FTA-MA-26-5010-99-01

DOT-VNTSC-FTA-99-6

Drug and Alcohol Testing Results

1998 Annual Report

December 1999

Office of Safety and Security

U.S. Department

of Transportation

Federal Transit

Administration
NOTICE 

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the 

Department of Transportation in the interest of information 

exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for 

its contents or use thereof. 
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved 

 OMB No. 0704-0188

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining 

the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for 

reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of 

Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503. 

1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 

December 1999 

3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED

 Final Report 

January 1998–December 1998

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 

Drug and Alcohol Testing Results 1998 Annual Report 

6. AUTHOR(S) 

James A. Harrison, Richard Anderson,* Michael Redington,* David Rutyna,* Eve Rutyna,* 

and Cassandra Oxley* 

5. FUNDING NUMBERS 

TM059/U0139 

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Research & Special Programs Administration 

John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center 

55 Broadway 

Cambridge, MA 02142-1093

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 

 REPORT NUMBER

DOT-VNTSC-FTA-99-6 

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Federal Transit Administration 

Office of Safety and Security 

Washington, DC 20590

10. SPONSORING/MONITORING 

 AGENCY REPORT NUMBER 

FTA-MA-26-5010-99-01 

11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 

* EG&G Technical Services, Inc. 

 55 Broadway 

 Cambridge, MA 02142-1093

12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 

This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service, 

Springfield, VA 22161 

12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE 

13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words) 

The Drug and Alcohol Testing Results 1998 Annual Report is a compilation and analysis of drug and alcohol testing results 

reported by transit systems in the United States during 1998. The report covers results for the following drug types: marijuana 

(THC), cocaine, phencyclidine (PCP), opiates, and amphetamines. The drug test types covered are: pre-employment, random, 

post-accident, reasonable suspicion, return-to-duty, and follow-up. The report also covers testing results for alcohol for the

following test types: random, post-accident, reasonable suspicion, return-to-duty, and follow-up. 

15. NUMBER OF PAGES 

112 

14. SUBJECT TERMS 

safety-sensitive, random testing, alcohol testing, drug testing, FTA-covered employees 

16. PRICE CODE 

17.SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 

OF REPORT 

Unclassified

18.SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 

OF THIS PAGE 

Unclassified

19. SECURITY 

CLASSIFICATION OF THIS 

ABSTRACT 

Unclassified

20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT 

NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89) 

Prescribed by ANSI Std. 239-18 

 298-102 

1998 Annual Report iii 

PREFACE 

This annual report represents the cooperative efforts of many people. Full appreciation is 

extended to the Federal Transit Administration, the Volpe National Transportation 

Systems Center, and the following individuals who were instrumental in guiding this 

project and contributing to its success: 

Judy Z. Meade 

Director, Office of Safety and Security 

Federal Transit Administration 

Mark Snider 

Drug and Alcohol Program Manager 

Federal Transit Administration 

James A. Harrison 

Transportation Industry Analyst 

Volpe National Transportation Systems Center 

Richard D. Anderson, Cassandra L. Oxley, Michael R. Redington, David Rutyna, and 

Eve C. Rutyna, all of EG&G Technical Services, Inc., and Brian Baker of Cambridge 

Systematics, Inc. 
iv 

METRIC/ENGLISH CONVERSION FACTORS 

ENGLISH TO METRIC METRIC TO ENGLISH

LENGTH (APPROXIMATE) LENGTH (APPROXIMATE) 

1 inch (in) = 2.5 centimeters (cm) 1 millimeter (mm) = 0.04 inch (in) 

1 foot (ft) = 30 centimeters (cm) 1 centimeter (cm) = 0.4 inch (in) 

1 yard (yd) = 0.9 meter (m) 1 meter (m) = 3.3 feet (ft) 

1 mile (mi) = 1.6 kilometers (km) 1 meter (m) = 1.1 yards (yd) 

 1 kilometer (km) = 0.6 mile (mi)

AREA (APPROXIMATE) AREA (APPROXIMATE) 

1 square inch (sq in, in2) = 6.5 square centimeters 

(cm2

) 

1 square centimeter (cm2

) = 0.16 square inch (sq in, in2) 

1 square foot (sq ft, ft2) = 0.09 square meter (m2) 1 square meter (m2) = 1.2 square yards (sq yd, 

yd2

) 

1 square yard (sq yd, yd2) = 0.8 square meter (m2) 1 square kilometer (km2) = 0.4 square mile (sq mi, mi2) 

1 square mile (sq mi, mi2) = 2.6 square kilometers 

(km2

) 

10,000 square meters (m2

) = 1 hectare (ha) = 2.5 acres 

1 acre = 0.4 hectare (he) = 4,000 square meters (m2) 

MASS - WEIGHT (APPROXIMATE) MASS - WEIGHT (APPROXIMATE) 

1 ounce (oz) = 28 grams (gm) 1 gram (gm) = 0.036 ounce (oz) 

1 pound (lb) = 0.45 kilogram (kg) 1 kilogram (kg) = 2.2 pounds (lb) 

1 short ton = 2,000 

pounds (lb) 

= 0.9 tonne (t) 1 tonne (t) =

=

1,000 kilograms (kg) 

1.1 short tons

VOLUME (APPROXIMATE) VOLUME (APPROXIMATE) 

1 teaspoon (tsp) = 5 milliliters (ml) 1 milliliter (ml) = 0.03 fluid ounce (fl oz) 

1 tablespoon (tbsp) = 15 milliliters (ml) 1 liter (l) = 2.1 pints (pt) 

1 fluid ounce (fl oz) = 30 milliliters (ml) 1 liter (l) = 1.06 quarts (qt) 

1 cup (c) = 0.24 liter (l) 1 liter (l) = 0.26 gallon (gal) 

1 pint (pt) = 0.47 liter (l) 

 1 quart (qt) = 0.96 liter (l) 

1 gallon (gal) = 3.8 liters (l) 

1 cubic foot (cu ft, ft3) = 0.03 cubic meter (m3) 1 cubic meter (m3) = 36 cubic feet (cu ft, ft3) 

1 cubic yard (cu yd, yd3) = 0.76 cubic meter (m3) 1 cubic meter (m3) = 1.3 cubic yards (cu yd, yd3)

TEMPERATURE (EXACT) TEMPERATURE (EXACT) 

[(x-32)(5/9)] °F = y °C [(9/5) y + 32] °C = x °F

QUICK INCH - CENTIMETER LENGTH CONVERSION

0 1 2 34 5

Inches

Centimeters 01 3 2 6 11 4 5 7 13 8 9 10 12

QUICK FAHRENHEIT - CELSIUS TEMPERATURE CONVERSION

 -40° -22° -4° 14° 32° 50° 68° 86° 104° 122° 140° 158° 176° 194° 212°

 

