-butyl)-amphetamine in mouse hair after systemic administration.
Drug Metab Dispos. 28:286-291.
30. Green SJ, Wilson JF. 1996. The effect of hair color on the
incorporation of methadone into hair in the rat. J Anal Toxicol.
20:121-123.
31. Slawson MH, Wilkins DG, Rollins DE. 1998. The incorporation of
drugs into hair: relationship of hair color and melanin
concentration to phencyclidine incorporation. J Anal Toxicol.
22:406-413.
32. Henderson GL, Harkey MR, Zhou C, Jones RT, Jacob P III. 1998.
Incorporation of isotopically labeled cocaine into human hair: race
as a factor. J Anal Toxicol. 22:156-165.
33. Rollins DE, Wilkins DG, Krueger GG, Augsburger MP, Mizuno A,
O'Neal C, Borges CR, Slawson MH. 2003. The effect of hair color on
the incorporation of codeine into human hair. J Anal Toxicol. 27,
545-551.
34. Kronstrand R, Forstberg-Peterson S, Kagedal B, Ahlner J, Larson
G. 1999. Codeine concentration in hair after oral administration is
dependent on melanin content. Clin Chem. 45:1485-1494.
35. Mieczkowski T. 2003. Assessing the potential of a ``color
effect'' for hair analysis of 11-nor-9-carboxy-delta(9)-
tetrahydrocannabinol: analysis of a large sample of hair specimens.
Life Sci. 74:463-469.
36. Mieczkowski T, Newel R. 2000. Statistical examination of hair
color as a potential biasing factor in hair analysis. Forensic Sci.
Int. 107:13-38.
37. Mieczkowski T, Newel R. 1993. An evaluation of patterns of
racial bias in hair assays for cocaine: black and white arrestees
compared. Forensic Sci. Int. 63:85-98.
38. Cuypers E, Flinders B., Bosman IJ, Lusthof KJ, Van Asten AC,
Tytgat J, Heeren RMA. 2014. Hydrogen peroxide reactions on cocaine
in hair using imaging mass spectrometry. Forens Sci Int. 242:103-
110.
39. Tanaka S, Iio R, Takayama N., Hayakawa K. 2001. Identification
of reaction products of methamphetamine and hydrogen peroxide in
hair dye and decolorant treatments by high performance liquid
chromatography/mass spectrometry. Biomed Chromatgr. 15;45-49.
40. Pritchett JS, Phinney KW. 2015. Influence of chemical
straightening on the stability of drugs of abuse in hair. J Anal
Toxicol. 39:13-16.
41. Baeck S, Han E, Chung H, Pyo M. 2011. Effects of repeated hair
washing and a single hair dyeing on concentrations of
methamphetamine and amphetamine in human hairs. Forens Sci Int.
206:77-80.
42. Kidwell DA, Smith FP, Shepherd AR. 2015. Ethnic hair care
products may increase false positives in hair drug testing. Forens
Sci Int. 257:160-164.
43. Hill V, Loni E, Cairns T, Sommer J, Schaffer M. 2014.
Identification and analysis of damaged or porous hair. Drug Test
Anal. 6:42-54.
44. European Workplace Drug Testing Society. 2015. European
guidelines for workplace drug and alcohol testing in hair. 2015-11-
01 Version 2.0. Retrieved from https://www.ewdts.org/.
45. Cooper GAA, Kronstrand R, Kintz P. 2012. Society of hair testing
guidelines for drug testing in hair. Forens Sci Int. 218:20-24.
46. Hill V, Cairns T, Cheng CC, Schaffer M. 2005. Multiple aspects
of hair analysis for opiates: methodology, clinical and workplace
populations, codeine, and poppy seed ingestion. J Anal Toxicol.
29:696-703.
Summary
The Department believes that the benefits of pursuing the proposed
Mandatory Guidelines using Hair outweigh the costs to include this
additional specimen type in federal workplace drug testing programs.
There is no requirement for federal agencies to use hair as part of
their drug testing program. A federal agency may choose to use urine,
oral fluid, hair or any combination of specimen types in accordance
with the Mandatory Guidelines for each matrix in their program based on
the agency's mission, its employees' duties, and the danger to the
public health and safety or to national security that could result from
an employee's failure to carry out the duties of his or her position.
Dated: July 20, 2020.
Elinore F. McCance-Katz,
Assistant Secretary for Mental Health and Substance Use, Substance
Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.
Approved: July 23, 2020.
Alex M. Azar II,
Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services.
0
The Mandatory Guidelines using Hair are hereby proposed to be adopted
in accordance with section 503 of Public Law 100-71 and Executive Order
12564.
Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs Using
Hair
Subpart A--Applicability
1.1 To whom do these Guidelines apply?
1.2 Who is responsible for developing and implementing these
Guidelines?
1.3 How does a federal agency request a change from these
Guidelines?
1.4 How are these Guidelines revised?
1.5 What do the terms used in these Guidelines mean?
1.6 What is an agency required to do to protect employee records?
1.7 What is a refusal to take a federally regulated drug test?
1.8 What are the potential consequences for refusing to take a
federally regulated drug test?
Subpart B--Hair Specimens
2.1 What type of specimen may be collected?
2.2 Under what circumstances may a hair specimen be collected?
2.3 How is each hair specimen collected?
2.4 What amount of hair is collected?
2.5 How does the collector split the hair specimen collected?
2.6 When may an entity or individual release a hair specimen?
Subpart C--Hair Specimen Tests
3.1 Which tests are conducted on a hair specimen?
3.2 May a hair specimen be tested for additional drugs?
3.3 May any of the specimens be used for other purposes?
3.4 What are the drug test cutoff concentrations for hair?
3.5 May an HHS-certified laboratory perform additional drug and/or
specimen validity tests on a specimen at the request of the Medical
Review Officer (MRO)?
3.6 What criteria are used to report a hair specimen as adulterated?
3.7 What criteria are used to report a hair specimen as substituted?
3.8 What criteria are used to report an invalid result for a hair
specimen?
Subpart D--Collectors
4.1 Who may collect a specimen?
4.2 Who may not collect a specimen?
4.3 What are the requirements to be a collector?
4.4 What are the requirements to be a trainer for collectors?
[[Page 56128]]
4.5 What must a federal agency do before a collector is permitted to
collect a specimen?
Subpart E--Collection Sites
5.1 Where can a collection for a drug test take place?
5.2 What are the requirements for a collection site?
5.3 Where must collection site records be stored?
5.4 How long must collection site records be stored?
5.5 How does the collector ensure the security and integrity of a
specimen at the collection site?
5.6 What are the privacy requirements when collecting a hair
specimen?
Subpart F--Federal Drug Testing Custody and Control Form
6.1 What federal form is used to document custody and control?
6.2 What happens if the correct OMB-approved Federal CCF is not
available or is not used?
Subpart G--Hair Specimen Collection Materials
7.1 What is used to collect a hair specimen?
7.2 What are the requirements for hair collection materials?
7.3 What are the minimum performance requirements for hair
collection materials?
Subpart H--Hair Specimen Collection Procedure
8.1 What privacy must the donor be given when providing a hair
specimen?
8.2 What must the collector ensure at the collection site before
starting a hair specimen collection?
8.3 What are the preliminary steps in the hair specimen collection
procedure?
8.4 What steps does the collector take in the collection procedure
before the donor provides a hair specimen?
8.5 What steps does the collector take during and after the hair
specimen collection procedure?
8.6 What procedure is used when the donor is unable to provide a
hair specimen?
8.7 If the donor is unable to provide a hair specimen, may another
specimen type be collected for testing?
8.8 How does the collector prepare the hair specimens?
8.9 How does the collector report a donor's refusal to test?
8.10 What are a federal agency's responsibilities for a collection
site?
Subpart I--HHS Certification of Laboratories
9.1 Who has the authority to certify laboratories to test hair
specimens for federal agencies?
9.2 What is the process for a laboratory to become HHS-certified?
9.3 What is the process for a laboratory to maintain HHS
certification?
9.4 What is the process when a laboratory does not maintain its HHS
certification?
9.5 What are the qualitative and quantitative specifications of
performance testing (PT) samples?
9.6 What are the PT requirements for an applicant laboratory that
seeks to perform hair testing?
9.7 What are the PT requirements for an HHS-certified hair
laboratory?
9.8 What are the inspection requirements for an applicant
laboratory?
9.9 What are the maintenance inspection requirements for an HHS-
certified laboratory?
9.10 Who can inspect an HHS-certified laboratory and when may the
inspection be conducted?
9.11 What happens if an applicant laboratory does not satisfy the
minimum requirements for either the PT program or the inspection
program?
9.12 What happens if an HHS-certified laboratory does not satisfy
the minimum requirements for either the PT program or the inspection
program?
9.13 What factors are considered in determining whether revocation
of a laboratory's HHS certification is necessary?
9.14 What factors are considered in determining whether to suspend a
laboratory's HHS certification?
9.15 How does the Secretary notify an HHS-certified laboratory that
action is being taken against the laboratory?
9.16 May a laboratory that had its HHS certification revoked be
recertified to test federal agency specimens?
9.17 Where is the list of HHS-certified laboratories published?
Subpart J--Blind Samples Submitted by an Agency
10.1 What are the requirements for federal agencies to submit blind
samples to HHS-certified laboratories?
10.2 What are the requirements for blind samples?
10.3 How is a blind sample submitted to an HHS-certified laboratory?
10.4 What happens if an inconsistent result is reported for a blind
sample?
Subpart K--Laboratory
11.1 What must be included in the HHS-certified laboratory's
standard operating procedure manual?
11.2 What are the responsibilities of the responsible person (RP)?
11.3 What scientific qualifications must the RP have?
11.4 What happens when the RP is absent or leaves an HHS-certified
laboratory?
11.5 What qualifications must an individual have to certify a result
reported by an HHS-certified laboratory?
11.6 What qualifications and training must other personnel of an
HHS-certified laboratory have?
11.7 What security measures must an HHS-certified laboratory
maintain?
11.8 What are the laboratory chain of custody requirements for
specimens and aliquots?
11.9 How must an HHS-certified laboratory process an alternate
specimen that was collected at the same time as a hair specimen?
11.10 What amount of hair is tested?
11.11 What are the requirements for an initial drug test?
11.12 What must an HHS-certified laboratory do to validate an
initial drug test?
11.13 What are the batch quality control requirements when
conducting an initial drug test?
11.14 What are the requirements for a confirmatory drug test?
11.15 What must an HHS-certified laboratory do to validate a
confirmatory drug test?
11.16 What are the batch quality control requirements when
conducting a confirmatory drug test?
11.17 What are the analytical and quality control requirements for
conducting specimen validity tests?
11.18 What must an HHS-certified laboratory do to validate a
specimen validity test?
11.19 What are the requirements for an HHS-certified laboratory to
report a test result?
11.20 How long must an HHS-certified laboratory retain specimens?
11.21 How long must an HHS-certified laboratory retain records?
11.22 What statistical summary reports must an HHS-certified
laboratory provide for hair testing?
11.23 What HHS-certified laboratory information is available to a
federal agency?
11.24 What HHS-certified laboratory information is available to a
federal employee?
11.25 What types of relationships are prohibited between an HHS-
certified laboratory and an MRO?
Subpart L--Instrumented Initial Test Facility (IITF)
12.1 May an IITF test hair specimens for a federal agency's
workplace drug testing program?
Subpart M--Medical Review Officer (MRO)
13.1 Who may serve as an MRO?
13.2 How are nationally recognized entities or subspecialty boards
that certify MROs approved?
13.3 What training is required before a physician may serve as an
MRO?
13.4 What are the responsibilities of an MRO?
13.5 What must an MRO do when reviewing a hair specimen's test
results?
13.6 What action does the MRO take when the collector reports that
the donor did not provide a sufficient amount of hair for a drug
test?
13.7 Who may request a test of a split (B) hair specimen?
13.8 How does an MRO report a primary (A) specimen test result to an
agency?
13.9 What types of relationships are prohibited between an MRO and
an HHS-certified laboratory?
Subpart N--Split Specimen Tests
14.1 When may a split (B) hair specimen be tested?
14.2 How does an HHS-certified laboratory test a split (B) hair
specimen when the primary (A) specimen was reported adulterated?
[[Page 56129]]
14.3 How does an HHS-certified laboratory test a split (B) hair
specimen when the primary (A) specimen was reported substituted?
14.4 Who receives the split (B) specimen result?
14.5 What action(s) does an MRO take after receiving the split (B)
hair specimen result from the second HHS-certified laboratory?
14.6 How does an MRO report a split (B) specimen test result to an
agency?
14.7 How long must an HHS-certified laboratory retain a split (B)
specimen?
Subpart O--Criteria for Rejecting a Specimen for Testing
15.1 What discrepancies require an HHS-certified laboratory to
report a specimen as rejected for testing?
15.2 What discrepancies require an HHS-certified laboratory to
report a specimen as rejected for testing unless the discrepancy is
corrected?
15.3 What discrepancies are not sufficient to require an HHS-
certified laboratory to reject a hair specimen for testing or an MRO
to cancel a test?
15.4 What discrepancies may require an MRO to cancel a test?
Subpart P--Laboratory Suspension/Revocation Procedures
16.1 When may the HHS certification of a laboratory be suspended?
16.2 What definitions are used for this subpart?
16.3 Are there any limitations on issues subject to review?
16.4 Who represents the parties?
16.5 When must a request for informal review be submitted?
16.6 What is an abeyance agreement?
16.7 What procedures are used to prepare the review file and written
argument?
16.8 When is there an opportunity for oral presentation?
16.9 Are there expedited procedures for review of immediate
suspension?
16.10 Are any types of communications prohibited?
16.11 How are communications transmitted by the reviewing official?
16.12 What are the authority and responsibilities of the reviewing
official?
16.13 What administrative records are maintained?
16.14 What are the requirements for a written decision?
16.15 Is there a review of the final administrative action?
Subpart A--Applicability
Section 1.1 To whom do these Guidelines apply?
(a) These Guidelines apply to:
(1) Executive Agencies as defined in 5 U.S.C. 105;
(2) The Uniformed Services, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 2101(3) (but
excluding the Armed Forces as defined in 5 U.S.C. 2101(2));
(3) Any other employing unit or authority of the federal government
except the United States Postal Service, the Postal Rate Commission,
and employing units or authorities in the Judicial and Legislative
Branches; and
(4) The Intelligence Community, as defined by Executive Order
12333, is subject to these Guidelines only to the extent agreed to by
the head of the affected agency;
(5) Laboratories that provide drug testing services to the federal
agencies;
(6) Collectors who provide specimen collection services to the
federal agencies; and
(7) Medical Review Officers (MROs) who provide drug testing review
and interpretation of results services to the federal agencies.
(b) These Guidelines do not apply to drug testing under authority
other than Executive Order 12564, including testing of persons in the
criminal justice system, such as arrestees, detainees, probationers,
incarcerated persons, or parolees.
Section 1.2 Who is responsible for developing and implementing these
Guidelines?
(a) Executive Order 12564 and Public Law 100-71 require the
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to establish scientific
and technical guidelines for federal workplace drug testing programs.
(b) The Secretary has the responsibility to implement these
Guidelines.
Section 1.3 How does a federal agency request a change from these
Guidelines?
(a) Each federal agency must ensure that its workplace drug testing
program complies with the provisions of these Guidelines unless a
waiver has been obtained from the Secretary.
(b) To obtain a waiver, a federal agency must submit a written
request to the Secretary that describes the specific change for which a
waiver is sought and a detailed justification for the change.
Section 1.4 How are these Guidelines revised?
(a) To ensure the full reliability and accuracy of specimen tests,
the accurate reporting of test results, and the integrity and efficacy
of federal drug testing programs, the Secretary may make changes to
these Guidelines to reflect improvements in the available science and
technology.
(b) The changes will be published in final as a notice in the
Federal Register.
Section 1.5 What do the terms used in these Guidelines mean?
The following definitions are adopted:
Accessioner. The individual who signs the Federal Drug Testing
Custody and Control Form at the time of specimen receipt at the HHS-
certified laboratory or (for urine) the HHS-certified IITF.
Adulterated Specimen. A specimen that has been altered, as
evidenced by test results showing either a substance that is not a
normal constituent for that type of specimen or showing an abnormal
concentration of a normal constituent (e.g., nitrite in urine).
Aliquot. A portion of a specimen used for testing.
Alternate Responsible Person. The person who assumes professional,
organizational, educational, and administrative responsibility for the
day-to-day management of the HHS-certified laboratory when the
responsible person is unable to fulfill these obligations.
