Transportation Systems and Drug Testing

By Anthony M. Davis

According to a recent Government Accountability Office report, our national transportation systems and safety is at risk from undetected drug use. In their report, Drug Testing: Undercover Tests Reveal Significant Vulnerabilities in DOT’s Drug Testing Program, 24 drug test collection sites around the nation were tested, of those, 22 sites had serious issues with compliance.

For the purpose of the study, the investigators posed as commercial truck drivers seeking a drug test. Even though the focus of the investigation centered upon truck drivers, current DOT drug testing does not stop there.  Current regulation requires merchant mariners, employees in the aviation industry, railroads, and mass transit, pipeline workers and truck drivers to comply with voluntary drug testing.

Given the results of this investigation, our national transportation system is flawed and citizens relying upon safe transport could be in danger. We worry about terrorist threats from outside our country, yet a vital system designed to ensure public safety is broken.  The reliability of drug collection and testing facilities affects many sectors of the transportation system. References throughout this article will refer to Transportation Workers, regardless of being a truck driver, merchant marine, etc.

There are a number of troublesome issues in the GAO report. Investigators arrived at each of the 24 collection sites and produced fraudulent identification. Yet, none of the sites double-checked credentials confirming the identity of the individual. This shows a serious error in the identity verification process. In effect, a Transportation Worker seeking to avoid a positive drug test could have a surrogate provide a urine sample on their behalf.

If DOT is to ensure that Transportation Workers in safety sensitive positions are drug-free, they must require standardized identification. A possible option for existing Transportation Workers could be the Transportation Workers’ Identification Credential (TWIC). Yet, even this alternative fails for a pre-employment drug test of potential employees without an issued card. For now, collection personnel should require multiple sources of identity.

The Federal Drug Testing Custody and Control Form (CCF) is used as a chain of custody for the drug test, beginning with the identification of the donor. Currently, an applicant for a merchant mariner’s document (MMD) or license requires the following certification:

Whoever, in any manner within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States, knowingly and willfully falsifies, conceals or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact, or makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations, or makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry, violates the U. S. Criminal Code at Title 18 U. S. C. 1001 which subjects the violator to Federal prosecution and possible incarceration, fine or both.

Certainly one form is an application for a transportation credential (MMD) and the other is an application for a drug test. However, if DOT is serious about ensuring our highways, rails, waterways and airspace are safe from drug use by employees in safety-sensitive positions; they should then get serious and ensure the CCF gets updated requiring truthful statements.

A common practice at collection facilities is to use toilet bluing in the water to deter dilution of the sample. Yet, GAO investigators found numerous collection sites failed to have bluing in the toilet, allowing the potential to dilute the urine sample. Another collection requirement is to have all water sources secured preventing dilution. Many sites failed by having a working sink in the testing areas.

Within four minutes of the test, the temperature of the sample is required to ensure it is consistent with an individual recently taking the test. Failures occurred with this portion as well. An individual fearing a positive result could bring in another sample or a synthetic.

Another problem investigators found was the capability to adulterate the sample with cleaning materials stored within reach of the testing area. DOT regulations specifically address these issues to ensure an untainted sample is collected.  The testing area should be free of anything that could deter the quality of the test sample.

The GAO report details how investigators on eight separate occasions provided faulty samples. Of those, four were synthetic urine and four were adulterants added to the sample. The GAO report states that none of the laboratories detected anything out of the ordinary with the eight tests and does rightfully explain a flaw in the current Code of Federal Regulations.

The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration (SAMSHA) revised drug testing guidelines in 2004 requiring all urine tests to be given validity tests. Yet, DOT did not implement this requirement. Within current regulations there is no stated requirement that labs conduct validity testing, only that they are, authorized to conduct validity testing.

Now here’s where this author has a problem with the investigation.  As a prior Coast Guard Marine Investigator, a large part of our enforcement business dealt with failed drug tests by mariners. As a rule, laboratories consistently conducted validity testing of the sample and provided a report if the mariner tested positive, adulterated, dilute or substituted.  The same collection sites and laboratories testing samples from commercial truck drivers use the same facilities to test merchant mariners. So, why is it that substituted and adulterated samples go undetected for commercial truckers when they typically are detected for mariners?

I sought out the lead investigator on three different occasions, once by phone and twice by email. I hoped to get a clearer understanding of enforcement differences between truckers and mariners. In both cases I attempted to reach Mr. Gregory Kutz of the GAO. I explained my surprise of the adulterated tests that went undetected and I wanted to give him an opportunity to comment; in both cases, he chose not to.

The GAO report describes how numerous adulterants and synthetic substances are commonly sold on the Internet to cheat the test. As an Investigator that has worked these drug cases, this is old news. Adulterants and substitutes have been on the market for years.  I questioned my concerns with prior and current Marine Investigators and one comment was consistent with each Investigator. They said that the report now tells Transportation Workers they can safely go out and buy a product to help them beat the test.  I’m not sure that’s true because I doubt that truck drivers, mariners, pilots and railroad personnel are rushing out to read the read the GAO report.

Even so, there is a public safety and responsibility issue at play. The GAO report states their intent to provide DOT with a list of the areas and collection sites. Giving the investigation credence at face value that they found 22 collection sites with flawed procedures and eight laboratories failing to detect altered drug samples, the GAO should publicly announce the names of the facilities and not await DOT’s plan to fix the situation.

Every day, our citizens travel on public transportation via air, ground, rail or water. These same transportation mechanisms transport vital cargoes and hazardous materials near neighborhoods and through our cities. If drug test collection is flawed, then other facilities should be used or those with problems forced to rectify their procedures. Anything less places the public safety of our citizens and nation in jeopardy.