°F

 °C -40° -30° -20° -10° 0° 10° 20° 30° 40° 50° 60° 70° 80° 90° 100°

For more exact and or other conversion factors, see NIST Miscellaneous Publication 286, Units of Weights and 

Measures. Price $2.50 SD Catalog No. C13 10286 Updated 6/17/98
1998 Annual Report v

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Section Page 

1. INTRODUCTION 

1.1 Who Must Report .................................................................................................................. 1-1 

1.2 Employees Who Must be Tested ........................................................................................... 1-2

1.3 Types of Tests........................................................................................................................ 1-3 

1.4 Drug Testing Program Overview........................................................................................... 1-4 

1.5 Alcohol Testing Program Overview ...................................................................................... 1-4 

1.6 Drug and Alcohol MIS Data Quality and Validation ............................................................ 1-5 

1.7 Organization of this Report ................................................................................................... 1-5 

1.8 Availability of Drug and Alcohol MIS Documentation......................................................... 1-5 

2. ELECTRONIC REPORTING.................................................................................................. 2-1

3. GENERAL INFORMATION−DRUG AND ALCOHOL TEST RESULTS 

3.1 Distribution of Transit Systems and Contractors................................................................... 3-1 

3.2 Rail and Non-Rail Employers................................................................................................ 3-3 

3.3 FTA-Covered Employees ...................................................................................................... 3-3 

3.4 Federal Funds......................................................................................................................... 3-11 

4. DRUG TEST RESULTS 

4.1 Drug Tests Results by FTA Region ...................................................................................... 4-1

4.2 Results of Drug Tests Presented by Test Types..................................................................... 4-2 

4.3 Post-Accident Testing............................................................................................................ 4-10 

4.4 Accidents ............................................................................................................................... 4-10 

4.5 Distribution of Positive Drug Test Results by Type of Drug ................................................ 4-11 

4.6 Drug Test Refusals................................................................................................................. 4-16 

4.7 Return-to-Duty-Positive Rate ................................................................................................ 4-17 

4.8 Results of Drug Tests Presented by Employee Category....................................................... 4-17 
1998 Annual Report vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) 

Section Page 

5. ALCOHOL TEST RESULTS 

5.1 Alcohol Tests by FTA Region ............................................................................................... 5-3 

5.2 Results of Alcohol Testing by Test Types............................................................................. 5-4 

5.3 Results of Alcohol Testing by Employee Category............................................................... 5-4 

5.4 Employees Who Refused Alcohol Testing............................................................................ 5-17 

5.5 Employees Returned to Duty................................................................................................. 5-17 

5.6 Accidents ............................................................................................................................... 5-18 

5.7 Post-Accident Positives ......................................................................................................... 5-19 

5.8 Violation Rate........................................................................................................................ 5-19 

5.9 Other Violations..................................................................................................................... 5-20 

6. TREND ANALYSIS 

6.1 Drug and Alcohol Reports Received ..................................................................................... 6-1 

6.2 Positive Random Drug Tests ................................................................................................. 6-3 

APPENDICES 

 A – Glossary....................................................................................................................A-1 

 B – FTA Regions.............................................................................................................B-1 

 C – Rail Employers....................................................................................................................... C-1 
1998 Annual Report vii

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure Page

2-1. Electronic Report Forms Received........................................................................................ 2-2 

2-2. Electronic Reporting by Employer Size ................................................................................ 2-2

2-3. Electronic Reporting by FTA Region.................................................................................... 2-3 

3-1. Number of Drug and Alcohol Forms Received..................................................................... 3-1 

3-2. Drug and Alcohol Reports Received by Employer Size ....................................................... 3-2 

3-3. Number of FTA Drug and Alcohol Reports Received by Region ........................................ 3-2 

3-4. Reports Received – Rail Versus Non-Rail............................................................................ 3-3 

3-5. Number of FTA-Covered Employees by Employee Category/Percent of Labor Force that 

 was Contracted ...................................................................................................................... 3-4 

3-6. Percent of FTA-Covered Employees for Transit Systems .................................................... 3-4 

3-7. Percent of FTA-Covered Employees in Each Employee Category – Contractors ................ 3-5 

3-8. All FTA-Covered Employees by Employee Category .......................................................... 3-6 

3-9. Percent of All FTA-Covered Employees for Large Operators.............................................. 3-6 

3-10. Percent of All FTA-Covered Employees for Small Operators.............................................. 3-7 

3-11. Percent of All FTA-Covered Employees Reporting for Rural Operators ............................. 3-7 

3-12. All FTA-Covered Employees by Employer Size .................................................................. 3-8 

3-13. FTA-Covered Employees by Employee Category for Rail and Non-Rail ............................ 3-8 

3-14. Percent of FTA-Covered Employees in Each Employee Category – Rail Operators............ 3-9 

3-15. Percent of FTA-Covered Employees in Each Employee Category – Non-Rail Operators ... 3-9 

3-16. FTA-Covered Employees by Region .................................................................................... 3-10 

3-17. FTA-Covered Employees by Region/Size ............................................................................ 3-10 

3-18. Number and Percent of Transit Systems that Received Federal Funds by Source of 

Funding.................................................................................................................................. 3-11 

3-19. Percent of Total Funds by Funding Source ........................................................................... 3-12 

3-20. Number of Transit Systems that Received Federal Funds by Source of Funding and by 

 FTA Region........................................................................................................................... 3-13 

3-21. Percent of Transit Systems that Received Federal Funds by Size and Source of Funding ... 3-13 

4-1. Number and Percent of Positive Specimens by Type of Drug.............................................. 4-12 

4-2. Number of Positive Specimens by Type of Drug for Each Employer Type ......................... 4-13 

4-3. Percent of Positive Specimens by Type of Drug for Each Employer Type........................... 4-13 

4-4. Percent of Positive Specimens by Type of Drug and Operator Size ..................................... 4-14 

4-5. Number and Type of Drug by FTA Region........................................................................... 4-14 

4-6. Percent of Positive Specimens by FTA Region and Type of Drug ....................................... 4-15 

4-7. Number of Positive Specimens by Employee Category and Type of Drug .......................... 4-15 

4-8. Percent of Positive Specimens by Type of Drug and Employee Category............................ 4-16 

4-9. Drug Test Refusals ................................................................................................................ 4-17 

5-1. Consequences of an Alcohol Test for FTA-Covered Employees.......................................... 5-1 

5-2. Alcohol Test Refusals ........................................................................................................... 5-17 

6-1. Drug and Alcohol Reports Received..................................................................................... 6-1 

6-2. FTA-Covered Employees...................................................................................................... 6-2 
1998 Annual Report viii

LIST OF FIGURES (cont.) 