Alternate Technology Initial Drug Test. An initial drug test using
technology other than immunoassay to differentiate negative specimens
from those requiring further testing.
Artificial hair. A weave or other synthetic forms of hair, as well
as animal substitutes.
Batch. A number of specimens or aliquots handled concurrently as a
group.
Biomarker. An endogenous substance used to validate a biological
specimen.
Blind Sample. A sample submitted to an HHS-certified test facility
for quality assurance purposes, with a fictitious identifier, so that
the test facility cannot distinguish it from a donor specimen.
Calibrator. A sample of known content and analyte concentration
prepared in the appropriate matrix used to define expected outcomes of
a testing procedure. The test result of the calibrator is verified to
be within established limits prior to use.
Cancelled Test. The result reported by the MRO to the federal
agency when a specimen has been reported to the MRO as an invalid
result (and the donor has no legitimate explanation), the specimen has
been rejected for testing, when a hair specimen has been reported as
positive and the MRO directs testing of the alternate specimen for the
donor, when a split specimen fails to reconfirm, or when the MRO
determines that a fatal flaw or unrecovered correctable flaw exists in
the forensic records (as described in Sections 15.1 and 15.2).
Carryover. The effect that occurs when a sample result (e.g., drug
concentration) is affected by a preceding sample during the preparation
or analysis of a sample.
Certifying Scientist (CS). The individual responsible for verifying
the chain of custody and scientific
[[Page 56130]]
reliability of a test result reported by an HHS-certified laboratory.
Certifying Technician (CT). The individual responsible for
verifying the chain of custody and scientific reliability of negative,
rejected for testing, and (for urine) negative/dilute results reported
by an HHS-certified laboratory or (for urine) an HHS-certified IITF.
Chain of Custody (COC) Procedures. Procedures that document the
integrity of each specimen or aliquot from the point of collection to
final disposition.
Chain of Custody Documents. Forms used to document the control and
security of the specimen and all aliquots. The document may account for
an individual specimen, aliquot, or batch of specimens/aliquots and
must include the name and signature of each individual who handled the
specimen(s) or aliquot(s) and the date and purpose of the handling.
Collection Container. A receptacle used to collect a donor's drug
test specimen.
Collection Site. The location where specimens are collected.
Collector. A person trained to instruct and assist a donor in
providing a specimen.
Confirmatory Drug Test. A second analytical procedure performed on
a separate aliquot of a specimen to identify and quantify a specific
drug or drug metabolite.
Confirmatory Specimen Validity Test. A second test performed on a
separate aliquot of a specimen to further support an initial specimen
validity test result.
Control. A sample used to evaluate whether an analytical procedure
or test is operating within predefined tolerance limits.
Cutoff. The analytical value (e.g., drug or drug metabolite
concentration) used as the decision point to determine a result (e.g.,
negative, positive, adulterated, invalid, or substituted) or the need
for further testing.
Decontamination. The removal of external contamination (i.e.,
environmentally-deposited drug) in or on a hair specimen.
Donor. The individual from whom a specimen is collected.
External Service Provider. An independent entity that performs
services related to federal workplace drug testing on behalf of a
federal agency, a collector/collection site, an HHS[hyphen]certified
laboratory, a Medical Review Officer (MRO), or, for urine, an HHS-
certified Instrumented Initial Test Facility (IITF).
Failed to Reconfirm. The result reported for a split (B) specimen
when a second HHS-certified laboratory is unable to corroborate the
result reported for the primary (A) specimen.
False Hair. Hair that is not the donor's hair. False hair may be
artificial or human in origin.
Federal Drug Testing Custody and Control Form (Federal CCF). The
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved form that is used to
document the collection and chain of custody of a specimen from the
time the specimen is collected until it is received by the test
facility (i.e., HHS-certified laboratory or, for urine, HHS-certified
IITF). It may be a paper (hardcopy), electronic, or combination
electronic and paper format (hybrid). The form may also be used to
report the test result to the Medical Review Officer.
HHS. The Department of Health and Human Services.
Initial Drug Test. An analysis used to differentiate negative
specimens from those requiring further testing.
Initial Specimen Validity Test. The first analysis used to
determine if a specimen is invalid, adulterated, or substituted.
Instrumented Initial Test Facility (IITF). A permanent location
where (for urine) initial testing, reporting of results, and
recordkeeping are performed under the supervision of a responsible
technician.
Invalid Result. The result reported by an HHS-certified laboratory
in accordance with the criteria established in Section 3.8 when a
positive, negative, adulterated, or substituted result cannot be
established for a specific drug or specimen validity test.
Laboratory. A permanent location where initial and confirmatory
drug testing, reporting of results, and recordkeeping are performed
under the supervision of a responsible person.
Limit of Detection. The lowest concentration at which the analyte
(e.g., drug or drug metabolite) can be identified.
Limit of Quantification. For quantitative assays, the lowest
concentration at which the identity and concentration of the analyte
(e.g., drug or drug metabolite) can be accurately established.
Lot. A number of units of an item (e.g., reagents, quality control
material) manufactured from the same starting materials within a
specified period of time for which the manufacturer ensures that the
items have essentially the same performance characteristics and
expiration date.
Medical Review Officer (MRO). A licensed physician who reviews,
verifies, and reports a specimen test result to the federal agency.
Negative Result. The result reported by an HHS-certified laboratory
or (for urine) an HHS-certified IITF to an MRO when a specimen contains
no drug and/or drug metabolite; or the concentration of the drug or
drug metabolite is less than the cutoff for that drug or drug class.
Performance Testing (PT) Sample. A program-generated sample sent to
a laboratory or (for urine) to an IITF to evaluate performance.
Positive Result. The result reported by an HHS-certified laboratory
when a specimen contains a drug or drug metabolite equal to or greater
than the confirmation cutoff concentration.
Reconfirmed. The result reported for a split (B) specimen when the
second HHS-certified laboratory corroborates the original result
reported for the primary (A) specimen.
Rejected for Testing. The result reported by an HHS-certified
laboratory or (for urine) an HHS-certified IITF when no tests are
performed on a specimen because of a fatal flaw or an unrecovered
correctable error (see Sections 15.1 and 15.2)
Responsible Person (RP). The person who assumes professional,
organizational, educational, and administrative responsibility for the
day-to-day management of an HHS-certified laboratory.
Sample. A performance testing sample, calibrator or control used
during testing, or a representative portion of a donor's specimen.
Secretary. The Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services.
Specimen. Fluid or material collected from a donor at the
collection site for the purpose of a drug test.
Specimen guide. An item that holds the hair specimen as positioned
by the collector, and has an indication of the orientation (i.e., root
or distal end) of the hair specimen collected.
Split Specimen Collection (for Hair). A collection in which the
specimen collected is divided into a primary (A) specimen and a split
(B) specimen, which are independently sealed in the presence of the
donor.
Standard. Reference material of known purity or a solution
containing a reference material at a known concentration.
Substituted Specimen. A specimen with physical or chemical
characteristics that are not consistent with those observed in human
hair.
Wash procedures. A rinse with organic solvents to remove oils and
residue on the hair prior to initial testing.
[[Page 56131]]
Unique metabolite. A drug metabolite present in a hair specimen
only as a result of biotransformation following drug use, and whose
detection by a confirmatory drug test distinguishes drug use from
external contamination. A unique metabolite does not occur as a
contaminant in licit and illicit drug products and is not produced from
the drug as an artifact and only results from biotransformation
following drug use.
Section 1.6 What is an agency required to do to protect employee
records?
Consistent with 5 U.S.C. 552a and 48 CFR 24.101-24.104, all agency
contracts with laboratories, collectors, and MROs must require that
they comply with the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a. In addition, the
contracts must require compliance with employee access and
confidentiality provisions of Section 503 of Public Law 100-71. Each
federal agency must establish a Privacy Act System of Records or modify
an existing system or use any applicable Government-wide system of
records to cover the records of employee drug test results. All
contracts and the Privacy Act System of Records must specifically
require that employee records be maintained and used with the highest
regard for employee privacy.
The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996
(HIPAA) Privacy Rule (Rule), 45 CFR parts 160 and 164, Subparts A and
E, may be applicable to certain health care providers with whom a
federal agency may contract. If a health care provider is a HIPAA
covered entity, the provider must protect the individually identifiable
health information it maintains in accordance with the requirements of
the Rule, which includes not using or disclosing the information except
as permitted by the Rule and ensuring there are reasonable safeguards
in place to protect the privacy of the information. For more
information regarding the HIPAA Privacy Rule, please visit https://www.hhs.gov/ocr/hipaa.
Section 1.7 What is a refusal to take a federally regulated drug test?
(a) As a donor for a federally regulated drug test, you have
refused to take a federally regulated drug test if you:
(1) Fail to appear for any test (except a pre-employment test)
within a reasonable time, as determined by the federal agency,
consistent with applicable agency regulations, after being directed to
do so by the federal agency;
(2) Fail to remain at the collection site until the collection
process is complete with the exception of a donor who leaves the
collection site before the collection process begins for a pre-
employment test as described in Section 8.5(d);
(3) Fail to provide a hair specimen for any drug test required by
these Guidelines or federal agency regulations with the exception of a
donor who leaves the collection site before the collection process
begins for a pre-employment test as described in Section 8.5(d); or a
donor who is unable to provide a sufficient amount of hair for faith-
based or medical reasons, or due to an insufficient amount or length of
hair; or when the collector identifies lice or a similar infestation in
the hair.
(4) Fail or decline to participate in an alternate specimen
collection (e.g., urine, oral fluid) as directed by the federal agency
or collector (i.e., as described in Section 8.5);
(5) Fail to cooperate with any part of the testing process (e.g.,
disrupt the collection process; refuse to allow the collector to
collect a sufficient amount of hair; fail to provide a split specimen);
(6) Bring materials to the collection site for the purpose of
adulterating or substituting the specimen;
(7) Attempt to adulterate or substitute the specimen; or
(8) Admit to the collector or MRO that you have adulterated or
substituted the specimen.
Section 1.8 What are the potential consequences for refusing to take a
federally regulated drug test?
(a) As a federal agency employee or applicant, a refusal to take a
test may result in the initiation of disciplinary or adverse action, up
to and including removal from, or non-selection for, federal
employment.
(b) When a donor has refused to participate in a part of the
collection process, the collector must terminate the collection process
and take action as described in Section 8.9; immediately notify the
federal agency's designated representative by any means (e.g.,
telephone or secure facsimile [fax] machine) that ensures that the
refusal notification is immediately received, document the refusal on
the Federal CCF, sign and date the Federal CCF, and send all copies of
the Federal CCF to the federal agency's designated representative.
(c) When documenting a refusal to test during the verification
process as described in Sections 13.4 and 13.5, the MRO must complete
the MRO copy of the Federal CCF to include:
(1) Checking the refusal to test box;
(2) Providing a reason for the refusal in the remarks line; and
(3) Signing and dating the MRO copy of the Federal CCF.
Subpart B--Hair Specimens
Section 2.1 What type of specimen may be collected?
a. Only specimen types authorized by Mandatory Guidelines for
Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs may be collected.
b. A federal agency may collect hair and/or an alternate specimen
type for its workplace drug testing program, but may not implement hair
testing as the exclusive means of drug testing. A federal agency using
hair testing must follow these Guidelines.
c. A federal agency that collects hair specimens for its workplace
drug testing program must also authorize an alternate specimen type to
be collected either:
(1) At the time that a donor's hair specimen is collected, or
(2) at the direction of the MRO, following verification of a hair
test as positive or invalid, or when the laboratory rejected the hair
specimen.
Alternate specimens collected under Section 2.1(c)(1) and (2) can
be tested only if an MRO directs, in writing, that such specimens be
tested and following the MRO's receipt and verification of a positive,
invalid, or rejected hair test result from a laboratory (see Section
13.5).
d. A federal agency that collects hair specimens for its workplace
drug testing program must also authorize the collection of one or more
alternative specimen types when a donor is unable to provide a
sufficient amount of hair for faith-based or medical reasons, or due to
an insufficient amount or length of hair.
Section 2.2 Under what circumstances may a hair specimen be collected?
A federal agency may only collect a hair specimen for federal
agency pre-employment and random testing purposes, and may not use hair
specimens for reasonable suspicion/cause, post accident, return to
duty, or follow-up testing purposes (i.e., for purposes other than pre-
employment or random testing).
Section 2.3 How is each hair specimen collected?
Each hair specimen is collected as a split specimen as described in
Sections 2.5 and 8.8.
Section 2.4 What amount of hair is collected?
At least 100 mg of hair is collected, as described in Section 8.5.
[[Page 56132]]
Section 2.5 How does the collector split the hair specimen collected?
The collector subdivides the collected hair into 2 specimens
designated as ``A'' (primary) and ``B'' (split) as described in Section
8.5.
Section 2.6 When may an entity or individual release a hair specimen?
Entities and individuals subject to these Guidelines under Section
1.1 may not release specimens collected pursuant to Executive Order
12564, Public Law 100-71 and these Guidelines to donors or their
designees. Specimens also may not be released to any other entity or
individual unless expressly authorized by these Guidelines or by
applicable federal law. This section does not prohibit a donor's
request to have a split (B) specimen tested in accordance with Section
13.9.
Subpart C--Hair Drug and Specimen Validity Tests
Section 3.1 Which tests are conducted on a hair specimen?
A federal agency:
(a) Must ensure that each specimen is tested for marijuana and
cocaine as provided under Section 3.4;
(b) Is authorized to test each specimen for opioids, amphetamines,
and phencyclidine, as provided under Section 3.4;
(c) Is authorized to test hair specimens for damage that may affect
drug test results;
(d) Is authorized upon a Medical Review Officer's request to test a
hair specimen to determine specimen validity, using, for example, a
test for a biomarker or a test for a specific adulterant; and
(e) May perform additional testing if a specimen exhibits abnormal
characteristics, causes reactions or responses characteristic of an
adulterant during initial or confirmatory drug tests (e.g., non-
recovery of internal standard, unusual response), or contains an
unidentified substance that interferes with the confirmatory analysis.
Section 3.2 May a hair specimen be tested for additional drugs?
For approval to routinely test for any drugs listed in Schedule I
or II of the Controlled Substances Act that are not listed in Section
3.1, a federal agency must petition the Secretary in writing. Such
approval must be limited to the use of the appropriate science and
technology. If an initial test procedure is not available upon request
for a Schedule I or Schedule II drug, the HHS-certified laboratory must
test for the drug using the confirmatory analytical method. For any
specimen with a positive result, the laboratory must test a separate
aliquot of the specimen in a separate testing batch using the same
confirmatory analytical method. Additionally, the split (B) specimen
will be available for testing if the donor requests a retest at another
HHS-certified laboratory.
Section 3.3 May any of the specimens be used for other purposes?
(a) Specimens collected pursuant to Executive Order 12564, Public
Law 100-71, and these Guidelines must only be tested for drugs and to
determine their validity in accordance with Subpart C of these
Guidelines. Use of specimens by donors, their designees or any other
entity, for other purposes (e.g., deoxyribonucleic acid, DNA, testing)
is prohibited unless authorized in accordance with applicable federal
law.
(b) These Guidelines are not intended to prohibit federal agencies,
specifically authorized by law to test a specimen for additional
classes of drugs in its workplace drug testing program.
Section 3.4 What are the drug test cutoff concentrations for hair?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Confirmatory
Initial test analyte Initial test Confirmatory test analyte test cutoff
cutoff \1\ concentration
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marijuana Metabolites (THCA) \2\.............. \3\ 1 pg/mg THCA............................ 0.05 pg/mg
Cocaine/Benzoylecgonine....................... \3\ 500 pg/mg Cocaine Benzoylecgonine......... 500 pg/mg
50 pg/mg
Codeine/...................................... 200 pg/mg Codeine......................... 200 pg/mg
Morphine/..................................... .............. Morphine........................ 200 pg/mg
6-Acetylmorphine.............................. .............. 6-Acetylmorphine................ 200 pg/mg
Hydrocodone/.................................. 200 pg/mg Hydrocodone..................... 200 pg/mg
Hydromorphone................................. .............. Hydromorphone................... 200 pg/mg
Oxycodone/.................................... 200 pg/mg Oxycodone....................... 200 pg/mg
Oxymorphone................................... .............. Oxymorphone..................... 200 pg/mg
Phencyclidine................................. 300 pg/mg Phencyclidine................... 300 pg/mg
Amphetamine/.................................. \3\ 500 pg/mg Amphetamine..................... 300 pg/mg
Methamphetamine \4\........................... .............. Methamphetamine................. 300 pg/mg
MDMA \5\/MDA \6\.............................. \3\ 500 pg/mg MDMA............................ 300 pg/mg
.............. MDA............................. 300 pg/mg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ For grouped analytes (i.e., two or more analytes that are in the same drug class and have the same initial
test cutoff):
Immunoassay: The test must be calibrated with one analyte from the group identified as the target analyte. The
cross-reactivity of the immunoassay to the other analyte(s) within the group must be 80 percent or greater; if
not, separate immunoassays must be used for the analytes within the group.