Figure Page

6-3. Comparison of Positive Random Drug Results..................................................................... 6-3 

6-4. Comparison of Random Alcohol Test Results ≥ 0.04 .......................................................... 6-3 

6-5. Total Positive Drug Test Rate ............................................................................................... 6-4 

6-6. Total Results of Alcohol Rests ≥ 0.04................................................................................... 6-4 

6-7. Violation Rate (Alcohol) ...................................................................................................... 6-5 

6-8. Alcohol Test Refusals ........................................................................................................... 6-5 

6-9. Drug Test Results by Test Type 1996 to 1998 ...................................................................... 6-6 

6-10. Alcohol Test Results ≥ 0.04 by Test Type 1996 to 1998 ...................................................... 6-7 

6-11. 1998 Percent of Total Drug Tests.......................................................................................... 6-8 

6-12. Comparison of Test Results by Drug Type ........................................................................... 6-9 

6-13. Random Alcohol Test Results ≥ 0.04 by Region .................................................................. 6-10 

6-14. Positive Random Drug Tests by Region ............................................................................... 6-10 

LIST OF TABLES 

Table Page

ES-1. 1998 Random Drug Test Results .......................................................................................... ES-3 

ES-2. 1998 Random Alcohol Test Results...................................................................................... ES-5 

ES-3. 1996 – 1998 Positive Random Drug Test Results................................................................. ES-6 

ES-4. 1996 – 1998 Random Alcohol Test Results ≥ 0.04............................................................... ES-6 

ES-5. 1996 – 1998 Positive Drug Test Results ............................................................................... ES-6

ES-6. 1996 – 1998 Alcohol Test Results ≥ 0.04 ............................................................................. ES-7 

ES-7. 1996 – 1998 Positive Drug Test Results/Employee Category .............................................. ES-7 

ES-8. 1996 – 1998 Alcohol Test Results ≥ 0.04/Employee Category ............................................ ES-8 

4-1. 1998 Random Drug Test Results .......................................................................................... 4-1 

4-2. Random Drug Test Results by Operator Size ....................................................................... 4-1 

4-3. Random Drug Test Results by FTA Region.......................................................................... 4-2 

4-4. Random Drug Test Results for Rail and Non-Rail ............................................................... 4-2 

4-5. Drug Test Results by Test Type and Employee Category..................................................... 4-4 

4-6. Drug Test Results by Test Type and Employee Category by Size ........................................ 4-6 

4-7. Drug Test Results by Test Type and Employee Category by Rail and Non-Rail.................. 4-8 

4-8. 1998 Accidents with Drug Positives ..................................................................................... 4-10 

4-9. Accidents with Drug Positives by Size ................................................................................. 4-10 

4-10. Accidents with Drug Positives by Region............................................................................. 4-11 

4-11. Post-Accident Drug Test Positives........................................................................................ 4-11 

4-12. Multiple Drug Combinations ................................................................................................ 4-16 
1998 Annual Report ix

LIST OF TABLES (cont.) 

Table Page

4-13. Returned-to-Duty Covered Employees .............................................................................. 4-17 

4-14. Drug Test Results by Employee Category and Test Type by Transit System and 

 Contractor........................................................................................................................... 4-18 

4-15. Drug Test Results by Employee Category and Test Type by Size ..................................... 4-20 

4-16. Drug Test Results by Employee Category and Test Type by Rail and Non-Rail............... 4-22 

5-1. Percent of Alcohol Forms Received for 1998 With at Least One Positive Test Result..... 5-2 

5-2. Random Alcohol Test Results at Both Levels for Transit Systems and Contractors......... 5-2 

5-3. Random Alcohol Test Results at Both Levels by Size....................................................... 5-3 

5-4. Random Alcohol Test Results by Rail and Non-Rail......................................................... 5-3 

5-5. Random Alcohol Test Results at Both Levels by Region .................................................. 5-3 

5-6. Alcohol Test Results by Test Type and Employee Category by 

 Transit System and Contractor........................................................................................... 5-5 

5-7. Alcohol Test Results by Test Type and Employee Category by Size ................................ 5-7 

5-8. Alcohol Test Results by Test Type and Employee Category by Rail and Non-Rail.......... 5-9 

5-9. Alcohol Test Results by Employee Category and Test Type by Transit System 

 and Contractor.................................................................................................................... 5-11 

5-10. Alcohol Test Results by Employee Category and Test Type by Size ................................ 5-13 

5-11. Alcohol Test Results by Employee Category and Test Type by Rail and Non-Rail.......... 5-15 

5-12. Covered Employees Returned-to-Duty .............................................................................. 5-17 

5-13. Accidents with Alcohol Positives ...................................................................................... 5-18 

5-14. Accidents with Alcohol Positives by Size.......................................................................... 5-18 

5-15. Post-Accident Alcohol Positives........................................................................................ 5-19 

5-16. Violation Rate by Transit System/Contractor .................................................................... 5-19 

5-17. Violation Rate by Employer Size....................................................................................... 5-19 

5-18. Violation Rate by FTA Region .......................................................................................... 5-20 

5-19. Other Alcohol Violations ................................................................................................... 5-20 

6-1. Percent of Drug Reports with a Positive and Alcohol Reports with a Test ≥ 0.04 ............ 6-2 

1998 Annual Report ES-1 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

INTRODUCTION 

This annual report presents the results of mandatory drug and alcohol testing conducted by 

transit systems and their contractors receiving funds from the Federal Transit Administration 

(FTA). Under the Omnibus Transportation Employee Testing Act passed by Congress in 1991, 

the FTA was required to establish regulations for drug and alcohol testing of transit employees 

performing safety-sensitive functions. These regulations require that each recipient of FTA funds 

(1) implement an anti-drug program to deter and detect the use of prohibited drugs, (2) establish 

a program to prevent the misuse of alcohol, and (3) report the results of its programs to FTA 

annually. The 1998 Annual Report is the fourth annual report summarizing the reported results 

of drug and alcohol tests from all such transit systems. 

Compliance with FTA’s drug and alcohol testing program is a condition of Federal assistance. 

Failure of a recipient to establish and implement a drug and alcohol testing program − either in 

its own operations or in those of an entity operating on its behalf − may result in the suspension 

of Federal transit funding to the recipient. Because a recipient may not always directly provide 

mass transit services, the FTA uses the term “operator” or “employer” to describe those who 

actually provide transit services. The direct recipient of FTA funds, however, is the entity 

legally responsible to the FTA for compliance. 

DISTRIBUTION OF TRANSIT SYSTEMS AND CONTRACTORS 

The FTA received drug and alcohol reporting forms for calendar year 1998 from 2,477 

individual employers representing 1,631 transit systems and 846 contractors. Of the 2,477 

individual employers, 855 were large operators, 382 were small operators, and 1,240 were rural 

operators. A total of 1,606 of the total employers reported being a member of a consortium. 

Approximately 72 percent of all employers reported no positive drug test results, and 96 percent 

of employers reported no alcohol test results ≥ 0.04 percent. Thirty-five percent of contractors 

submitted a greater percentage of forms with at least one positive drug test result, compared to 

23 percent of transit systems. Five percent of contractors submitted forms with at least one 

alcohol test result ≥ 0.04 percent (5 percent), compared to 3 percent of transit systems.

Employers reported a total of 224,696 employees performing safety-sensitive functions; 81.2 

percent of these employees are employed at transit systems with 18.8 percent employed by 

contractors. The average transit system employs more than twice as many safety-sensitive 

employees than the average contractor, 111 to 51. Large operators employ an average of 211 

safety-sensitive employees compared to 47 for small operators and 21 for rural. The largest 

number of employees performing safety-sensitive functions are engaged in revenue vehicle 

operation (69.1 percent) followed by revenue vehicle and equipment maintenance (19.4 percent). 

Revenue vehicle control/dispatch, CDL/non-revenue vehicle, and armed security personnel 

together make-up less than 12 percent of the overall labor force (7.6 percent, 1.9 percent, and 1.8 

percent, respectively). Ninety-two transit systems reported contracting out all of their safetysensitive functions (5.3 percent of all transit systems). The largest number of contract employees 

were involved in revenue vehicle operation at 21.5 percent, followed by revenue vehicle 
1998 Annual Report ES-2 

control/dispatch at 19.9 percent. For rural operators, contractors comprise a relatively small 

percent of the total number of FTA-covered employees at 16.2 percent; for large operators, 

contractors comprise a slightly higher total at 19.0 percent; for small operators, contractors 

comprise 26.2 percent of the total number of FTA-covered employees. 

ELECTRONIC REPORTING 

Electronically reporting Drug and Alcohol MIS results became an option for FTA-covered 

employers in 1998. Electronic software was developed with help and validation capabilities in 

an effort to lessen the reporting burden. In December 1998, when the FTA Drug and Alcohol 

Project Office, located at the Volpe Center in Cambridge, Massachusetts, conducted its annual 

mailing of FTA Drug and Alcohol reporting materials, included was a set of five FTA Drug and 

Alcohol MIS reporting diskettes. Approximately 1,200 sets of diskettes were mailed to FTA 

recipients, subrecipients, and State Department of Transportation (DOT) offices. For the first 

time, reporters had the option of reporting on paper forms, or by using the electronic reporting 

system and submitting results on a data diskette; 317 reporters opted for the data diskette, more 

than 25 percent of those receiving the diskettes. In addition, approximately 300 reporters used 

electronic reporting to complete the information and then reported on paper forms generated 

through the electronic reporting software. 

Of the 317 reporters who reported electronically, 58 or 18.3 percent indicated at least one 

positive drug test, and 27 or 8.5 percent indicated at least one positive alcohol test. 

DRUG TEST RESULTS 

All employers must establish an anti-drug program that encompasses training for and testing of 

employees and supervisors performing safety-sensitive functions. Supervisors receive specific 

training to recognize the signs and symptoms of prohibited drug use. The FTA’s drug rule 

specifies that safety-sensitive employees may not use any of five prohibited substances (or their 

metabolites): marijuana, cocaine, phencyclidine (PCP), opiates (e.g., heroin, morphine, codeine), 

or amphetamines (e.g., racemic, amphetamine, dextroamphetamine, and methamphetamine). 

If an FTA-covered employee has a verified positive result from a drug test, the employee must 

be removed from the safety-sensitive position, be informed of available educational and 

treatment programs, and be referred to a substance abuse professional to determine whether the 

employee has a drug problem. If an employer’s policy allows for a “second chance,” the 

regulation states that the employee must complete a course of treatment prescribed by the 

substance abuse professional and take a return-to-duty drug test with a verified negative result 

prior to returning to a safety-sensitive position. 

The 1998 drug-testing program performed by large, small and rural transit employers revealed 

the following major findings: 

A total of 111,490 specimens were collected for random drug testing. Of that number, 1,196 

specimens tested positive for one or more of the five prohibited drugs. Random drug testing 
1998 Annual Report ES-3 

accounted for 55.5 percent of the total specimens collected and 35.6 percent of the total positive 

specimens (of 3,355 total positive specimens). 

The overall positive random test rate was 1.07 percent industry-wide, as shown in table ES-1. 

Positive random test results were 0.93 percent for transit systems and 1.69 percent for 

contractors. The 1997 random rate of positive test results was 1.21 percent. 

Table ES-1. 1998 Random Drug Test Results 

Employer Number of 

Specimens 

Number 

Positive 

Percent 

Positive 

Transit Systems 90,855 847 0.93 

Contractors 20,635 349 1.69 

Totals 111,490 1,196 1.07 

 

There was little disparity in the percent of random drug positives between large, small, and rural 

operators (1.06 percent, 1.19 percent, and 1.12 percent, respectively). 

A total of 200,748 specimens were collected for all six types of drug testing. Of that figure, 

3,355 specimens tested positive for one or more of the five prohibited drugs. Transit systems 

accounted for 75.3 percent of all drug tests conducted. Contractors accounted for the remaining 

24.7 percent of the total drug tests despite accounting for only 18.8 percent of total safetysensitive employees. The overall rate of positive drug tests was 1.67 percent; the 1997 rate was 

1.77 percent. 

Of the six drug test types (pre-employment, random, post-accident, reasonable suspicion, returnto-duty, and follow-up), the highest percent of positive specimens was for reasonable suspicion 

testing (8.04 percent). Cocaine was found to be present in 63 percent of all positive reasonable 

suspicion drug tests; marijuana was second at 42 percent. Contractors reported positive results at 

a higher rate than did transit systems in all test types. The lowest percentage of positive 

specimens was for random testing (1.07 percent). Random testing was by far the most common 

test to be conducted, with 60.1 percent of all specimens collected by transit systems, followed by 

pre-employment testing (23.2 percent). Pre-employment testing was the most common test 

conducted by contractors at more than twice the rate as that of transit systems at 49.6 percent. 