Alternate technology: Either one analyte or analytes as grouped in the table above must be used for calibration,
depending on the technology. At least one analyte within the group must have a concentration equal to or
greater than the initial test cutoff or, alternatively, the sum of the analytes present (i.e., equal to or
greater than the laboratory's validated limit of quantification) must be equal to or greater than the initial
test cutoff.
\2\ An immunoassay must be calibrated with the target analyte, L-[Delta]-9-tetrahydrocannabinol-9-carboxylic
acid (THCA).
\3\ Alternate technology (THCA): The confirmatory test cutoff (i.e., 0.05 pg/mg) must be used for an alternate
technology initial test that is specific for THCA).
\4\ An immunoassay must be calibrated with the target analyte, D-amphetamine or D-methamphetamine.
\5\ Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA).
\6\ Methylenedioxyamphetamine (MDA).
[[Page 56133]]
Section 3.5 May an HHS-certified laboratory perform additional drug
and/or specimen validity tests on a specimen at the request of the
Medical Review Officer (MRO)?
An HHS-certified laboratory is authorized to perform additional
drug and/or specimen validity tests on a case-by-case basis as
necessary to provide information that the MRO would use to report a
verified drug test result (e.g., specimen validity tests using
biomarkers). An HHS-certified laboratory is not authorized to routinely
perform additional drug and/or specimen validity tests at the request
of an MRO without prior authorization from the Secretary or designated
HHS representative, with the exception of the determination of D, L
stereoisomers of amphetamine and methamphetamine. All tests must meet
appropriate validation and quality control requirements in accordance
with these Guidelines.
Section 3.6 What criteria are used to report a hair specimen as
adulterated?
An HHS-certified laboratory reports a hair specimen as adulterated
when the presence of an adulterant is verified using an initial test on
the first aliquot and a different confirmatory test on the second
aliquot.
Section 3.7 What criteria are used to report a hair specimen as
substituted?
An HHS-certified laboratory documents and reports a hair specimen
as substituted if it has physical or chemical characteristics
inconsistent with those observed in human hair. Such documentation
should briefly describe the physical or chemical characteristics that
are inconsistent with human hair.
Section 3.8 What criteria are used to report an invalid result for a
hair specimen?
An HHS-certified laboratory reports a primary (A) hair specimen as
an invalid result when:
(a) Interference occurs on the initial drug tests on two separate
aliquots (i.e., valid initial drug test results cannot be obtained);
(b) Interference with the confirmatory drug assay occurs on two
separate aliquots of the specimen and the laboratory is unable to
identify the interfering substance;
(c) The specimen has been tested and the color of the primary (A)
and the split (B) specimens are clearly different;
(d) The laboratory determines the hair is damaged (i.e., using a
validated method) to the extent that the drug test result may be
affected; or
(e) The laboratory obtains a positive confirmatory drug test result
and is unable to definitively remove external contamination from the
specimen (i.e., using a validated decontamination procedure).
Subpart D--Collectors
Section 4.1 Who may collect a specimen?
(a) A collector who has been trained to collect hair specimens in
accordance with these Guidelines.
(b) The immediate supervisor of a federal employee donor may only
collect that donor's specimen when no other collector is available. The
supervisor must be a trained collector.
(c) The hiring official of a federal agency applicant may only
collect that federal agency applicant's specimen when no other
collector is available. The hiring official must be a trained
collector.
Section 4.2 Who may not collect a specimen?
(a) A federal agency employee who is in a testing designated
position and subject to the federal agency drug testing rules must not
be a collector for co-workers in the same testing pool or who work
together with that employee on a daily basis.
(b) A federal agency applicant or employee must not collect his or
her own drug testing specimen.
(c) An employee working for an HHS-certified laboratory must not
act as a collector if the employee could link the identity of the donor
to the donor's drug test result.
(d) To avoid a potential conflict of interest, a collector must not
be related to the employee (e.g., spouse, ex-spouse, relative) or a
close personal friend (e.g., fiancée).
Section 4.3 What are the requirements to be a collector?
(a) An individual may serve as a collector if they fulfill the
following conditions:
(1) Is knowledgeable about the collection procedure described in
these Guidelines;
(2) Is knowledgeable about any guidance provided by the federal
agency's Drug-free Workplace Program and additional information
provided by the Secretary relating to these Guidelines;
(3) Is trained and qualified to collect a hair specimen. Training
must include the following:
(i) All steps necessary to complete a hair collection;
(ii) Completion and distribution of the Federal CCF;
(iii) Problem collections;
(iv) Fatal flaws, correctable flaws, and how to correct problems in
collections; and
(v) The collector's responsibility for maintaining the integrity of
the collection process, ensuring the privacy of the donor, ensuring the
security of the specimen, and avoiding conduct or statements that could
be viewed as offensive or inappropriate.
(4) Has demonstrated proficiency in collections by completing five
consecutive error-free mock collections.
(i) The five mock collections must include two uneventful
collection scenarios, one insufficient specimen quantity scenario, one
scenario in which the donor refuses to sign the Federal CCF, and one
scenario in which the donor refuses to initial the specimen container
tamper-evident seal.
(ii) A qualified trainer for collectors must monitor and evaluate
the individual being trained, in person or by a means that provides
real-time observation and interaction between the trainer and the
trainee, and the trainer must attest in writing that the mock
collections are ``error-free.''
(b) A trained collector must complete refresher training at least
every five years that includes the requirements in paragraph (a) of
this section.
(c) The collector must maintain the documentation of his or her
training and provide that documentation to a federal agency when
requested.
(d) An individual may not collect specimens for a federal agency
until his or her training as a collector has been properly documented.
Section 4.4 What are the requirements to be a trainer for collectors?
(a) Individuals are considered qualified trainers for collectors
and may train others to collect hair specimens when they have completed
the following:
(1) Qualified as a trained collector and regularly conducted hair
drug test collections for a period of at least one year or
(2) Completed a ``train the trainer'' course given by an
organization (e.g., manufacturer, private entity, contractor, federal
agency).
(b) A qualified trainer for collectors must complete refresher
training at least every five years in accordance with the collector
requirements in Section 4.3(a).
(c) A qualified trainer for collectors must maintain the
documentation of his or her training and provide that documentation to
a federal agency when requested.
[[Page 56134]]
Section 4.5 What must a federal agency do before a collector is
permitted to collect a specimen?
A federal agency must ensure the following:
(a) The collector has satisfied the requirements described in
Section 4.3;
(b) The collector, who may be self-employed, or an organization
(e.g., third party administrator that provides a collection service,
collector training company, federal agency that employs its own
collectors) maintains a copy of the training record(s); and
(c) The collector has been provided the name and telephone number
of the federal agency representative.
Subpart E--Collection Sites
Section 5.1 Where can a collection for a drug test take place?
(a) A collection site may be a permanent or temporary facility
located either at the work site or at a remote site.
(b) In the event that an agency-designated collection site is not
accessible and there is an immediate requirement to collect a hair
specimen, another site may be used for the collection, providing the
collection is performed by a trained hair specimen collector.
Section 5.2 What are the requirements for a collection site?
The facility used as a collection site must have the following:
(a) Provisions to ensure donor privacy during the collection (as
described in Section 8.1);
(b) A suitable and clean surface area that is not accessible to the
donor for handling the specimens and completing the required paperwork;
(c) A secure temporary storage area to maintain specimens until the
specimen is transferred to an HHS-certified laboratory;
(d) A restricted access area where only authorized personnel may be
present during the collection;
(e) A restricted access area for the storage of collection
supplies; and
(f) A restricted access area for the secure storage of records.
Section 5.3 Where must collection site records be stored?
Collection site records must be stored at a secure site designated
by the collector or the collector's employer.
Section 5.4 How long must collection site records be stored?
Collection site records (e.g., collector copies of the OMB-approved
Federal CCF) must be stored securely for a minimum of 2 years. The
collection site may convert hardcopy records to electronic records for
storage and discard the hardcopy records after 6 months.
Section 5.5 How does the collector ensure the security and integrity of
a specimen at the collection site?
(a) A collector must do the following to maintain the security and
integrity of a specimen:
(1) Not allow unauthorized personnel to enter the collection area
during the collection procedure;
(2) Perform only one donor collection at a time;
(3) Restrict access to collection supplies before, during, and
after collection;
(4) Ensure that only the collector and the donor are allowed to
handle the unsealed specimen;
(5) Ensure the chain of custody process is maintained and
documented throughout the entire collection, storage, and transport
procedures;
(6) Ensure that the Federal CCF is completed and distributed as
required; and
(7) Ensure that specimens transported to an HHS-certified
laboratory are sealed and placed in transport containers designed to
minimize the possibility of damage during shipment (e.g., specimen
boxes, padded mailers, or other suitable shipping container), and those
containers are securely sealed to eliminate the possibility of
undetected tampering.
(b) Couriers, express carriers, and postal service personnel are
not required to document chain of custody since specimens are sealed in
packages that would indicate tampering during transit to the HHS-
certified laboratory.
Section 5.6 What are the privacy requirements when collecting a hair
specimen?
The collector collects hair from the donor (as described in Section
8.5). The donor must be allowed privacy while the collector obtains the
hair specimen. Collections must be performed at a site that provides
reasonable privacy (as described in Section 8.1).
Subpart F--Federal Drug Testing Custody and Control Form
Section 6.1 What federal form is used to document custody and control?
The OMB-approved Federal CCF must be used to document custody and
control of each specimen at the collection site.
Section 6.2 What happens if the correct OMB-approved Federal CCF is not
available or is not used?
(a) The use of a non-federal CCF or an expired Federal CCF is not,
by itself, a reason for the HHS-certified laboratory to automatically
reject the specimen for testing or for the MRO to cancel the test.
(b) If the collector does not use the correct OMB-approved Federal
CCF, the collector must document that it is a federal agency specimen
collection and provide the reason that the incorrect form was used.
Based on the information provided by the collector, the HHS-certified
laboratory must handle and test the specimen as a federal agency
specimen.
(c) If the HHS-certified laboratory or MRO discovers that the
collector used an incorrect form, the laboratory or MRO must obtain a
memorandum for the record from the collector describing the reason the
incorrect form was used. If a memorandum for the record cannot be
obtained, the laboratory reports a rejected for testing result to the
MRO and the MRO cancels the test. The HHS-certified laboratory must
wait at least 5 business days while attempting to obtain the memorandum
before reporting a rejected for testing result to the MRO.
Subpart G--Hair Specimen Collection Materials
Section 7.1 What is used to collect a hair specimen?
Collection materials include a means (i.e., single-use or reusable
scissors) to cut the hair, individually packaged isopropyl alcohol wipe
(i.e., to clean reusable scissors), two specimen guides (items that
hold the hair specimen as positioned by the collector), and two
sealable collection containers (e.g., envelopes) labelled A for the
primary (A) and B for the split (B) specimens.
Section 7.2 What are the requirements for hair collection materials?
(a) The specimen guides and the collection containers must not
substantially affect the composition of drugs and/or drug metabolites
in the hair specimen.
(b) All collection items (e.g., scissors, clip) that come into
contact with the hair must be single-use items or must be cleaned
before each use, as described in section 8.4.
(c) The specimen guides and containers must maintain the integrity
of the specimen during storage and transport so that the specimen
contained therein can be tested in an HHS-certified laboratory for the
[[Page 56135]]
presence of drugs and/or their metabolites.
(d) The specimen guides and containers must be sufficiently
transparent to enable an assessment of specimen appearance and
identification of abnormal physical characteristics without opening the
container.
Section 7.3 What are the minimum performance requirements for hair
collection materials?
(a) The specimen guides must be capable of holding the hair
specimen as positioned by the collector, and have an indication of the
orientation (i.e., root or distal end) of the hair specimen collected.
(b) The specimen guides or containers must have graduated markings
or guides for collectors to verify the minimum width and length of hair
that would equate to 100 mg of hair or 50 mg of hair in each container
labeled A and B.
Subpart H--Hair Specimen Collection Procedure
Section 8.1 What privacy must the donor be given when providing a hair
specimen?
The following privacy requirements apply when a donor is providing
a hair specimen:
(a) Only authorized personnel and the donor may be present in the
restricted access area where the collection takes place.
(b) The collector is not required to be the same gender as the
donor.
Section 8.2 What must the collector ensure at the collection site
before starting a hair specimen collection?
The collector must take all reasonable steps to prevent the
adulteration or substitution of a hair specimen at the collection site.
Section 8.3 What are the preliminary steps in the hair specimen
collection procedure?
The collector must take the following steps before beginning a hair
specimen collection:
(a) If a donor fails to arrive at the collection site at the
assigned time, the collector must follow the federal agency policy or
contact the federal agency representative to obtain guidance on action
to be taken.
(b) When the donor arrives at the collection site, the collector
should begin the collection procedure without undue delay. For example,
the collection should not be delayed because an authorized employer or
employer representative is late in arriving.
(c) The collector requests the donor to present photo
identification (e.g., driver's license; employee badge issued by the
employer; an alternative photo identification issued by a federal,
state, or local government agency). If the donor does not have proper
photo identification, the collector shall contact the supervisor of the
donor or the federal agency representative who can positively identify
the donor. If the donor's identity cannot be established, the collector
must not proceed with the collection.
(d) The collector asks the donor to remove any unnecessary outer
garments such as a coat or jacket and any hat or hood.
(e) If, at any point in the collection, the collector sees any item
that appears to have been brought by the donor to the collection site
with the intent to adulterate or substitute the specimen, this is
considered a refusal to test. The collector must stop the collection
and report the refusal to test as described in Section 8.9.
(f) If, at any point in the collection, the collector sees any
evidence that the donor has lice or similar infestation in his or her
hair, the collector immediately stops the collection procedure. The
collector records the reason for not collecting a hair specimen on the
Federal CCF, contacts the federal agency's designated representative
for authorization to collect an alternate specimen, and assuming proper
authorization is provided, begins the collection procedure for the
alternate specimen (see Section 8.7) in accordance with the Mandatory
Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs using the
alternate specimen. The collector sends the appropriate copies of the
Federal CCF used for the hair specimen to the MRO and to the federal
agency's designated representative. The federal agency may choose to
provide the collection site with a standard protocol to follow in lieu
of requiring the collector to contact the agency's designated
representative for authorization in each case.
(g) The collector must provide identification (e.g., employee
badge, employee list) if requested by the donor.
(h) The collector explains the basic collection procedure to the
donor.
(i) The collector informs the donor that the instructions for
completing the Federal Custody and Control Form are located on the
Federal CCF (e.g., on the back of Copy 5 or on a separate page) or are
available upon request.
(j) The collector answers any reasonable and appropriate questions
the donor may have regarding the collection procedure.
Section 8.4 What steps does the collector take in the collection
procedure before the donor provides a hair specimen?
(a) At the beginning of the collection, the collector must put on
single-use gloves that are clean and unused. The collector must remove
the gloves from the package in the presence of the donor.
(b) The collector will provide or the donor may select specimen
collection materials that are clean, unused, and wrapped/sealed in
original packaging. The specimen collection materials will be opened in
view of the donor. Specimen collection materials must be single-use,
with the exception of scissors and/or clips which may be either single-
use or reusable (as described in item 2 below).
(1) Both the donor and the collector must keep the unwrapped
collection materials in view at all times until the container
containing the donor's hair specimen has been sealed and labeled.
(2) Scissors and/or clips may be reused provided that the collector
cleans such items in the presence of the donor with an isopropyl
alcohol wipe prior to use in the hair collection. If single-use items
are used, the collector is not required to clean the item before use
assuming such use is the first use of the item.
(c) The collector reviews with the donor the procedures required
for hair specimen collection as stated in the instructions for the
specimen collection kit.
(d) The collector asks the donor whether they have false hair
(i.e., artificial or natural hair that is not their own such as a wig,
weave, or extensions). If the donor admits the presence of false hair
or the collector identifies false hair after the donor denies having
false hair, this does not constitute a refusal to test. If the
collector can collect a sufficient amount of the donor's own hair, the
collector proceeds with the collection.