Across employee categories there was some variation in the percent of positive random tests. 

The lowest rate was 0.60 percent for revenue vehicle control/dispatch, and the highest was 1.22 

percent for CDL/non-revenue vehicle operators. CDL/non-revenue vehicle operators also had 

the highest percent of positives of all specimens collected for both transit systems and 

contractors. Armed security personnel had the lowest percent of positives for both transit systems 

and contractors. 

Marijuana and cocaine were detected most frequently in the specimens that tested positive for 

drugs. Of 3,355 positive specimens, 54.16 percent tested positive for marijuana and 38.69 

percent tested positive for cocaine. Marijuana was also detected most frequently in all 10 

regions. One hundred thirty-five specimens tested positive for multiple drugs; the most common 

multiple-drug combination was marijuana and cocaine, with 77 positive results. There were 22 
1998 Annual Report ES-4 

cases of individuals testing positive for both drugs and alcohol and there was one isolated case of 

an individual testing positive for the five illegal substances. 

There were 199 qualifying accidents that resulted in a positive post-accident drug test (128 from 

transit systems and 71 from contractors). There were no fatalities reported as resulting from 

these accidents. Cocaine was detected in 55.7 percent of all positive post-accident drug tests; 

marijuana was second at 42.9 percent. 

ALCOHOL TEST RESULTS 

Transit systems are required to establish and conduct an alcohol misuse prevention program in 

which employees performing safety-sensitive functions are tested for the misuse of alcohol and 

supervisors are trained to recognize the signs and symptoms of alcohol misuse. Employees are 

subject to five types of alcohol tests: random, reasonable suspicion, post-accident, return-to-duty, 

and follow-up. In addition, employers may not allow safety-sensitive employees to consume 

alcohol under four specific circumstances: (1) 4 hours before performing a safety-sensitive 

function; (2) while performing a safety-sensitive function; (3) after a fatal accident, unless the 

employee has received a post-accident test or 8 hours have elapsed, whichever occurs first; or (4) 

after a nonfatal accident unless the employee's involvement was completely discounted as a 

contributing factor to the accident, the employee has been tested, or 8 hours have elapsed. 

An employee with an alcohol concentration of 0.02 or greater but less than 0.04 must be 

removed from duty for 8 hours or until a retest shows an alcohol concentration of less than 0.02. 

An employee with an alcohol concentration ≥ 0.04 must be prohibited from performing any 

safety-sensitive duties, removed from his/her safety-sensitive position, and be evaluated by a 

substance abuse professional. To return to a safety-sensitive position, the employee must 

properly complete a course of treatment prescribed by the substance abuse professional and pass 

a return-to-duty alcohol test. 

The 1998 alcohol-testing program performed by large, small, and rural transit employers 

revealed the following: of the total of 41,206 random alcohol-screening tests conducted, 54 

confirmation test results ≥ 0.04 were documented (0.13 percent), as shown in Table ES-2. The 

rate for transit systems was 0.13 percent. For contractors, the rate was 0.14 percent. In 1997, the 

random rate was 0.14 percent. 

The FTA alcohol-testing rule includes a definition for the violation rate for purposes of setting 

next year’s random alcohol testing rate. The definition describes the violation rate as the number 

of random test results ≥ 0.04 in addition to the number of employees who refused a random test, 

divided by the total number of random tests administered plus the number of employees who 

refused a random test. The violation rate for 1998 for all employers (transit systems and 

contractors) is 0.22 percent. 
1998 Annual Report ES-5 

Table ES-2. 1998 Random Alcohol Test Results 

Employer Number 

Screens 

Number 

Positive 

Percent 

≥ 0.04 

Transit Systems 34,039 44 0.13 

Contractors 7,167 10 0.14 

Totals 41,206 54 0.13 

• For 1998, the FTA reduced the random alcohol testing rate to 10 percent. (Effective as of 

January 1, 1998, as announced in the Federal Register of January 6, 1998.) 

• The percent of total test results ≥ 0.04 for all test types was 0.29 percent industry-wide. The 

rate for transit systems was 0.24 percent. For contractors, the rate was 0.56 percent. For 

1997, the percent of total test results ≥ 0.04 was 0.25 percent.

• Transit systems conducted 83.8 percent of the 64,546 total screening tests. Contractors 

conducted 16.2 percent of the total. 

• Of the 5 required alcohol test types, the highest percent of test results ≥ 0.04 was for 

reasonable suspicion testing at 9.52 percent. Contractors returned alcohol concentrations at ≥

0.04 for reasonable suspicion testing more often than transit systems (17.73 percent versus 

7.34 percent).

• Of the 5 employee categories, the highest percent of test results ≥ 0.04 was in the Revenue 

Vehicle Control/Dispatch category at 0.47 percent. Armed Security Personnel had zero test 

results ≥ 0.04.

• The post-accident test type had the lowest percent of test results ≥ 0.04 at 0.12 percent. 

• There were 15 accidents reported that resulted in a post-accident alcohol test result of 0.04 or 

greater. There were no fatalities resulting from these accidents. Contractors accounted for 8 

of the post-accident test results ≥ 0.04 and transit systems accounted for 7. 

• The Revenue Vehicle Operations employee category accounted for all of the alcohol test 

results ≥ 0.04 for post-accident testing. 

• There were 59 alcohol test refusals, 31 for transit systems and 28 for contractors. Thirty-five 

refusals were for random tests and 24 were for non-random tests. 

• There were 82 reported “Other” Alcohol Violations -- 4 additional specific circumstances in 

which employers may not allow their safety-sensitive employees to consume alcohol as 

mentioned above. 
1998 Annual Report ES-6 

TREND RESULTS 1996 THROUGH 1998 

The number of FTA drug and alcohol reporting forms received from 1996 through 1998 has 

increased by 8.3 percent. The number of these reports received from transit systems has 

increased by 3.2 percent while reports received from contractors have increased by 19.7 percent. 

The number of reported safety-sensitive employees has increased by 4.1 percent for transit 

systems and 9.7 percent for contractors. The percent of contracted FTA-covered employees, 

increased from 18.4 percent in 1996 to 19.2 percent in 1998. 

The percent of positive random drug test results and the percent of random alcohol test results 

greater than or equal to 0.04 decreased each year for the 3-year period from 1996 to 1998. 

Transit systems have shown a significant decrease in both random drug and random alcohol 

testing whereas the percent of random alcohol test results ≥ 0.04 has increased over the same 

period for contractors. The percent of positive random drug test results has decreased for 

contractors, but at a much slower rate than that of transit systems. See Tables ES-3 and ES-4. 