(e) If the collector is unable to collect the donor's hair, the
collector immediately stops the collection procedure. The collector
records the reason for not collecting a hair specimen on the Federal
CCF, contacts the federal agency's designated representative for
authorization to collect the alternate specimen, and assuming proper
authorization is provided, begins the collection procedure for the
alternate specimen (see Section 8.7) in accordance with the Mandatory
Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs using the
alternate specimen. The collector sends the
[[Page 56136]]
appropriate copies of the Federal CCF used for the hair specimen to the
MRO and to the federal agency's designated representative. The federal
agency may choose to provide the collection site with a standard
protocol to follow in lieu of requiring the collector to contact the
agency's designated representative for authorization in each case.
(f) The collector notes any unusual behavior or appearance of the
donor on the Federal CCF. If the collector detects any conduct that
clearly indicates an attempt to tamper with a specimen, the collector
must report a refusal to test in accordance with Section 8.9.
Section 8.5 What steps does the collector take during and after the
hair specimen collection procedure?
Integrity and Identity of the Specimen. The collector must take the
following steps during and after the donor provides the hair specimen:
(a) The collector shall be present and maintain visual contact with
the donor during the procedures outlined in this section.
(b) The collector cuts a portion of the donor's hair that is
approximately one-half (0.5) inches wide and at least one (1.0) inch
long on the crown (i.e., posterior vertex) of the head and as close to
the scalp as possible.
(1) The collector must ensure that at least 100 mg of hair is
collected for testing.
(2) If the donor's hair is sparse or is short (i.e., between one-
half and one inch long), the collector may collect hair from multiple
sites on the posterior vertex and back of the head, avoiding the front
and side regions.
(3) If the donor's hair is less than one-half inch long or if the
collector cannot collect at least 100 mg from the posterior vertex or
back of the head, the collector stops the collection and takes actions
described in Section 8.6.
(c) The collector subdivides the hair specimen into two
approximately equal specimens (A and B), and places specimen A in the
first specimen guide and specimen B in the second specimen guide. If
possible, the collector aligns the hairs with the root end identified
as indicated on the specimen guide. For short hair (between one-half
and one inch long), the collector is not required to identify the root
end. The collector secures the hair in each specimen guide (e.g., folds
the guide).
(d) If the donor fails to remain present through the completion of
the collection, fails to follow the instructions for the collection,
refuses to allow the collector to collect sufficient hair as required
in step (b) above for reasons other than those described in Section
2.1, or refuses to provide an alternate specimen when directed to do
so, the collector stops the collection and reports the refusal to test
in accordance with Section 8.9.
(e) If the federal agency requires collection of an alternate
specimen at the same time as the hair collection, the collector should
collect the hair specimen first, and then collect the other authorized
specimen (e.g., urine or oral fluid) using the applicable collection
procedures described in the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace
Drug Testing Programs using the alternate specimen.
(i) The collector must record a comment on the Federal CCF for each
specimen with sufficient information to link the two specimens
(including the unique specimen identification number of the associated
specimen).
(ii) The collector must also record a comment on the Federal CCF
for the alternate specimen noting that the laboratory is to hold the
specimen for testing pending the MRO's request for testing.
(iii) The collector must forward the hair specimen to an HHS-
certified hair testing laboratory. The collector forwards the alternate
specimen, if one is authorized to be collected at the same time as the
hair specimen, to a laboratory that is certified by HHS for that
specimen type. The laboratory will accession and store the alternate
specimen under appropriate storage conditions in the event that the MRO
requests testing as described in Section 13.5.
Section 8.6 What procedure is used when the donor is unable to provide
a hair specimen?
If the donor is unable to provide a hair specimen (i.e., as
described in sections 2.1, 8.3, and 8.4), the collector records the
reason for not collecting a hair specimen on the Federal CCF, contacts
the federal agency's designated representative for authorization to
collect an alternate specimen, and assuming proper authorization is
provided, begins the collection procedure for the alternate specimen
authorized by the federal agency (see Section 8.7) in accordance with
the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs
using the alternate specimen. The collector sends the appropriate
copies of the Federal CCF used for the hair specimen to the MRO and to
the federal agency's designated representative. The federal agency may
choose to provide the collection site with a standard protocol to
follow in lieu of requiring the collector to contact the agency's
designated representative for authorization to collect an alternate
specimen in each case.
Section 8.7 If the donor is unable to provide a hair specimen, may
another specimen type be collected for testing?
Yes. A federal agency that elects to implement hair testing is
required to authorize collections of one or more alternate specimen
types authorized by Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug
Testing Programs.
Section 8.8 How does the collector prepare the hair specimens?
(a) All federal agency collections are to be split specimen
collections.
(b) After placing the A and B hair specimens (i.e., in the specimen
guides) into separate envelopes, in the presence of the donor, the
collector places a tamper-evident label/seal from the Federal CCF on
each envelope. The collector records the date of the collection on the
tamper-evident labels/seals.
(c) The collector instructs the donor to initial the tamper-evident
labels/seals on each specimen envelope. If the donor refuses to initial
the labels/seals, the collector notes the refusal on the Federal CCF
and continues with the collection process.
(d) The collector must ensure that all the information required on
the Federal CCF is provided.
(e) The collector asks the donor to read and sign a statement on
the Federal CCF certifying that the specimens identified were collected
from him or her. If the donor refuses to sign the certification
statement, the collector notes the refusal on the Federal CCF and
continues with the collection process.
(f) The collector signs and prints his or her name on the Federal
CCF, completes the Federal CCF, and distributes the copies of the
Federal CCF as required.
(g) The collector seals the specimens (A and B) in a package and,
within 24 hours or during the next business day, sends them to the HHS-
certified laboratory that will be testing the primary (A) hair
specimen.
(h) If the specimen and Federal CCF are not immediately transported
to an HHS-certified laboratory, they must remain under direct control
of the collector or be appropriately secured under proper specimen
storage conditions until transported.
Section 8.9 How does the collector report a donor's refusal to test?
If there is a refusal to test as defined in Section 1.7, the
collector stops the collection, discards any hair specimen
[[Page 56137]]
collected and reports the refusal to test by:
(a) Notifying the federal agency by means (e.g., telephone, email,
or secure fax) that ensures that the notification is immediately
received,
(b) Documenting the refusal to test including the reason on the
Federal CCF. In the event that a donor is unable to provide a
sufficient amount of hair for faith-based or medical reasons, or due to
an insufficient amount or length of hair, the collector must specify
the circumstances, and
(c) Sending all copies of the Federal CCF to the federal agency's
designated representative.
Section 8.10 What are a federal agency's responsibilities for a
collection site?
(a) A federal agency must ensure that collectors and collection
sites satisfy all requirements in subparts D, E, F, G, and H.
(b) A federal agency (or only one federal agency when several
agencies are using the same collection site) must inspect 5 percent or
up to a maximum of 50 collection sites each year, selected randomly
from those sites used to collect agency specimens (e.g., virtual,
onsite, or self-evaluation).
(c) A federal agency must investigate reported collection site
deficiencies (e.g., specimens reported ``rejected for testing'' by an
HHS-certified laboratory) and take appropriate action which may include
a collection site self-assessment (i.e., using the Collection Site
Checklist for the Collection of Hair Specimens for Federal Agency
Workplace Drug Testing Programs) or an inspection of the collection
site. The inspections of these additional collection sites may be
included in the 5 percent or maximum of 50 collection sites inspected
annually.
Subpart I--HHS Certification of Laboratories
Section 9.1 Who has the authority to certify laboratories to test hair
specimens for federal agencies?
(a) The Secretary has broad discretion to take appropriate action
to ensure the full reliability and accuracy of drug testing and
reporting, to resolve problems related to drug testing, and to enforce
all standards set forth in these Guidelines. The Secretary has the
authority to issue directives to any HHS-certified laboratory,
including suspending the use of certain analytical procedures when
necessary to protect the integrity of the testing process; ordering any
HHS-certified laboratory to undertake corrective actions to respond to
material deficiencies identified by an inspection or through
performance testing; ordering any HHS-certified laboratory to send
specimens or specimen aliquots to another HHS-certified laboratory for
retesting when necessary to ensure the accuracy of testing under these
Guidelines; ordering the review of results for specimens tested under
the Guidelines for private sector clients to the extent necessary to
ensure the full reliability of drug testing for federal agencies; and
ordering any other action necessary to address deficiencies in drug
testing, analysis, specimen collection, chain of custody, reporting of
results, or any other aspect of the certification program.
(b) A laboratory is prohibited from stating or implying that it is
certified by HHS under these Guidelines to test hair specimens for
federal agencies unless it holds such certification.
Section 9.2 What is the process for a laboratory to become HHS-
certified?
(a) A laboratory seeking HHS certification must:
(1) Submit a completed OMB-approved application form (i.e., the
applicant laboratory provides detailed information on both the
administrative and analytical procedures to be used for federally
regulated specimens);
(2) Have its application reviewed as complete and accepted by HHS;
(3) Successfully complete the PT challenges in 3 consecutive sets
of initial PT samples;
(4) Satisfy all the requirements for an initial inspection; and
(5) Receive notification of certification from the Secretary before
testing specimens for federal agencies.
Section 9.3 What is the process for a laboratory to maintain HHS
certification?
(a) To maintain HHS certification, a laboratory must:
(1) Successfully participate in both the maintenance PT and
inspection programs (i.e., successfully test the required quarterly
sets of maintenance PT samples, undergo an inspection 3 months after
being certified, and undergo maintenance inspections at a minimum of
every 6 months thereafter);
(2) Respond in an appropriate, timely, and complete manner to
required corrective action requests if deficiencies are identified in
the maintenance PT performance, during the inspections, operations, or
reporting; and
(3) Satisfactorily complete corrective remedial actions, and
undergo special inspection and special PT sets to maintain or restore
certification when material deficiencies occur in either the PT
program, inspection program, or in operations and reporting.
Section 9.4 What is the process when a laboratory does not maintain its
HHS certification?
(a) A laboratory that does not maintain its HHS certification must:
(1) Stop testing federally regulated specimens;
(2) Ensure the security of federally regulated specimens and
records throughout the required storage period described in Sections
11.20, 11.21, and 14.7;
(3) Ensure access to federally regulated specimens and records in
accordance with Sections 11.23 and 11.24 and Subpart P; and
(4) Follow the HHS suspension and revocation procedures when
imposed by the Secretary, follow the HHS procedures in Subpart P that
will be used for all actions associated with the suspension and/or
revocation of HHS certification.
Section 9.5 What are the qualitative and quantitative specifications of
performance testing (PT) samples?
(a) PT samples used to evaluate drug tests will be prepared using
the following specifications:
(1) PT samples may contain one or more of the drugs and drug
metabolites in the drug classes listed in Section 3.4. The PT samples
must satisfy one of the following parameters:
(i) The concentration of a drug or metabolite will be at least 20
percent above the initial test cutoff concentration for the drug or
drug metabolite;
(ii) The concentration of a drug or metabolite may be as low as 40
percent of the confirmatory test cutoff concentration when the PT
sample is designated as a retest sample; or
(iii) The concentration of drug or metabolite may differ from
9.5(a)(1)(i) and 9.5(a)(1)(ii) for a special purpose.
(2) A PT sample may contain an interfering substance or other
substances for special purposes.
(3) A PT sample may be prepared in various ways (e.g., using drug
user hair, hair externally contaminated with drug analytes, hair
subjected to cosmetic treatments) to challenge the laboratory's
decontamination and test procedures.
(4) A negative PT sample will not contain a measurable amount of a
target analyte.
(b) The laboratory must (to the greatest extent possible) handle,
test, and report a PT sample in a manner identical to that used for a
donor specimen, unless otherwise specified.
[[Page 56138]]
Section 9.6 What are the PT requirements for an applicant laboratory
that seeks to perform hair testing?
(a) An applicant laboratory that seeks certification under these
Guidelines to perform hair testing must satisfy the following criteria
on three consecutive sets of PT samples:
(1) Have no false positive results;
(2) Correctly identify, confirm, and report at least 90 percent of
the total drug challenges over the three sets of PT samples;
(3) Correctly identify at least 80 percent of the drug challenges
for each initial drug test over the three sets of PT samples;
(4) For the confirmatory drug tests, correctly determine the
concentrations [i.e., no more than 20 percent or 2 standard deviations (whichever is larger) from the appropriate
reference or peer group means] for at least 80 percent of the total
drug challenges over the three sets of PT samples;
(5) For the confirmatory drug tests, must not obtain any drug
concentration that differs by more than 50 percent from the
appropriate reference or peer group mean;
(6) For each confirmatory drug test, correctly identify and
determine the concentrations [i.e., no more than 20 percent
or 2 standard deviations (whichever is larger) from the
appropriate reference or peer group means] for at least 50 percent of
the drug challenges for an individual drug over the three sets of PT
samples;
(7) For each confirmatory drug test, correctly identify a sample
that has been contaminated with one or more drugs;
(b) Failure to satisfy these requirements will result in the denial
of the laboratory's application for HHS certification to perform hair
testing.
Section 9.7 What are the PT requirements for an HHS-certified hair
laboratory?
(a) A laboratory certified under these Guidelines to perform hair
testing must satisfy the following criteria on the maintenance PT
samples:
(1) Have no false positive results;
(2) Correctly identify, confirm, and report at least 90 percent of
the total drug challenges over two consecutive PT cycles;
(3) Correctly identify at least 80 percent of the drug challenges
for each initial drug test over two consecutive PT cycles;
(4) For the confirmatory drug tests, correctly determine that the
concentrations for at least 80 percent of the total drug challenges are
no more than 20 percent or 2 standard
deviations (whichever is larger) from the appropriate reference or peer
group means over two consecutive PT cycles;
(5) For the confirmatory drug tests, must not obtain any drug
concentration that differs by more than 50 percent from the
appropriate reference or peer group means;
(6) For each confirmatory drug test, correctly identify and
determine that the concentrations for at least 50 percent of the drug
challenges for an individual drug are no more than 20
percent or 2 standard deviations (whichever is larger) from
the appropriate reference or peer group means over two consecutive PT
cycles;
(7) For each confirmatory drug test, correctly identify a sample
contaminated with one or more drugs;
(b) Failure to participate in all PT cycles or to satisfy these
requirements may result in suspension or revocation of an HHS-certified
laboratory's certification.
Section 9.8 What are the inspection requirements for an applicant
laboratory?
(a) An applicant laboratory is inspected by a team of two
inspectors.
(b) Each inspector conducts an independent review and evaluation of
all aspects of the laboratory's testing procedures and facilities using
an inspection checklist.
Section 9.9 What are the maintenance inspection requirements for an
HHS-certified laboratory?
(a) An HHS-certified laboratory must undergo an inspection 3 months
after becoming certified and at least every 6 months thereafter.
(b) An HHS-certified laboratory is inspected by two or more
inspectors. The number of inspectors is determined according to the
number of specimens to be reviewed. Additional information regarding
inspections is available from SAMHSA.
(c) Inspectors conduct an independent evaluation and review of the
HHS-certified laboratory's procedures, records, and facilities using
guidance provided by the Secretary.
(d) To remain certified, an HHS-certified laboratory must continue
to satisfy the minimum requirements as stated in these Guidelines.
Section 9.10 Who can inspect an HHS-certified laboratory and when may
the inspection be conducted?
(a) An individual may be selected as an inspector for the Secretary
if they satisfy the following criteria:
(1) Has experience and an educational background similar to that
required for either a responsible person or a certifying scientist for
an HHS-certified laboratory as described in Subpart K;
(2) Has read and thoroughly understands the policies and
requirements contained in these Guidelines and in other guidance
consistent with these Guidelines provided by the Secretary;
(3) Submits a resume and documentation of qualifications to HHS;
(4) Attends approved training; and
(5) Performs acceptably as an inspector on an inspection of an HHS-
certified laboratory.
(b) The Secretary or a federal agency may conduct an inspection at
any time.
Section 9.11 What happens if an applicant laboratory does not satisfy
the minimum requirements for either the PT program or the inspection
program?
If an applicant laboratory fails to satisfy the requirements
established for the initial certification process, the laboratory must
start the certification process from the beginning.
Section 9.12 What happens if an HHS-certified laboratory does not
satisfy the minimum requirements for either the PT program or the
inspection program?
(a) If an HHS-certified laboratory fails to satisfy the minimum
requirements for certification, the laboratory is given a period of
time (e.g., 5 or 30 working days depending on the nature of the
deficiency) to provide any explanation for its performance and evidence
that all deficiencies have been corrected.
(b) A laboratory's HHS certification may be revoked, suspended, or
no further action taken depending on the seriousness of the
deficiencies and whether there is evidence that the deficiencies have
been corrected and that current performance meets the requirements for
certification.
(c) An HHS-certified laboratory may be required to undergo a
special inspection or to test additional PT samples to address
deficiencies.
(d) If an HHS-certified laboratory's certification is revoked or
suspended in accordance with the process described in Subpart P, the
laboratory is not permitted to test federally regulated specimens until
the suspension is lifted or the laboratory has successfully completed
the certification requirements as a new applicant laboratory.
Section 9.13 What factors are considered in determining whether
revocation of a laboratory's HHS certification is necessary?
(a) The Secretary shall revoke certification of an HHS-certified
[[Page 56139]]
laboratory in accordance with these Guidelines if the Secretary
determines that revocation is necessary to ensure fully reliable and
accurate drug test results and reports.
(b) The Secretary shall consider the following factors in
determining whether revocation is necessary:
(1) Unsatisfactory performance in analyzing and reporting the
results of drug tests (e.g., an HHS-certified laboratory reporting a
false positive result for an employee's drug test);
(2) Unsatisfactory participation in performance testing or
inspections;
(3) A material violation of a certification standard, contract
term, or other condition imposed on the HHS-certified laboratory by a
federal agency using the laboratory's services;
(4) Conviction for any criminal offense committed as an incident to
operation of the HHS-certified laboratory; or
(5) Any other cause that materially affects the ability of the HHS-
certified laboratory to ensure fully reliable and accurate drug test
results and reports.
(c) The period and terms of revocation shall be determined by the
Secretary and shall depend upon the facts and circumstances of the
revocation and the need to ensure accurate and reliable drug testing.
Section 9.14 What factors are considered in determining whether to
suspend a laboratory's HHS certification?
(a) The Secretary may immediately suspend (either partially or
fully) a laboratory's HHS certification to conduct drug testing for
federal agencies if the Secretary has reason to believe that revocation
may be required and that immediate action is necessary to protect the
interests of the United States and its employees.
(b) The Secretary shall determine the period and terms of
suspension based upon the facts and circumstances of the suspension and
the need to ensure accurate and reliable drug testing.
Section 9.15 How does the Secretary notify an HHS-certified laboratory
that action is being taken against the laboratory?
(a) When a laboratory's HHS certification is suspended or the
Secretary seeks to revoke HHS certification, the Secretary shall
immediately serve the HHS-certified laboratory with written notice of
the suspension or proposed revocation by fax, mail, personal service,
or registered or certified mail, return receipt requested. This notice
shall state the following:
(1) The reasons for the suspension or proposed revocation;
(2) The terms of the suspension or proposed revocation; and
(3) The period of suspension or proposed revocation.
(b) The written notice shall state that the laboratory will be
afforded an opportunity for an informal review of the suspension or
proposed revocation if it so requests in writing within 30 days of the
date the laboratory received the notice, or if expedited review is
requested, within 3 days of the date the laboratory received the
notice. Subpart P contains detailed procedures to be followed for an
informal review of the suspension or proposed revocation.
(c) A suspension must be effective immediately. A proposed
revocation must be effective 30 days after written notice is given or,
if review is requested, upon the reviewing official's decision to
uphold the proposed revocation. If the reviewing official decides not
to uphold the suspension or proposed revocation, the suspension must
terminate immediately and any proposed revocation shall not take
effect.
(d) The Secretary will publish in the Federal Register the name,
address, and telephone number of any HHS-certified laboratory that has
its certification revoked or suspended under Section 9.13 or Section
9.14, respectively, and the name of any HHS-certified laboratory that
has its suspension lifted. The Secretary shall provide to any member of
the public upon request the written notice provided to a laboratory
that has its HHS certification suspended or revoked, as well as the
reviewing official's written decision which upholds or denies the
suspension or proposed revocation under the procedures of Subpart P.
Section 9.16 May a laboratory that had its HHS certification revoked be
recertified to test federal agency specimens?
Following revocation, a laboratory may apply for recertification.
Unless otherwise provided by the Secretary in the notice of revocation
under Section 9.15 or the reviewing official's decision under Section
16.9(e) or 16.14(a), a laboratory which has had its certification
revoked may reapply for HHS certification as an applicant laboratory.
Section 9.17 Where is the list of HHS-certified laboratories published?
(a) The list of HHS-certified laboratories is published monthly in
the Federal Register. This notice is also available on the internet at
https://www.samhsa.gov/workplace.
(b) An applicant laboratory is not included on the list.
Subpart J--Blind Samples Submitted by an Agency
Section 10.1 What are the requirements for federal agencies to submit
blind samples to HHS-certified laboratories?
(a) Each federal agency is required to submit blind samples for its
workplace drug testing program. The collector must send the blind
samples to the HHS-certified laboratory that the collector sends
employee specimens.
(b) Each federal agency must submit at least 3 percent blind
samples along with its donor specimens based on the projected total
number of donor specimens collected per year (up to a maximum of 400
blind samples). Every effort should be made to ensure that blind
samples are submitted quarterly.
(c) Approximately 75 percent of the blind samples submitted each
year by an agency must be negative and 25 percent must be positive for
one or more drugs.
Section 10.2 What are the requirements for blind samples?
(a) Drug positive blind samples must be validated by the supplier
using appropriate initial and confirmatory tests.
(1) Drug positive blind samples must contain one or more of the
drugs or metabolites listed in Section 3.4.
(2) Drug positive blind samples must contain concentrations of
drugs at least 1.5 times the initial drug test cutoff concentration.
(b) Drug negative blind samples (i.e., certified to contain no
drugs) must be validated by the supplier as negative using appropriate
initial and confirmatory tests.
(c) The supplier must provide information on the blind samples'
content, validation, expected results, and stability to the collection
site/collector sending the blind samples to the laboratory, and must
provide the information upon request to the MRO, the federal agency for
which the blind sample was submitted, or the Secretary.
Section 10.3 How is a blind sample submitted to an HHS-certified
laboratory?
(a) A blind sample must be submitted as a split specimen (specimens
A and B) with the current Federal CCF that the HHS-certified laboratory
uses for donor specimens. The collector provides the required
information to ensure that the Federal CCF has been properly completed
and provides fictitious
[[Page 56140]]
initials on the specimen label/seal. The collector must indicate that
the specimen is a blind sample on the MRO copy where a donor would
normally provide a signature.
(b) A collector should attempt to distribute the required number of
blind samples randomly with donor specimens rather than submitting the
full complement of blind samples as a single group.
Section 10.4 What happens if an inconsistent result is reported for a
blind sample?
If an HHS-certified laboratory reports a result for a blind sample
that is inconsistent with the expected result (e.g., a laboratory
reports a negative result for a blind sample that was supposed to be
positive, a laboratory reports a positive result for a blind sample
that was supposed to be negative):
(a) The MRO must contact the laboratory and attempt to determine if
the laboratory made an error during the testing or reporting of the
sample;
(b) The MRO must contact the blind sample supplier and attempt to
determine if the supplier made an error during the preparation or
transfer of the sample;
(c) The MRO must contact the collector and determine if the
collector made an error when preparing the blind sample for transfer to
the HHS-certified laboratory;
(d) If there is no obvious reason for the inconsistent result, the
MRO must notify both the federal agency for which the blind sample was
submitted and the Secretary; and
(e) The Secretary shall investigate the blind sample error. A
report of the Secretary's investigative findings and the corrective
action taken in response to identified deficiencies must be sent to the
federal agency. The Secretary shall ensure notification of the finding
as appropriate to other federal agencies and coordinate any necessary
actions to prevent the recurrence of the error.
Subpart K--Laboratory
Section 11.1 What must be included in the HHS-certified laboratory's
standard operating procedure manual?
(a) An HHS-certified laboratory must have a standard operating
procedure (SOP) manual that describes, in detail, all HHS-certified
laboratory operations. When followed, the SOP manual ensures that all
specimens are tested using the same procedures.
(b) The SOP manual must include at a minimum, but is not limited
to, a detailed description of the following:
(1) Chain of custody procedures;
(2) Accessioning;
(3) Security;
(4) Quality control/quality assurance programs;
(5) Analytical methods and procedures;
(6) Equipment and maintenance programs;
(7) Personnel training;
(8) Reporting procedures; and
(9) Computers, software, and laboratory information management
systems.
(c) All procedures in the SOP manual must be compliant with these
Guidelines and all guidance provided by the Secretary.
(d) A copy of all procedures that have been replaced or revised and
the dates on which the procedures were in effect must be maintained for
at least 2 years.
Section 11.2 What are the responsibilities of the responsible person
(RP)?
(a) Manage the day-to-day operations of the HHS-certified
laboratory even if another individual has overall responsibility for
alternate areas of a multi-specialty laboratory.
(b) Ensure that there are sufficient personnel with adequate
training and experience to supervise and conduct the work of the HHS-
certified laboratory. The RP must ensure the continued competency of
laboratory staff by documenting their in-service training, reviewing
their work performance, and verifying their skills.
(c) Maintain a complete and current SOP manual that is available to
all personnel of the HHS-certified laboratory and ensure that it is
followed. The SOP manual must be reviewed, signed, and dated by the
RP(s) when procedures are first placed into use and when changed or
when a new individual assumes responsibility for the management of the
HHS-certified laboratory. The SOP must be reviewed and documented by
the RP annually.
(d) Maintain a quality assurance program that ensures the proper
performance and reporting of all test results; verify and monitor
acceptable analytical performance for all controls and calibrators;
monitor quality control testing; and document the validity,
reliability, accuracy, precision, and performance characteristics of
each test and test system.
(e) Initiate and implement all remedial actions necessary to
maintain satisfactory operation and performance of the HHS-certified
laboratory in response to the following: Quality control systems not
within performance specifications; errors in result reporting or in
analysis of performance testing samples; and inspection deficiencies.
The RP must ensure that specimen results are not reported until all
corrective actions have been taken and that the results provided are
accurate and reliable.
Section 11.3 What scientific qualifications must the RP have?
The RP must have documented scientific qualifications in analytical
toxicology.
Minimum qualifications are:
(a) Certification or licensure as a laboratory director by the
state in forensic or clinical laboratory toxicology, a Ph.D. in one of
the natural sciences, or training and experience comparable to a Ph.D.
in one of the natural sciences with training and laboratory/research
experience in biology, chemistry, and pharmacology or toxicology;
(b) Experience in forensic toxicology with emphasis on the
collection and analysis of biological specimens for drugs of abuse;
(c) Experience in forensic applications of analytical toxicology
(e.g., publications, court testimony, conducting research on the
pharmacology and toxicology of drugs of abuse) or qualify as an expert
witness in forensic toxicology;
(d) Fulfillment of the RP responsibilities and qualifications, as
demonstrated by the HHS-certified laboratory's performance and verified
upon interview by HHS-trained inspectors during each on-site
inspection; and
(e) Qualify as a certifying scientist.
Section 11.4 What happens when the RP is absent or leaves an HHS-
certified laboratory?
(a) HHS-certified laboratories must have multiple RPs or one RP and
an alternate RP. If the RP(s) are concurrently absent, an alternate RP
must be present and qualified to fulfill the responsibilities of the
RP.
(1) If an HHS-certified laboratory is without the RP and alternate
RP for 14 calendar days or less (e.g., temporary absence due to
vacation, illness, or business trip), the HHS-certified laboratory may
continue operations and testing of federal agency specimens under the
direction of a certifying scientist.
(2) The Secretary, in accordance with these Guidelines, will
suspend a laboratory's HHS certification for all specimens if the
laboratory does not have an RP or alternate RP for a period of more
than 14 calendar days. The suspension will be lifted upon the
[[Page 56141]]
Secretary's approval of a new permanent RP or alternate RP.
(b) If the RP leaves an HHS-certified laboratory:
(1) The HHS-certified laboratory may maintain certification and
continue testing federally regulated specimens under the direction of
an alternate RP for a period of up to 180 days while seeking to hire
and receive the Secretary's approval of the RP's replacement.
(2) The Secretary, in accordance with these Guidelines, will
suspend a laboratory's HHS certification for all federally regulated
specimens if the laboratory does not have a permanent RP within 180
days. The suspension will be lifted upon the Secretary's approval of
the new permanent RP.
(c) To nominate an individual as an RP or alternate RP, the HHS-
certified laboratory must submit the following documents to the
Secretary: The candidate's current resume or curriculum vitae, copies
of diplomas and licensures, a training plan (not to exceed 90 days) to
transition the candidate into the position, an itemized comparison of
the candidate's qualifications to the minimum RP qualifications
described in the Guidelines, and have official academic transcript(s)
submitted from the candidate's institution(s) of higher learning. The
candidate must be found qualified during an on-site inspection of the
HHS-certified laboratory.
(d) The HHS-certified laboratory must fulfill additional inspection
and PT criteria as required prior to conducting federally regulated
testing under a new RP.
Section 11.5 What qualifications must an individual have to certify a
result reported by an HHS-certified laboratory?
(a) A certifying scientist must have:
(1) At least a bachelor's degree in the chemical or biological
sciences or medical technology, or equivalent;
(2) Training and experience in the analytical methods and forensic
procedures used by the HHS-certified laboratory relevant to the results
that the individual certifies; and
(3) Training and experience in reviewing and reporting forensic
test results and maintaining chain of custody, and an understanding of
appropriate remedial actions in response to problems that may arise.
(b) A certifying technician must have:
(1) Training and experience in the analytical methods and forensic
procedures used by the HHS-certified laboratory relevant to the results
that the individual certifies; and
(2) Training and experience in reviewing and reporting forensic
test results and maintaining chain of custody, and an understanding of
appropriate remedial actions in response to problems that may arise.
Section 11.6 What qualifications and training must other personnel of
an HHS-certified laboratory have?
(a) All HHS-certified laboratory staff (e.g., technicians,
administrative staff) must have the appropriate training and skills for
the tasks they perform.
(b) Each individual working in an HHS-certified laboratory must be
properly trained (i.e., receive training in each area of work that the
individual will be performing, including training in forensic
procedures related to their job duties) before they are permitted to
work independently with federally regulated specimens. All training
must be documented.
Section 11.7 What security measures must an HHS-certified laboratory
maintain?
(a) An HHS-certified laboratory must control access to the drug
testing facility, specimens, aliquots, and records.
(b) Authorized visitors must be escorted at all times, except for
individuals conducting inspections (i.e., for the Department, a federal
agency, a state, or other accrediting agency) or emergency personnel
(e.g., firefighters and medical rescue teams).
(c) An HHS-certified laboratory must maintain records documenting
the identity of the visitor and escort, date, time of entry and exit,
and purpose for access to the secured area.
Section 11.8 What are the laboratory chain of custody requirements for
specimens and aliquots?
(a) HHS-certified laboratories must use chain of custody procedures
(internal and external) to maintain control and accountability of
specimens from the time of receipt at the laboratory through completion
of testing, reporting of results, during storage, and continuing until
final disposition of the specimens.
(b) HHS-certified laboratories must use chain of custody procedures
to document the handling and transfer of aliquots throughout the
testing process until final disposal.
(c) The chain of custody must be documented using either paper copy
or electronic procedures.
(d) Each individual who handles a specimen or aliquot must sign and
complete the appropriate entries on the chain of custody form when the
specimen or aliquot is handled or transferred, and every individual in
the chain must be identified.
(e) The date and purpose must be recorded on an appropriate chain
of custody form each time a specimen or aliquot is handled or
transferred.
Section 11.9 How must an HHS-certified laboratory process an alternate
specimen that was collected at the same time as a hair specimen?
When an alternate specimen is collected at the same time as a hair
specimen, the collector must forward the hair specimen to an HHS-
certified hair testing laboratory and forward the alternate specimen to
a laboratory that is certified by HHS for that specimen type. Section
8.5(e) requires the collector to record a comment on each Federal CCF
with sufficient information (including the associated specimen's unique
specimen identification number) to enable the laboratory to identify
that there is an associated hair specimen.
(a) When a laboratory receives a specimen that it is not certified
by HHS to test, the laboratory must contact the federal agency
representative to select a laboratory with the appropriate HHS
certification to test the specimen, and must forward the specimen to
the selected laboratory.
(b) The laboratory certified to test the alternate specimen must
accession and hold the specimen under the storage conditions specified
by the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs
for that specimen type. The laboratory does not test the alternate
specimen unless an MRO submits a signed request for testing.
(c) Upon receipt of a written MRO request for testing of the
alternate specimen, the laboratory tests and reports the specimen in
accordance with its standard operating procedures for that specimen
type.
Section 11.10 What amount of hair is tested?
The laboratory prepares an aliquot of the hair specimen of the
specified weight needed for the test. If the root end is identified,
the laboratory uses the first one inch of the hair from the root end.
Section 11.11 What are the requirements for an initial drug test?