Table ES-3. 1996 - 1998 Positive Random Drug Test Results 

Employer 1996 1997 1998 

Transit Systems 1.42% 1.06% 0.93% 

Contractors 1.84% 1.92% 1.69% 

Totals 1.50% 1.21% 1.07% 

Table ES-4. 1996 - 1998 Random Alcohol Test Results ≥ 0.04 

Employer 1996 1997 1998 

Transit Systems 0.17% 0.15% 0.13% 

Contractors 0.11% 0.09% 0.14% 

Totals 0.16% 0.14% 0.13% 

As with random testing, the percent of total positive drug test results decreased each year for the 

3-year period from 1996 to 1998. Transit systems showed a significant decrease in total positive 

drug tests whereas the percent of total positive drug tests slightly increased over the same period 

for contractors. The percent of total alcohol test results ≥ 0.04 increased over the period of 1996 

to 1998. The percent of total alcohol test results ≥ 0.04 has shown little change for transit 

systems but increased significantly for contractors, approximately doubling. See Tables ES-5 

and ES-6. 

Table ES-5. 1996 - 1998 Positive Drug Test Results 

Employer 1996 1997 1998 

Transit Systems 1.75% 1.41% 1.28% 

Contractors 2.75% 3.01% 2.87% 

Totals 2.00% 1.77% 1.67% 
1998 Annual Report ES-7 

Table ES-6. 1996 - 1998 Alcohol Test Results ≥ 0.04 

Employer 1996 1997 1998 

Transit Systems 0.26% 0.23% 0.24% 

Contractors 0.27% 0.28% 0.56% 

Totals 0.26% 0.24% 0.29% 

The number of random drug tests has increased at a rate of 3.1 percent for transit systems and 2.0 

percent for contractors from 1996 to 1998. 

The number of non-random drug tests has increased at the much higher rate of 21.5 percent for 

transit systems and 8.7 percent for contractors from 1996 to 1998. 

The random alcohol testing requirement was reduced in 1998 from 25 percent to 10 percent and 

is indicated in the number of tests, which have decreased by 33.7 percent for transit systems and 

36.5 percent for contractors. 

Like drug tests, the number of non-random alcohol tests has increased significantly by 10.2 

percent and 26.4 percent respectively for transit systems and contractors. 

 

Of the 6 required drug and 5 alcohol test types, the only test type with an increase in its positive 

drug test rate and alcohol test results ≥ 0.04 from 1996-98 was reasonable suspicion testing. 

Post-accident testing also had an increase in alcohol test results ≥ 0.04. 

Of the 5 employee categories that comprise FTA-covered employees, all categories have shown 

a decrease in the percent of total positive drug test results. Almost the opposite is true with 

alcohol test rates ≥ 0.04, where 3 of the 5 employee categories have increased. For contractors 

all 5 categories have increased or remained the same for alcohol test rates ≥ 0.04. See Tables 

ES-7 and ES-8. 

Table ES-7. 1996 - 1998 Positive Drug Test Results/ 

Employee Category 

Employer 1996 1997 1998 

Revenue Vehicle 

Operation 2.06% 1.87% 1.79% 

Revenue Veh. And 

Equip. Maint. 1.95% 1.69% 1.45% 

Revenue Veh. 

Control/Disp. 1.20% 0.91% 0.85% 

CDL/Non-Revenue 

Vehicle 2.55% 2.05% 2.06% 

Armed Security 

Personnel 0.73% 0.28% 0.60% 

Totals 2.00% 1.77% 1.67% 
1998 Annual Report ES-8 

Table ES-8. 1996 - 1998 Alcohol Test Results ≥ 0.04/ 

Employee Category 

Employer 1996 1997 1998 

Revenue Vehicle 

Operation 0.23% 0.20% 0.26% 

Revenue Veh. And 

Equip. Maint. 0.33% 0.34% 0.39% 

Revenue Veh. 

Control/Disp. 0.20% 0.30% 0.47% 

CDL/Non-Revenue 

Vehicle 0.61% 0.48% 0.42% 

Armed Security 

Personnel 0.06% 0.06% 0.00% 

Totals 0.26% 0.24% 0.29% 
1998 Annual Report 1-1

1. INTRODUCTION 

This annual report presents the results of mandatory drug and alcohol testing conducted by transit 

systems that receive funds from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Under the Omnibus 

Transportation Employee Testing Act passed by Congress in 1991, the FTA was required to 

establish regulations for drug and alcohol testing of transit employees performing safety-sensitive 

functions. The purpose of requiring transit agencies to implement drug and alcohol programs is 

to achieve a drug- and alcohol-free work force in the interest of the health and safety of transit 

employees and the traveling public. This annual report covers the testing results from calendar 

year 1998. 

The FTA regulations require that recipients of specific FTA funds implement an anti-drug 

program to deter and detect the use of prohibited drugs by transit employees and to establish a 

program to prevent prohibited alcohol use. Covered under these regulations are employees of 

transit systems that receive grant funds and employees of contractors to those transit systems. 

Large operators (i.e., those providing transit services in urbanized areas of 200,000 or more in 

population) were required to begin their drug and alcohol testing programs for calendar year 

1995. Small operators (i.e., those providing transit services in areas of less than 200,000) were 

required to begin their drug and alcohol testing programs for calendar year 1996. 

1.1 Who Must Report 

Transit systems that receive funding from 

the FTA sources listed in Figure 1-1 are 

required to have drug and alcohol testing 

programs. Under FTA regulations, all 

recipients must implement the required 

drug and alcohol testing programs and must 

report the results of their programs to the 

FTA annually. The results must be 

submitted to the FTA on specific 

Management Information System (MIS) 

forms approved by the Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB). Recipients of 5310 funds only are not required to comply with 

FTA drug and alcohol testing requirements, unless they provide contract services to recipients 

receiving Section 5307, 5309, and 5311 funds. In those instances, they must report as 

contractors. 

Some recipients provide mass transit services directly. Others rely on additional public or private 

entities to provide services in whole or in part. In these cases, the direct recipient of FTA funds 

is legally responsible for assuring that any entity operating on its behalf is in compliance with 

FTA testing rules. 

Section 5307 (Section 9). Formula Program 

Section 5309 (Section 3). Capital Program 

Section 5310 (Section 16). Elderly and Disabled 

Program 

Section 5311 (Section 18). Non-urbanized Area 

Program 

Figure 1-1. FTA Federal Funding Sources (1998)
1998 Annual Report 1-2

Transit systems that receive funding directly from the FTA must certify annually that they are in 

compliance with the drug and alcohol testing regulations. States must certify regulatory 

compliance on behalf of the transit systems that receive FTA funding through a state agency. 