(a) An initial drug test may be:
(1) An immunoassay or
(2) An alternate technology (e.g., spectrometry, spectroscopy).
(b) An HHS-certified laboratory must validate an initial drug test
before testing specimens.
[[Page 56142]]
(c) Initial drug tests must be accurate and reliable for the
testing of specimens when identifying drugs or their metabolites.
(d) An HHS-certified laboratory may conduct a second initial drug
test using a method with different specificity, to rule out cross-
reacting compounds. This second initial drug test must satisfy the
batch quality control requirements specified in Section 11.12.
Section 11.12 What must an HHS-certified laboratory do to validate an
initial drug test?
(a) An HHS-certified laboratory must demonstrate and document the
following for each initial drug test:
(1) The ability to differentiate negative specimens from those
requiring further testing;
(2) The performance of the test around the cutoff concentration,
using samples at several concentrations between 0 and 150 percent of
the cutoff concentration;
(3) The effective concentration range of the test (linearity);
(4) The potential for carryover;
(5) The potential for interfering substances; and
(6) The potential matrix effects if using an alternate technology.
(b) Each new lot of reagent must be verified prior to being placed
into service.
(c) Each initial drug test using an alternate technology must be
re-verified periodically or at least annually.
Section 11.13 What are the batch quality control requirements when
conducting an initial drug test?
(a) Each batch of specimens must contain the following controls:
(1) At least one control certified to contain no drug or drug
metabolite;
(2) At least one positive control with the drug or drug metabolite
targeted at a concentration 25 percent above the cutoff;
(3) At least one control with the drug or drug metabolite targeted
at a concentration 75 percent of the cutoff; and
(4) At least one control that appears as a donor specimen to the
analysts.
(b) Calibrators and controls must total at least 10 percent of the
aliquots analyzed in each batch.
Section 11.14 What are the requirements for a confirmatory drug test?
(a) The analytical method must use mass spectrometric
identification [e.g., gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS),
liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry (LC/MS), GC/MS/MS, LC/MS/MS] or
equivalent.
(b) A confirmatory drug test must be validated before it can be
used to test federally regulated specimens.
(c) Confirmatory drug tests must be accurate and reliable for the
testing of a hair specimen when identifying and quantifying drugs or
their metabolites.
(d) The laboratory must subject each confirmatory drug test
specimen to a validated and effective decontamination procedure prior
to testing.
Section 11.15 What must an HHS-certified laboratory do to validate a
confirmatory drug test?
(a) An HHS-certified laboratory must demonstrate and document the
following for each confirmatory drug test:
(1) The linear range of the analysis;
(2) The limit of detection;
(3) The limit of quantification;
(4) The accuracy and precision at the cutoff concentration;
(5) The accuracy (bias) and precision at 40 percent of the cutoff
concentration;
(6) The potential for interfering substances;
(7) The potential for carryover;
(8) The effectiveness of the decontamination procedure; and
(9) The potential matrix effects if using liquid chromatography
coupled with mass spectrometry.
(b) Each new lot of reagent must be verified prior to being placed
into service.
(c) HHS-certified laboratories must re-verify each confirmatory
drug test method periodically or at least annually.
Section 11.16 What are the batch quality control requirements when
conducting a confirmatory drug test?
(a) At a minimum, each batch of specimens must contain the
following calibrators and controls:
(1) A calibrator at the cutoff concentration;
(2) At least one control certified to contain no drug or drug
metabolite;
(3) At least one positive control with the drug or drug metabolite
targeted at 25 percent above the cutoff;
(4) At least one control targeted at or less than 40 percent of the
cutoff; and
(5) At least one control contaminated with drug analyte to monitor
the effectiveness of the decontamination procedure.
(b) Calibrators and controls must total at least 10 percent of the
aliquots analyzed in each batch.
Section 11.17 What are the analytical and quality control requirements
for conducting specimen validity tests?
An HHS-certified laboratory must perform specimen validity testing
to identify hair that has been damaged to the extent that the drug test
may be affected, and may perform other specimen validity tests in
accordance with Sections 3.1 and 3.5.
(a) Each invalid, adulterated, or substituted specimen validity
result must be based on an initial specimen validity test on one
aliquot and a confirmatory specimen validity test on a second aliquot;
(b) The HHS-certified laboratory must establish acceptance criteria
and analyze calibrators and controls as appropriate to verify and
document the validity of the test results; and
(c) Controls must be analyzed concurrently with specimens.
Section 11.18 What must an HHS-certified laboratory do to validate a
specimen validity test?
An HHS-certified laboratory must demonstrate and document for each
specimen validity test the appropriate performance characteristics of
the test, and must re-verify the test periodically, or at least
annually. Each new lot of reagent must be verified prior to being
placed into service.
Section 11.19 What are the requirements for an HHS-certified laboratory
to report a test result?
(a) Laboratories must report a test result to the agency's MRO
within an average of 5 working days after receipt of the specimen.
Reports must use the Federal CCF and/or an electronic report, as
described in items (l) and (m) below. Before any test result can be
reported, it must be certified by a certifying scientist or a
certifying technician (as appropriate).
(b) A primary (A) specimen is reported negative when each initial
drug test is negative or if the specimen is negative upon confirmatory
drug testing, and the specimen does not meet invalid criteria as
described in items (e)(1) through (e)(5) below.
(c) A primary (A) specimen is reported positive for a specific drug
or drug metabolite when both the initial drug test is positive and the
confirmatory drug test is positive in accordance with Section 3.4.
(d) For a specimen that has an invalid result for one of the
reasons stated in items (e)(1) or (e)(2) below, the HHS-certified
laboratory shall contact the MRO and both will decide if testing by
another HHS-certified laboratory would be useful in being able to
report a positive, adulterated, or substituted result. If no further
testing is necessary, the HHS-certified laboratory then reports the
invalid result to the MRO.
[[Page 56143]]
(e) A primary (A) hair specimen is reported as an invalid result
when:
(1) The color of the A and B specimens are clearly different (note:
A is tested);
(2) Interference occurs on the initial drug tests on two separate
aliquots (i.e., valid initial drug test results cannot be obtained);
(3) Interference with the confirmatory drug test occurs on at least
two separate aliquots of the specimen and the HHS-certified laboratory
is unable to identify the interfering substance;
(4) The hair is damaged to the extent that the drug test result may
be affected (i.e., based on at least two separate aliquots of the
specimen tested using a validated method to assess damage); or
(5) The laboratory obtains a positive confirmatory drug test result
and is unable to definitively remove external contamination from the
specimen using a validated decontamination procedure.
(f) An HHS-certified laboratory shall reject a primary (A) specimen
for testing when a fatal flaw occurs as described in Section 15.1 or
when a correctable flaw as described in Section 15.2 is not recovered.
The HHS-certified laboratory will indicate on the Federal CCF that the
specimen was rejected for testing and provide the reason for reporting
the rejected for testing result.
(g) An HHS-certified laboratory must report all positive,
adulterated, substituted, and invalid test results for a hair specimen,
with the exceptions noted below. For example, a specimen can be
positive for a drug and invalid because of interference on the
confirmatory test for a different drug analyte. The following
exceptions apply:
(1) When a specimen is positive and invalid because the hair is
damaged as described in item (e)(4) above, the laboratory does not
report the positive result.
(2) When a specimen is invalid because the laboratory cannot
definitively remove a drug present from external contamination as
described in item (e)(5) above, the laboratory does not report the
positive result for that drug. If the specimen is also positive for
another drug and the laboratory was able to remove external
contamination for that drug, the laboratory reports that positive
result in addition to the invalid result.
(h) An HHS-certified laboratory must report the confirmatory
concentration of each drug or drug metabolite reported for a positive
result.
(i) An HHS-certified laboratory must report numerical values of the
specimen validity test results that support an adulterated,
substituted, or invalid result (as appropriate).
(j) When the concentration of a drug or drug metabolite exceeds the
validated linear range of the confirmatory test, HHS-certified
laboratories may report to the MRO that the quantitative value exceeds
the linear range of the test or that the quantitative value is greater
than ``insert the actual value for the upper limit of the linear
range,'' or laboratories may report a quantitative value above the
upper limit of the linear range that was obtained by diluting an
aliquot of the specimen to achieve a result within the method's linear
range and multiplying the result by the appropriate dilution factor.
(k) HHS-certified laboratories may transmit test results to the MRO
by various electronic means (e.g., teleprinter, fax, or computer).
Transmissions of the reports must ensure confidentiality and the
results may not be reported verbally by telephone. Laboratories and
external service providers must ensure the confidentiality, integrity,
and availability of the data and limit access to any data transmission,
storage, and retrieval system.
(l) HHS-certified laboratories must fax, courier, mail, or
electronically transmit a legible image or copy of the completed
Federal CCF and/or forward a computer-generated electronic report. The
computer-generated report must contain sufficient information to ensure
that the test results can accurately represent the content of the
custody and control form that the MRO received from the collector. HHS-
certified laboratories must use the drug/metabolite names in Section
3.4 and/or the drug/metabolite abbreviations on the Federal CCF on
computer-generated electronic reports.
(m) For positive, adulterated, substituted, invalid, and rejected
specimens, laboratories must fax, courier, mail, or electronically
transmit a legible image or copy of the completed Federal CCF.
Section 11.20 How long must an HHS-certified laboratory retain
specimens?
(a) An HHS-certified laboratory must retain specimens that were
reported as positive, adulterated, or as an invalid result for a
minimum of 1 year.
(b) Retained hair specimens must be kept in secured storage at room
temperature and out of direct light, to ensure their availability for
retesting during an administrative or judicial proceeding.
(c) Alternate specimens (i.e., urine or oral fluid) must be kept in
appropriate long-term storage conditions, as specified by the Mandatory
Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs for that
specimen type.
(d) The laboratory must retain the alternate specimen for the same
period of time that the associated hair specimen is retained.
(e) Federal agencies may request that the HHS-certified laboratory
retain a specimen for an additional specified period of time and must
make that request within the 1-year period following the laboratory's
receipt of the specimen.
Section 11.21 How long must an HHS-certified laboratory retain records?
(a) An HHS-certified laboratory must retain all records generated
to support test results for at least 2 years. The laboratory may
convert hardcopy records to electronic records for storage and then
discard the hardcopy records after 6 months.
(b) A federal agency may request the HHS-certified laboratory to
maintain a documentation package (as described in Section 11.23) that
supports the chain of custody, testing, and reporting of a donor's
specimen that is under legal challenge by a donor. The federal agency's
request to the laboratory must be in writing and must specify the
period of time to maintain the documentation package.
(c) An HHS-certified laboratory may retain records other than those
included in the documentation package beyond the normal 2-year period
of time.
Section 11.22 What statistical summary reports must an HHS-certified
laboratory provide for hair testing?
(a) HHS-certified laboratories must provide to each federal agency
for which they perform testing a semiannual statistical summary report
that must be submitted by mail, fax, or email within 14 working days
after the end of the semiannual period. The summary report must not
include any personally identifiable information. A copy of the
semiannual statistical summary report will also be sent to the
Secretary or designated HHS representative. The semiannual statistical
report contains the following information:
(1) Reporting period (inclusive dates);
(2) HHS-certified laboratory name and address;
(3) Federal agency name;
(4) Number of specimen results reported;
(5) Number of specimens collected by reason for test;
(6) Number of specimens reported negative;
(7) Number of specimens rejected for testing because of a fatal
flaw;
[[Page 56144]]
(8) Number of specimens rejected for testing because of an
uncorrected flaw;
(9) Number of specimens tested positive by each initial drug test;
(10) Number of specimens reported positive;
(11) Number of specimens reported positive for each drug and drug
metabolite;
(12) Number of specimens reported adulterated;
(13) Number of specimens reported substituted; and
(14) Number of specimens reported as invalid result.
(b) An HHS-certified laboratory must make copies of an agency's
test results available when requested to do so by the Secretary or by
the federal agency for which the laboratory is performing drug-testing
services.
(c) An HHS-certified laboratory must ensure that a qualified
individual is available to testify in a proceeding against a federal
employee when the proceeding is based on a test result reported by the
laboratory.
Section 11.23 What HHS-certified laboratory information is available to
a federal agency?
(a) Following a federal agency's receipt of a positive,
adulterated, or substituted drug test report, the federal agency may
submit a written request for copies of the records relating to the drug
test results or a documentation package or any relevant certification,
review, or revocation of certification records.
(b) Standard documentation packages provided by an HHS-certified
laboratory must contain the following items:
(1) A cover sheet providing a brief description of the procedures
and tests performed on the donor's specimen;
(2) A table of contents that lists all documents and materials in
the package by page number;
(3) A copy of the Federal CCF with any attachments, internal chain
of custody records for the specimen, memoranda (if any) generated by
the HHS-certified laboratory, and a copy of the electronic report (if
any) generated by the HHS-certified laboratory;
(4) A brief description of the HHS-certified laboratory's initial
drug (and specimen validity, if applicable) testing procedures,
instrumentation, and batch quality control requirements;
(5) Copies of the initial test data for the donor's specimen with
all calibrators and controls and copies of all internal chain of
custody documents related to the initial tests;
(6) A brief description of the HHS-certified laboratory's
confirmatory drug (and specimen validity, if applicable) testing
procedures, instrumentation, and batch quality control requirements;
(7) Copies of the confirmatory test data for the donor's specimen
with all calibrators and controls and copies of all internal chain of
custody documents related to the confirmatory tests; and
(8) Copies of the r[eacute]sum[eacute] or curriculum vitae for the
RP(s) and the certifying technician or certifying scientist of record.
Section 11.24 What HHS-certified laboratory information is available to
a federal applicant or employee?
Federal applicants or employees who are subject of a workplace drug
test may submit a written request through the MRO and/or the federal
agency requesting copies of any records relating to their drug test
results or a documentation package as described in Section 11.23(b) and
any relevant certification, review, or revocation of certification
records. Federal applicants or employees, or their designees, are not
permitted access to their specimens collected pursuant to Executive
Order 12564, Public Law 100-71, and these Guidelines.
Section 11.25 What types of relationships are prohibited between an
HHS-certified laboratory and an MRO?
An HHS-certified laboratory must not enter into any relationship
with a federal agency's MRO that may be construed as a potential
conflict of interest or derive any financial benefit by having a
federal agency use a specific MRO.
This means an MRO may be an employee of the agency or a contractor
for the agency; however, an MRO shall not be an employee or agent of or
have any financial interest in the HHS-certified laboratory for which
the MRO is reviewing drug testing results. Additionally, an MRO shall
not derive any financial benefit by having an agency use a specific
HHS-certified laboratory or have any agreement with an HHS-certified
laboratory that may be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Subpart L--Instrumented Initial Test Facility (IITF)
Section 12.1 May an IITF test hair specimens for a federal agency's
workplace drug testing program?
No, only HHS-certified laboratories are authorized to test hair
specimens for federal agency workplace drug testing programs in
accordance with these Guidelines.
Subpart M--Medical Review Officer (MRO)
Section 13.1 Who may serve as an MRO?
(a) A currently licensed physician who has:
(1) A Doctor of Medicine (M.D.) or Doctor of Osteopathy (D.O.)
degree;
(2) Knowledge regarding the pharmacology and toxicology of illicit
drugs;
(3) The training necessary to serve as an MRO as set out in Section
13.3;
(4) Satisfactorily passed an initial examination administered by a
nationally recognized entity or subspecialty board that has been
approved by the Secretary to certify MROs; and
(5) At least every five years from initial certification, completed
requalification training on the topics in Section 13.3 and
satisfactorily passed a requalification examination administered by a
nationally recognized entity or a subspecialty board that has been
approved by the Secretary to certify MROs.
Section 13.2 How are nationally recognized entities or subspecialty
boards that certify MROs approved?
All nationally recognized entities or subspecialty boards which
seek approval by the Secretary to certify physicians as MROs for
federal workplace drug testing programs must submit their
qualifications, a sample examination, and other necessary supporting
examination materials (e.g., answers, previous examination statistics
or other background examination information, if requested). Approval
will be based on an objective review of qualifications that include a
copy of the MRO applicant application form, documentation that the
continuing education courses are accredited by a professional
organization, and the delivery method and content of the examination.
Each approved MRO certification entity must resubmit their
qualifications for approval every two years. The Secretary shall
publish at least every two years a notice in the Federal Register
listing those entities and subspecialty boards that have been approved.
This notice is also available on the internet at https://www.samhsa.gov/workplace/drug-testing.
Section 13.3 What training is required before a physician may serve
as an MRO?
(a) A physician must receive training that includes a thorough
review of the following:
[[Page 56145]]
(1) The collection procedures used to collect federal agency
specimens;
(2) How to interpret test results reported by HHS-certified IITFs
and laboratories (e.g., negative, negative/dilute, positive,
adulterated, substituted, rejected for testing, and invalid);
(3) Chain of custody, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements for
federal agency specimens;
(4) The HHS Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing
Programs for all authorized specimen types; and
(5) Procedures for interpretation, review (e.g., donor interview
for legitimate medical explanations, review of documentation provided
by the donor to support a legitimate medical explanation), and
reporting of results specified by any federal agency for which the
individual may serve as an MRO.
(b) Certified MROs must complete training on any revisions to these
Guidelines prior to their effective date, to continue serving as an MRO
for federal agency specimens.
Section 13.4 What are the responsibilities of an MRO?
(a) The MRO must review all positive, adulterated, rejected for
testing, invalid, and substituted test results.
(b) Staff under the direct, personal supervision of the MRO may
review and report negative and (for urine) negative/dilute test results
to the agency's designated representative. The MRO must review at least
5 percent of all negative results reported by the MRO staff to ensure
that the MRO staff are properly performing the review process.
(c) The MRO must discuss potential invalid results with the HHS-
certified laboratory, as addressed in Section 11.19(d) to determine
whether testing at another HHS-certified laboratory may be warranted.
(d) After receiving a report from an HHS-certified laboratory or
(for urine) HHS-certified IITF, the MRO must:
(1) Review the information on the MRO copy of the Federal CCF that
was received from the collector and the report received from the HHS-
certified laboratory or HHS-certified IITF;
(2) Interview the donor when required;
(3) Make a determination regarding the test result; and
(4) Report the verified result to the federal agency.
(e) The MRO must maintain records for a minimum of 2 years while
maintaining the confidentiality of the information. The MRO may convert
hardcopy records to electronic records for storage and discard the
hardcopy records after 6 months.
Section 13.5 What must an MRO do when reviewing a hair specimen's test
results?
(a) When the HHS-certified laboratory reports a negative result for
the primary (A) hair specimen, the MRO reports a negative result to the
agency.
(b) When the HHS-certified laboratory reports multiple results for
the primary (A) hair specimen, the MRO must follow the verification
procedures described in 13.5(c) through (g) and:
(1) The MRO reports all verified refusal to test results to the
federal agency.
(2) If an invalid result was reported in conjunction with a
positive, adulterated, or substituted result, the MRO does not report
the verified invalid result to the federal agency at this time. The MRO
takes action for the verified invalid result(s) for the primary (A)
specimen as described in 13.5(f) only when:
(i) The MRO verifies the positive or adulterated result as negative
based on a legitimate medical explanation as described in 13.5(c)(2)
and 13.5(d)(1); or
(ii) The split (B) specimen is tested and reported as a failure to
reconfirm the adulterated or substituted result reported for the
primary (A) specimen as described in Section 14.5(b) and 14.5(c).
(c) When the HHS-certified laboratory reports a positive result for
the primary (A) specimen, the MRO must contact the donor to determine
if there is an explanation for the positive result.
(1) If the donor admits illicit use of the drug(s) that caused the
positive result, the MRO reports the test result as positive to the
agency.
(2) If the donor provides documentation (e.g., a valid
prescription) to support a legitimate medical explanation for the
positive result, the MRO reports the test result as negative to the
agency.
(i) Passive exposure to a drug (e.g., exposure to marijuana smoke)
is not a legitimate medical explanation for a positive drug test
result.
(ii) Ingestion of food products containing marijuana is not a
legitimate medical explanation for a positive marijuana test result.
(3) If the donor is unable to provide a legitimate medical
explanation and there is no admission of illicit use supporting the
positive hair test result, the MRO reports a test cancelled result to
the agency and takes actions as follows:
(i) If an alternate specimen was collected at the same time as the
hair specimen, the MRO directs (in writing) the laboratory who has
custody of the donor's alternate specimen to test the specimen. The
laboratory and MRO follow the procedures in the Mandatory Guidelines
for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs for that specimen type.
(ii) If an alternate specimen was not collected at the same time as
the hair specimen, the MRO directs the agency to immediately collect an
alternate specimen from the donor. The collector, laboratory and MRO
follow the procedures in the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace
Drug Testing Programs for the alternate specimen type.
(d) When the HHS-certified laboratory reports an adulterated result
for the primary (A) hair specimen, the MRO contacts the donor to
determine if the donor has a legitimate medical explanation for the
adulterated result.
(1) If the donor provides a legitimate medical explanation, the MRO
reports a negative result to the federal agency.
(2) If the donor is unable to provide a legitimate medical
explanation, the MRO reports a refusal to test to the federal agency
because the hair specimen was adulterated.
(e) When the HHS-certified laboratory reports a substituted result
for the primary (A) hair specimen, the MRO reports a refusal to test to
the federal agency because the hair specimen was substituted.
(f) When the HHS-certified laboratory reports an invalid result for
the primary (A) hair specimen, the MRO reports a test cancelled result
to the agency and takes action as follows:
(1) If an alternate specimen was collected at the same time as the
hair specimen, the MRO directs (in writing) the laboratory who has
custody of the donor's alternate specimen to test the specimen. The
laboratory and MRO follow the procedures in the Mandatory Guidelines
for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs for the alternate specimen
type.
(2) If an alternate specimen was not collected at the same time as
the hair specimen, the MRO directs the agency to immediately collect an
alternate specimen from the donor. The collector, laboratory and MRO
follow the procedures in the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace
Drug Testing Programs for the alternate specimen type.
(g) When the HHS-certified laboratory reports a rejected for
testing result for the primary (A) specimen, the MRO reports a test
cancelled result to the agency and takes action as follows:
(1) If an alternate specimen was collected at the same time as the
hair
[[Page 56146]]
specimen, the MRO directs (in writing) the laboratory who has custody
of the donor's alternate specimen to test the specimen. The laboratory
and MRO follow the procedures in the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal
Workplace Drug Testing Programs for the alternate specimen type.
(2) If an alternate specimen was not collected at the same time as
the hair specimen, the MRO directs the agency to immediately collect an
alternate specimen from the donor. The collector, laboratory and MRO
follow the procedures in the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace
Drug Testing Programs for the alternate specimen type.
Section 13.6 What action does the MRO take when the collector reports
that the donor did not provide a sufficient amount of hair for a drug
test?
(a) When another specimen type (e.g., urine, oral fluid) was
collected in accordance with section 8.6, the MRO reviews and reports
the alternate specimen's test result in accordance with the Mandatory
Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs using the
alternate specimen.
(b) If the donor is unable to provide a sufficient amount of the
alternate specimen authorized by the federal agency, the MRO consults
with the federal agency. The federal agency follows the required
procedures in the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug
Testing Programs using the alternate specimen. This includes
immediately directing the donor to obtain, within five days, an
evaluation from a licensed physician, acceptable to the MRO, who has
expertise in the medical issues raised by the donor's failure to
provide a specimen. The MRO may perform this evaluation if the MRO has
appropriate expertise.
Section 13.7 Who may request a test of a split (B) hair specimen?
(a) For an adulterated or substituted result reported on a primary
(A) hair specimen, a donor may request through the MRO that the split
(B) specimen be tested by a second HHS-certified laboratory to verify
the result reported by the first HHS-certified laboratory.
(b) The donor has 72 hours (from the time the MRO notified the
donor that his or her specimen was reported adulterated or substituted
to request a test of the split (B) specimen. The MRO must inform the
donor that the donor has the opportunity to request a test of the split
(B) specimen when the MRO informs the donor that an adulterated or
substituted result is being reported to the federal agency on the
primary (A) specimen.
Section 13.8 How does an MRO report a primary (A) specimen test result
to an agency?
(a) The MRO must report all verified results to an agency using the
completed MRO copy of the Federal CCF or a separate report using a
letter/memorandum format. The MRO may use various electronic means for
reporting (e.g., teleprinter, fax, or computer). Transmissions of the
reports must ensure confidentiality. The MRO and external service
providers must ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability
of the data and limit access to any data transmission, storage, and
retrieval system.
(b) A verified result may not be reported to the agency until the
MRO has completed the review process.
(c) The MRO must send a copy of either the completed MRO copy of
the Federal CCF or the separate letter/memorandum report for all
adulterated and substituted results.
(d) The MRO must not disclose numerical values of drug test results
to the agency.
Section 13.9 What types of relationships are prohibited between an MRO
and an HHS-certified laboratory?
An MRO must not be an employee, agent of, or have any financial
interest in an HHS-certified laboratory for which the MRO is reviewing
drug test results.
This means an MRO must not derive any financial benefit by having
an agency use a specific HHS-certified laboratory or have any agreement
with the HHS-certified laboratory that may be construed as a potential
conflict of interest.
Subpart N--Split Specimen Tests
Section 14.1 When may a split (B) hair specimen be tested?
(a) The donor may request, verbally or in writing, through the MRO
that the split (B) hair specimen be tested at a different (i.e.,
second) HHS-certified laboratory when the primary (A) specimen was
determined by the MRO to be adulterated or substituted.
(b) A donor has 72 hours to initiate the request after being
informed of the result by the MRO. The MRO must document in the MRO's
records the verbal request from the donor to have the split (B)
specimen tested.
(c) If a split (B) hair specimen cannot be tested by a second HHS-
certified laboratory (e.g., insufficient specimen, lost in transit,
split not available, no second HHS-certified laboratory to perform the
test), the MRO reports a cancelled test to the federal agency and takes
action as follows:
(i) If an alternate specimen was collected at the same time as the
hair specimen, the MRO directs (in writing) the laboratory who has
custody of the donor's alternate specimen to test the specimen. The
laboratory and MRO follow the procedures in the Mandatory Guidelines
for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs for the alternate specimen
type.
(ii) If an alternate specimen was not collected at the same time as
the hair specimen, the MRO directs the agency to collect an alternate
specimen from the donor. The collector, laboratory and MRO follow the
procedures in the Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug
Testing Programs for the alternate specimen type.
(d) If a donor chooses not to have the split (B) specimen tested by
a second HHS-certified hair laboratory, a federal agency may have a
split (B) specimen retested as part of a legal or administrative
proceeding to defend an original adulterated or substituted result.
Section 14.2 How does an HHS-certified laboratory test a split (B) hair
specimen when the primary (A) specimen was reported adulterated?
(a) The HHS-certified laboratory must use its confirmatory specimen
validity test at an established limit of quantification (LOQ) to
reconfirm the presence of the adulterant.
(b) The second HHS-certified laboratory may only conduct the
confirmatory specimen validity test(s) needed to reconfirm the
adulterated result reported by the first HHS-certified laboratory.
Section 14.3 How does an HHS-certified laboratory test a split (B) hair
specimen when the primary (A) specimen was reported substituted?
The second HHS-certified laboratory may only conduct the
confirmatory specimen validity test(s) needed to reconfirm the
substituted result reported by the first HHS-certified laboratory.
Section 14.4 Who receives the split (B) specimen result?
The second HHS-certified laboratory must report the result to the
MRO.
Section 14.5 What action(s) does an MRO take after receiving the split
(B) hair specimen result from the second HHS-certified laboratory?
The MRO takes the following actions when the second HHS-certified
[[Page 56147]]
laboratory reports the result for the split (B) hair specimen as:
(a) Reconfirmed adulteration and/or substitution result. The MRO
reports reconfirmed to the agency.
(b) Failed to reconfirm adulteration or substitution. The MRO
reports to the agency a failed to reconfirm result (specify adulterant
or not substituted) and cancels both tests. The MRO shall notify the
HHS office responsible for coordination of the Drug Free Workplace
Program regarding the test results for the specimen.
(c) Failed to reconfirm an adulterated result and failed to
reconfirm a substituted result. The MRO reports to the agency a failed
to reconfirm result [(specify adulterant) and not substituted]. The MRO
shall notify the HHS office responsible for coordination of the Drug
Free Workplace Program regarding the test results for the specimen.
(d) Failed to reconfirm an adulterated result and reconfirmed a
substituted result. The MRO reports to the agency a reconfirmed result
(substituted) and a failed to reconfirm result (specify adulterant).
The MRO tells the agency that it may take action based on the
substituted result although Laboratory B failed to reconfirm the
adulterated result.
(e) Failed to reconfirm a substituted result and reconfirmed an
adulterated result. The MRO reports to the agency a reconfirmed result
(adulterated) and a failed to reconfirm result (not substituted). The
MRO tells the agency that it may take action based on the adulterated
result although Laboratory B failed to reconfirm the substituted
result.
Section 14.6 How does an MRO report a split (B) specimen test result to
an agency?
(a) The MRO must report all verified results to an agency using the
completed MRO copy of the Federal CCF or a separate report using a
letter/memorandum format. The MRO may use various electronic means for
reporting (e.g., teleprinter, fax, or computer). Transmissions of the
reports must ensure confidentiality. The MRO and external service
providers must ensure the confidentiality, integrity, and availability
of the data and limit access to any data transmission, storage, and
retrieval system.
(b) A verified result may not be reported to the agency until the
MRO has completed the review process.
(c) The MRO must send a copy of either the completed MRO copy of
the Federal CCF or the separate letter/memorandum report for all split
specimen results.
(d) The MRO must not disclose the numerical values of the drug test
results to the agency.
Section 14.7 How long must an HHS-certified laboratory retain a split
(B) specimen?
A split (B) specimen is retained for the same period of time that a
primary (A) specimen is retained and under the same storage conditions,
in accordance with Section 11.20. This applies even for those cases
when the split (B) specimen is tested by a second HHS-certified
laboratory and the second HHS-certified laboratory does not confirm the
original result reported by the first HHS-certified laboratory for the
primary (A) specimen.
Subpart O--Criteria for Rejecting a Specimen for Testing
Section 15.1 What discrepancies require an HHS-certified laboratory to
report a hair specimen as rejected for testing?
The following discrepancies are considered to be fatal flaws. The
HHS-certified laboratory must stop the testing process, reject the
specimen for testing, and indicate the reason for rejecting the
specimen on the Federal CCF when:
(a) The specimen ID number on the primary (A) or split (B) specimen
label/seal does not match the ID number on the Federal CCF, or the ID
number is missing either on the Federal CCF or on either specimen
label/seal;
(b) The primary (A) specimen label/seal is misapplied, broken or
shows evidence of tampering and the split (B) specimen cannot be re-
designated as the primary (A) specimen;
(c) The collector's printed name and signature are omitted on the
Federal CCF;
(d) There is an insufficient amount of specimen for analysis in the
primary (A) specimen unless the split (B) specimen can be re-designated
as the primary (A) specimen; or
(e) The accessioner failed to document the primary (A) specimen
seal condition on the Federal CCF at the time of accessioning, and the
split (B) specimen cannot be re-designated as the primary (A) specimen.
(f) The specimen was received at the HHS-certified laboratory
without a CCF;
(g) The CCF was received at the HHS-certified laboratory without a
specimen;
(h) The collector performed two separate collections using one CCF;
(i) The physical appearances (other than color) of the primary (A)
and split (B) specimen are clearly different;
(j) The laboratory identifies lice or a similar infestation in the
hair; or
(k) The HHS-certified laboratory identifies a flaw (other than
those specified above) that prevents testing or affects the forensic
defensibility of the drug test and cannot be corrected.
Section 15.2 What discrepancies require an HHS-certified laboratory to
report a specimen as rejected for testing unless the discrepancy is
corrected?
The following discrepancies are considered to be correctable:
(a) If a collector failed to sign the Federal CCF, the HHS-
certified laboratory must attempt to recover the collector's signature
before reporting the test result. If the collector can provide a
memorandum for record recovering the signature, the HHS-certified
laboratory may report the test result for the specimen. If, after
holding the specimen for at least 5 business days, the HHS-certified
laboratory cannot recover the collector's signature, the laboratory
must report a rejected for testing result and indicate the reason for
the rejected for testing result on the Federal CCF.
(b) If a specimen is submitted using a non-federal form or an
expired Federal CCF, the HHS-certified laboratory must test the
specimen and also attempt to obtain a memorandum for record explaining
why a non-federal form or an expired Federal CCF was used and ensure
that the form used contains all the required information. If, after
holding the specimen for at least 5 business days, the HHS-certified
laboratory cannot obtain a memorandum for record from the collector,
the laboratory must report a rejected for testing result and indicate
the reason for the rejected for testing result on the report to the
MRO.
Section 15.3 What discrepancies are not sufficient to require an HHS-
certified laboratory to reject a hair specimen for testing or an MRO to
cancel a test?