Failure of a recipient to establish and implement a drug and alcohol testing program−either in its 

own operations or in those of an entity operating on its behalf−may result in the suspension of 

Federal transit funding to the recipient. Because a recipient may not always provide transit 

services directly, the FTA uses the term “operator” or “employer” to describe those who actually 

provide transit services and who, therefore, must implement the FTA requirements. 

1.2 Employees Who Must be Tested 

Under the FTA’s drug and alcohol testing regulations, employees and supervisors who perform 

any of the following functions are considered safety-sensitive employees: 

1. Operate a revenue service vehicle, including when not in revenue service (includes 

employees who operate a passenger vehicle, whether or not a fare is collected); 

2. Maintain revenue service vehicles or equipment used in revenue service (except 5311 

recipients’ contractors); 

3. Dispatch or control revenue service vehicles; 

4. Operate a non-revenue service vehicle (e.g., snowplow or wrecker), which requires a 

Commercial Drivers License (CDL), and is not already covered by another employee 

category; and/or 

5. Provide security and carry a firearm. 

Maintenance contractors (except for 5311 recipients’ contractors) that perform routine, ongoing 

repair or maintenance work for FTA recipients and subrecipients must comply if their employees 

perform any of the identified safety-sensitive functions. In addition, supervisors who perform, or 

could be called upon to perform, any of the safety-sensitive functions are also included. 
1998 Annual Report 1-3

1.3 Types of Tests 

Employees who perform safety-sensitive functions are subject to six different types of tests: 

 

1) Pre-employment testing for drugs is performed on each prospective employee, including 

individuals who are being transferred into safety-sensitive positions. Employees may not be 

hired unless they have a verified negative drug test result. (This is no longer applicable for 

alcohol — the FTA suspended required pre-employment testing for alcohol on May 10, 1995, as 

a result of a U.S. Court of Appeals decision.) 

2) Random testing must be unannounced and unpredictable. The tests must be based on a 

scientifically valid random-number selection method. All safety-sensitive employees must have 

an equal chance of being selected for testing each time a selection is made, must be included in 

the selection pool, and must remain in the pool after being tested. For 1998, the number of 

random tests conducted must equal at least 50 percent (for drugs) and 10 percent (for alcohol) of 

the total number of employees performing safety-sensitive functions. Transit systems have the 

option of joining a consortium, an entity that arranges testing services and that acts on behalf of 

the employers. If a transit system joins a consortium for random testing, the testing rate applies 

to the total number of safety-sensitive employees within the consortium. As a result, some 

individual transit operators may not meet the random testing requirement. 

3) Post-accident testing is required for accidents where there is loss of human life. For non-fatal 

accidents that meet FTA-defined conditions, testing is required unless the covered employee’s 

performance can be completely discounted as a causative or contributing factor. When an 

accident occurs, safety-sensitive employees operating the vehicle must be tested, as well as any 

other safety-sensitive personnel not on the vehicle whose performance could have contributed to 

the accident. Tests must be administered as soon as possible but no later than 8 hours after the 

accident for alcohol and 32 hours for drugs. 

4) Reasonable suspicion testing is conducted when an employer suspects that an employee has 

used a prohibited drug or has misused alcohol as defined in the regulations. Reasonable 

suspicion determinations are made by trained supervisors and must be based on specific, 

contemporaneous, articulated observations concerning the appearance, behavior, speech, or body 

odor of the safety-sensitive employee. 

5) Return-to-duty testing occurs when an employer’s policy statement permits an employee 

who violated the regulations (i.e., tested positive for drugs, had an alcohol result of ≥ 0.04, 

refused to submit to a test) to return to duty to perform a safety-sensitive function after 

completion of rehabilitation. The employee must, however, be evaluated by a Substance Abuse 

Professional (SAP) and pass a return-to-duty test prior to performing a safety-sensitive function. 
1998 Annual Report 1-4

6) Follow-up testing occurs after an employee has been returned to duty after a positive drug or 

alcohol test. The employee is subject to unannounced follow-up testing for at least 12 but no 

more than 60 months as recommended by the SAP. Follow-up testing is separate from, and in 

addition to, random testing. 

1.4 Drug Testing Program Overview 

Transit systems must establish an anti-drug program that focuses on testing safety-sensitive 

employees and training for supervisors. FTA regulations specify that safety-sensitive employees 

may not use any of 5 prohibited substances (or their metabolites): marijuana; cocaine; opiates 

(e.g., heroin, morphine, codeine);* amphetamines (e.g., racemic, amphetamine, 

extroamphetamine, and methamphetamine); or phencyclidine (PCP). Testing for any other drugs 

must be performed separately from the FTA test. 

If an FTA-covered employee has a verified positive drug test result, the employee must be 

removed from the safety-sensitive position, be informed of the available educational and 

treatment programs, and be referred to an SAP. To return to a safety-sensitive position, the 

employee must complete a course of treatment prescribed by the SAP and take a return-to-duty 

drug test with a verified negative result. 

1.5 Alcohol Testing Program Overview 

Transit systems are required to establish and conduct an alcohol misuse prevention program in 

which employees performing safety-sensitive functions are tested for alcohol misuse. In 

addition, supervisors must receive specific training to recognize the signs and symptoms of 

possible alcohol misuse. There are four specific circumstances under which an employee is 

prohibited from consuming alcohol: 

1. Four hours before performing a safety-sensitive function; 

2. While performing a safety-sensitive function; 

3. After a fatal accident unless a post-accident test has been administered, or 8 hours have 

elapsed (whichever occurs first); and/or 

4. After a non-fatal accident unless the employee’s involvement can be completely discounted 

as a contributing factor to the accident, the employee has been tested, or 8 hours have 

elapsed. 

 

* On September 30, 1997, the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) published the final amendments to its 

Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Testing Programs (DHHS Guidelines) and indicated that December 1, 1998 would 

be the effective date for implementing these amendments. The amendments raised the initial and confirmatory test opiate 

thresholds from 300 nanograms per milliliter (ng/ml) to 2000 ng/ml. The DHHS amendments also established a new requirement 

to test for 6-acetylmorphine (6-AM), a metabolite that comes only from heroin, using a 10 ng/ml confirmatory level, for 

specimens that have tested positive for morphine on the confirmatory test at the 2000 ng/ml level.
1998 Annual Report 1-5

An employee with an alcohol concentration of 0.02 or greater but less than 0.04 for a 

confirmation test must be removed from duty for at least 8 hours or until a re-test conducted by 

the employer shows an alcohol concentration of less than 0.02. If an employer elects to remove 

the employee from duty for 8 hours, the employer is not required to administer an alcohol test 

before the employee resumes performing a safety-sensitive function unless the employee exhibits 

signs of alcohol misuse upon returning to work. 