(a) The following omissions and discrepancies on the Federal CCF
that are received by the HHS-certified laboratory should not cause an
HHS-certified laboratory to reject a hair specimen or cause an MRO to
cancel a test:
(1) An incorrect laboratory name and address appearing at the top
of the form;
(2) Incomplete/incorrect/unreadable employer name or address;
(3) MRO name is missing;
(4) Incomplete/incorrect MRO address;
[[Page 56148]]
(5) A transposition of numbers in the donor's Social Security
Number or employee identification number;
(6) A telephone number is missing/incorrect;
(7) A fax number is missing/incorrect;
(8) A ``drug tests to be performed'' box is not marked;
(9) A ``specimen collection'' box is not marked;
(10) The collection site address is missing;
(11) The collector's printed name is missing but the collector's
signature is properly recorded;
(13) The time of collection is not indicated;
(14) The date of collection is not indicated;
(15) Incorrect name of delivery service;
(16) The collector has changed or corrected information by crossing
out the original information on either the Federal CCF or specimen
label/seal without dating and initialing the change; or
(17) The donor's name inadvertently appears on the HHS-certified
laboratory copy of the Federal CCF or on the tamper-evident labels used
to seal the specimens.
(b) The following omissions and discrepancies on the Federal CCF
that are made at the HHS-certified laboratory should not cause an MRO
to cancel a test:
(1) The testing laboratory fails to indicate the correct name and
address in the results section when a different laboratory name and
address is printed at the top of the Federal CCF;
(2) The accessioner fails to print his or her name;
(3) The certifying scientist or certifying technician fails to
print his or her name;
(4) The certifying scientist or certifying technician accidentally
initials the Federal CCF rather than signing for a specimen reported as
rejected for testing;
(c) The above omissions and discrepancies should occur no more than
once a month. The expectation is that each trained collector and HHS-
certified laboratory will make every effort to ensure that the Federal
CCF is properly completed and that all the information is correct. When
an error occurs more than once a month, the MRO must direct the
collector or HHS-certified laboratory (whichever is responsible for the
error) to immediately take corrective action to prevent the recurrence
of the error.
Section 15.4 What discrepancies may require an MRO to cancel a test?
(a) An MRO must attempt to correct the following errors:
(1) The donor's signature is missing on the MRO copy of the Federal
CCF and the collector failed to provide a comment that the donor
refused to sign the form;
(2) The certifying scientist failed to sign the Federal CCF for a
specimen being reported adulterated, invalid, or substituted; or
(3) The electronic report provided by the HHS-certified laboratory
does not contain all the data elements required for the HHS standard
laboratory electronic report for a specimen being reported adulterated,
invalid result, or substituted.
(b) If error (a)(1) occurs, the MRO must contact the collector to
obtain a statement to verify that the donor refused to sign the MRO
copy. If, after at least 5 business days, the collector cannot provide
such a statement, the MRO must cancel the test.
(c) If error (a)(2) occurs, the MRO must obtain a statement from
the certifying scientist that they forgot to sign the Federal CCF, but
did, in fact, properly conduct the certification review. If, after at
least 5 business days, the MRO cannot get a statement from the
certifying scientist, the MRO must cancel the test.
(d) If error (a)(3) occurs, the MRO must contact the HHS-certified
laboratory. If, after at least 5 business days, the laboratory does not
retransmit a corrected electronic report, the MRO must cancel the test.
Subpart P--Laboratory Suspension/Revocation Procedures
Section 16.1 When may the HHS certification of a laboratory be
suspended?
These procedures apply when:
(a) The Secretary has notified an HHS-certified laboratory in
writing that its certification to perform drug testing under these
Guidelines has been suspended or that the Secretary proposes to revoke
such certification.
(b) The HHS-certified laboratory has, within 30 days of the date of
such notification or within 3 days of the date of such notification
when seeking an expedited review of a suspension, requested in writing
an opportunity for an informal review of the suspension or proposed
revocation.
Section 16.2 What definitions are used for this subpart?
Appellant. Means the HHS-certified laboratory which has been
notified of its suspension or proposed revocation of its certification
to perform testing and has requested an informal review thereof.
Respondent. Means the person or persons designated by the Secretary
in implementing these Guidelines.
Reviewing Official. Means the person or persons designated by the
Secretary who will review the suspension or proposed revocation. The
reviewing official may be assisted by one or more of the official's
employees or consultants in assessing and weighing the scientific and
technical evidence and other information submitted by the appellant and
respondent on the reasons for the suspension and proposed revocation.
Section 16.3 Are there any limitations on issues subject to review?
The scope of review shall be limited to the facts relevant to any
suspension or proposed revocation, the necessary interpretations of
those facts, the relevant Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace
Drug Testing Programs, and other relevant law. The legal validity of
these Guidelines shall not be subject to review under these procedures.
Section 16.4 Who represents the parties?
The appellant's request for review shall specify the name, address,
and telephone number of the appellant's representative. In its first
written submission to the reviewing official, the respondent shall
specify the name, address, and telephone number of the respondent's
representative.
Section 16.5 When must a request for informal review be submitted?
(a) Within 30 days of the date of the notice of the suspension or
proposed revocation, the appellant must submit a written request to the
reviewing official seeking review, unless some other time period is
agreed to by the parties. A copy must also be sent to the respondent.
The request for review must include a copy of the notice of suspension
or proposed revocation, a brief statement of why the decision to
suspend or propose revocation is wrong, and the appellant's request for
an oral presentation, if desired.
(b) Within 5 days after receiving the request for review, the
reviewing official will send an acknowledgment and advise the appellant
of the next steps. The reviewing official will also send a copy of the
acknowledgment to the respondent.
[[Page 56149]]
Section 16.6 What is an abeyance agreement?
Upon mutual agreement of the parties to hold these procedures in
abeyance, the reviewing official will stay these procedures for a
reasonable time while the laboratory attempts to regain compliance with
the Guidelines or the parties otherwise attempt to settle the dispute.
As part of an abeyance agreement, the parties can agree to extend the
time period for requesting review of the suspension or proposed
revocation. If abeyance begins after a request for review has been
filed, the appellant shall notify the reviewing official at the end of
the abeyance period, advising whether the dispute has been resolved. If
the dispute has been resolved, the request for review will be
dismissed. If the dispute has not been resolved, the review procedures
will begin at the point at which they were interrupted by the abeyance
agreement with such modifications to the procedures as the reviewing
official deems appropriate.
Section 16.7 What procedures are used to prepare the review file and
written argument?
The appellant and the respondent each participate in developing the
file for the reviewing official and in submitting written arguments.
The procedures for development of the review file and submission of
written argument are:
(a) Appellant's Documents and Brief. Within 15 days after receiving
the acknowledgment of the request for review, the appellant shall
submit to the reviewing official the following (with a copy to the
respondent):
(1) A review file containing the documents supporting appellant's
argument, tabbed and organized chronologically, and accompanied by an
index identifying each document. Only essential documents should be
submitted to the reviewing official.
(2) A written statement, not to exceed 20 double-spaced pages,
explaining why respondent's decision to suspend or propose revocation
of appellant's certification is wrong (appellant's brief).
(b) Respondent's Documents and Brief. Within 15 days after
receiving a copy of the acknowledgment of the request for review, the
respondent shall submit to the reviewing official the following (with a
copy to the appellant):
(1) A review file containing documents supporting respondent's
decision to suspend or revoke appellant's certification to perform drug
testing, which is tabbed and organized chronologically, and accompanied
by an index identifying each document. Only essential documents should
be submitted to the reviewing official.
(2) A written statement, not exceeding 20 double-spaced pages in
length, explaining the basis for suspension or proposed revocation
(respondent's brief).
(c) Reply Briefs. Within 5 days after receiving the opposing
party's submission, or 20 days after receiving acknowledgment of the
request for review, whichever is later, each party may submit a short
reply not to exceed 10 double-spaced pages.
(d) Cooperative Efforts. Whenever feasible, the parties should
attempt to develop a joint review file.
(e) Excessive Documentation. The reviewing official may take any
appropriate step to reduce excessive documentation, including the
return of or refusal to consider documentation found to be irrelevant,
redundant, or unnecessary.
Section 16.8 When is there an opportunity for oral presentation?
(a) Electing Oral Presentation. If an opportunity for an oral
presentation is desired, the appellant shall request it at the time it
submits its written request for review to the reviewing official. The
reviewing official will grant the request if the official determines
that the decision-making process will be substantially aided by oral
presentations and arguments. The reviewing official may also provide
for an oral presentation at the official's own initiative or at the
request of the respondent.
(b) Presiding Official. The reviewing official or designee will be
the presiding official responsible for conducting the oral
presentation.
(c) Preliminary Conference. The presiding official may hold a
prehearing conference (usually a telephone conference call) to consider
any of the following: simplifying and clarifying issues, stipulations
and admissions, limitations on evidence and witnesses that will be
presented at the hearing, time allotted for each witness and the
hearing altogether, scheduling the hearing, and any other matter that
will assist in the review process. Normally, this conference will be
conducted informally and off the record; however, the presiding
official may, at their discretion, produce a written document
summarizing the conference or transcribe the conference, either of
which will be made a part of the record.
(d) Time and Place of the Oral Presentation. The presiding official
will attempt to schedule the oral presentation within 30 days of the
date the appellant's request for review is received or within 10 days
of submission of the last reply brief, whichever is later. The oral
presentation will be held at a time and place determined by the
presiding official following consultation with the parties.
(e) Conduct of the Oral Presentation.
(1) General. The presiding official is responsible for conducting
the oral presentation. The presiding official may be assisted by one or
more of the official's employees or consultants in conducting the oral
presentation and reviewing the evidence. While the oral presentation
will be kept as informal as possible, the presiding official may take
all necessary steps to ensure an orderly proceeding.
(2) Burden of Proof/Standard of Proof. In all cases, the respondent
bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that its
decision to suspend or propose revocation is appropriate. The
appellant, however, has a responsibility to respond to the respondent's
allegations with evidence and argument to show that the respondent is
wrong.
(3) Admission of Evidence. The Federal Rules of Evidence do not
apply and the presiding official will generally admit all testimonial
evidence unless it is clearly irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly
repetitious. Each party may make an opening and closing statement, may
present witnesses as agreed upon in the prehearing conference or
otherwise, and may question the opposing party's witnesses. Since the
parties have ample opportunity to prepare the review file, a party may
introduce additional documentation during the oral presentation only
with the permission of the presiding official. The presiding official
may question witnesses directly and take such other steps necessary to
ensure an effective and efficient consideration of the evidence,
including setting time limitations on direct and cross-examinations.
(4) Motions. The presiding official may rule on motions including,
for example, motions to exclude or strike redundant or immaterial
evidence, motions to dismiss the case for insufficient evidence, or
motions for summary judgment. Except for those made during the hearing,
all motions and opposition to motions, including argument, must be in
writing and be no more than 10 double-spaced pages in length. The
presiding official will set a reasonable time for the party opposing
the motion to reply.
(5) Transcripts. The presiding official shall have the oral
presentation transcribed and the transcript shall be
[[Page 56150]]
made a part of the record. Either party may request a copy of the
transcript and the requesting party shall be responsible for paying for
its copy of the transcript.
(f) Obstruction of Justice or Making of False Statements.
Obstruction of justice or the making of false statements by a witness
or any other person may be the basis for a criminal prosecution under
18 U.S.C. 1505 or 1001.
(g) Post-hearing Procedures. At their discretion, the presiding
official may require or permit the parties to submit post-hearing
briefs or proposed findings and conclusions. Each party may submit
comments on any major prejudicial errors in the transcript.
Section 16.9 Are there expedited procedures for review of immediate
suspension?
(a) Applicability. When the Secretary notifies an HHS-certified
laboratory in writing that its certification to perform drug testing
has been immediately suspended, the appellant may request an expedited
review of the suspension and any proposed revocation. The appellant
must submit this request in writing to the reviewing official within 3
days of the date the HHS-certified laboratory received notice of the
suspension. The request for review must include a copy of the
suspension and any proposed revocation, a brief statement of why the
decision to suspend and propose revocation is wrong, and the
appellant's request for an oral presentation, if desired. A copy of the
request for review must also be sent to the respondent.
(b) Reviewing Official's Response. As soon as practicable after the
request for review is received, the reviewing official will send an
acknowledgment with a copy to the respondent.
(c) Review File and Briefs. Within 7 days of the date the request
for review is received, but no later than 2 days before an oral
presentation, each party shall submit to the reviewing official the
following:
(1) A review file containing essential documents relevant to the
review, which is tabbed, indexed, and organized chronologically; and
(2) A written statement, not to exceed 20 double-spaced pages,
explaining the party's position concerning the suspension and any
proposed revocation. No reply brief is permitted.
(d) Oral Presentation. If an oral presentation is requested by the
appellant or otherwise granted by the reviewing official, the presiding
official will attempt to schedule the oral presentation within 7-10
days of the date of appellant's request for review at a time and place
determined by the presiding official following consultation with the
parties. The presiding official may hold a prehearing conference in
accordance with Section 16.8(c) and will conduct the oral presentation
in accordance with the procedures of Sections 16.8(e), (f), and (g).
(e) Written Decision. The reviewing official shall issue a written
decision upholding or denying the suspension or proposed revocation and
will attempt to issue the decision within 7-10 days of the date of the
oral presentation or within 3 days of the date on which the transcript
is received or the date of the last submission by either party,
whichever is later. All other provisions set forth in Section 16.14
will apply.
(f) Transmission of Written Communications. Because of the
importance of timeliness for these expedited procedures, all written
communications between the parties and between both party and the
reviewing official shall be by fax, secured electronic transmissions,
or overnight mail.
Section 16.10 Are any types of communications prohibited?
Except for routine administrative and procedural matters, a party
shall not communicate with the reviewing or presiding official without
notice to the other party.
Section 16.11 How are communications transmitted by the reviewing
official?
(a) Because of the importance of a timely review, the reviewing
official should normally transmit written communications to either
party by fax, secured electronic transmissions, or overnight mail in
which case the date of transmission or day following mailing will be
considered the date of receipt. In the case of communications sent by
regular mail, the date of receipt will be considered 3 days after the
date of mailing.
(b) In counting days, include Saturdays, Sundays, and federal
holidays. However, if a due date falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or
federal holiday, then the due date is the next federal working day.
Section 16.12 What are the authority and responsibilities of the
reviewing official?
In addition to any other authority specified in these procedures,
the reviewing official and the presiding official, with respect to
those authorities involving the oral presentation, shall have the
authority to issue orders; examine witnesses; take all steps necessary
for the conduct of an orderly hearing; rule on requests and motions;
grant extensions of time for good reasons; dismiss for failure to meet
deadlines or other requirements; order the parties to submit relevant
information or witnesses; remand a case for further action by the
respondent; waive or modify these procedures in a specific case,
usually with notice to the parties; reconsider a decision of the
reviewing official where a party promptly alleges a clear error of fact
or law; and to take any other action necessary to resolve disputes in
accordance with the objectives of these procedures.
Section 16.13 What administrative records are maintained?
The administrative record of review consists of the review file;
other submissions by the parties; transcripts or other records of any
meetings, conference calls, or oral presentation; evidence submitted at
the oral presentation; and orders and other documents issued by the
reviewing and presiding officials.
Section 16.14 What are the requirements for a written decision?
(a) Issuance of Decision. The reviewing official shall issue a
written decision upholding or denying the suspension or proposed
revocation. The decision will set forth the reasons for the decision
and describe the basis therefore in the record. Furthermore, the
reviewing official may remand the matter to the respondent for such
further action as the reviewing official deems appropriate.
(b) Date of Decision. The reviewing official will attempt to issue
their decision within 15 days of the date of the oral presentation, the
date on which the transcript is received, or the date of the last
submission by either party, whichever is later. If there is no oral
presentation, the decision will normally be issued within 15 days of
the date of receipt of the last reply brief. Once issued, the reviewing
official will immediately communicate the decision to each party.
(c) Public Notice. If the suspension and proposed revocation are
upheld, the revocation will become effective immediately and the public
will be notified by publication of a notice in the Federal Register. If
the suspension and proposed revocation are denied, the revocation will
not take effect and the suspension will be lifted immediately. Public
notice will be given by publication in the Federal Register.
[[Page 56151]]
Section 16.15 Is there a review of the final administrative action?
Before any legal action is filed in court challenging the
suspension or proposed revocation, respondent shall exhaust
administrative remedies provided under this subpart, unless otherwise
provided by Federal Law. The reviewing official's decision, under
Section 16.9(e) or 16.14(a) constitutes final agency action and is ripe
for judicial review as of the date of the decision.
[FR Doc. 2020-16432 Filed 9-4-20; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 4162-20-P