A safety-sensitive employee with an alcohol concentration of ≥ 0.04 must be prohibited from 

performing any safety-sensitive functions, removed from his or her safety-sensitive position, and 

be referred to a SAP. 

1.6 Drug and Alcohol MIS Data Quality and Validation 

The Drug and Alcohol MIS data submitted to the FTA by transit operators and their contractors 

are subjected to extensive analysis and validation, both manual and automated. The process 

entails detailed examination of each MIS report, identification of errors or questionable entries, 

and the resolution of these problems in conjunction with the reporting agencies. 

In general, the quality of the database improves each year as the FTA clarifies definitions of data 

items, simplifies reporting procedures, and designs more sophisticated validation checks. 

Despite extensive efforts, it should be noted that data validation primarily encompasses a review 

of the consistency and reasonableness of the reported data. Errors of significant magnitude have 

been detected and corrected, but some statistically minor errors may remain. 

1.7 Organization of this Report 

This report contains six chapters and two appendices. Chapter 2 provides information on 

electronic reporting. Chapter 3 provides general information on the reporting process, including 

how many employers reported testing results to the FTA. Chapters 4 and 5 present drug and 

alcohol testing results, respectively. Chapter 6 presents a trend analysis. A glossary of terms 

used throughout this report is in Appendix A; Appendix B provides a list of FTA regions; 

Appendix C presents a list of rail systems and rail contractors that submitted reports. This year 

an additional size category (rural) has been introduced and another size category (small) has 

therefore been redefined. “Large” systems are located in urbanized areas of 200,000 or more in 

population. “Small” systems are located in urbanized areas of less than 200,000 but greater than 

or equal to 50,000. “Rural” systems are located in urbanized areas of less than 50,000 in 

population. 

1.8 Availability of Drug and Alcohol MIS Documentation 

Copies of reporting guidance and MIS reporting forms and diskettes are available from the Drug 

and Alcohol MIS Project Office at (617) 494-6336. The FTA Safety and Security Clearinghouse 

can be reached at (617) 494-2108 for additional copies of this report, as well as previously 

published annual reports. Other technical assistance materials including The Implementation 

Guidelines for Drug and Alcohol Regulations in Mass Transit may be acquired from the FTA’s 
1998 Annual Report 1-6

Office of Safety & Security at (202) 366-2896. Further information can also be found at the FTA 

Web site at the following Internet address: http://transit-safety.volpe.dot.gov/damis. 
1998 Annual Report 2-1

2. ELECTRONIC REPORTING 

This chapter presents details on electronic reporting of mandatory drug and alcohol testing 

conducted by transit systems receiving funds from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). The 

discussion presents data on the percentage of reporters who reported electronically by grantee, 

subrecipient, and by contractor. Also presented are data percentages by operator size: large, 

small, and rural. 

Electronic reporting of the Drug and Alcohol MIS results was instituted in 1998. Electronic 

software with “help” screen and validation capabilities was developed in an effort to lessen the 

burden placed upon the reporter. When the FTA Drug and Alcohol MIS Project Office, located 

at the Volpe Center in Cambridge, Massachusetts, conducted its annual mailing of FTA Drug and 

Alcohol reporting materials in December 1998, the reporting materials included a set of five FTA 

Drug and Alcohol MIS reporting disks. Approximately 1,200 sets of disks were included in this 

mailing to FTA recipients, subrecipients, and State Department of Transportation (DOT) Offices. 

For the first time in 1998 reporters had the option of reporting on paper forms that are available 

or by using the electronic reporting system and submitting results on a data disk. More than 25 

percent of reporters receiving the disks (317) opted for the data disk. In addition, approximately 

300 reporters used the electronic reporting method to complete the information and then reported 

on paper forms generated through the electronic reporting software. 

Of the 317 reporters who submitted data disks, 58 (18.3 percent) indicated a positive drug test 

and 27 (8.5 percent) indicated at least one positive alcohol test. This chapter presents details on 

electronic reporting of mandatory drug and alcohol testing conducted by transit systems receiving 

funds from the FTA. Figures 2-1, 2-2, and 2-3 that follow illustrate graphically the findings from 

the first year of electronic reporting. 
1998 Annual Report 2-2

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

Transit Systems 248 1383 1631 15.2%

Contractors 69 777 846 8.2%

MIS Data Disk MIS Collection 

Forms Totals Percent Data Disk

Figure 2-1. Electronic Report Forms Received 

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

MIS Data Disks 145 85 87

MIS Data Collection

Forms

710 297 1153

Percent Data Disks 17.0% 22.3% 7.0%

Large Small Rural

Figure 2-2. Electronic Reporting by Employer Size 
1998 Annual Report 2-3

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

MIS Data Collection Forms 118 107 169 402 455 188 308 110 187 116

MIS Data Disks 85 21 21 64 34 39 9 8 24 12

Percent Data Disk 41.9% 16.4% 11.1% 13.7% 7.0% 17.1% 2.8% 6.8% 11.4% 9.4%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Figure 2-3. Electronic Reporting by FTA Region

1998 Annual Report 3-1 

3. GENERAL INFORMATION−DRUG AND ALCOHOL TEST RESULTS 

This chapter presents in graphical format the information provided by transit systems and 

contractors submitting FTA Drug and Alcohol MIS forms to the FTA for 1998. The 

discussion presents data on the number of forms received and the distribution of workers 

by employee category, distribution of employees by size of organization (large, small, 

rural). Also included are sources of FTA funds and information comparing rail and nonrail reports received. 

3.1 Distribution of Transit Systems and Contractors 

For calendar year 1998, the FTA received drug and alcohol forms from 1,631 transit 

systems and 846 contractors. Figure 3-1 identifies the number of drug and alcohol forms 

received and the percent of contractors reporting. 

1,383

248

777

69

1,631

846

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

Transit Systems 1,383 248 1,631

Contractors 777 69 846

Percent Contractors 36.0% 21.8% 34.2%

MIS Data Collection 

Forms MIS Data Disks Total

Figure 3-1. Number of Drug and Alcohol Forms Received 

Figure 3-2 shows the number of transit system and contractor employers in large, small, 

and rural systems. 
1998 Annual Report 3-2 

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Transit Systems 322 265 1,044

Contractors 533 117 196

Percent Contractors 62.3% 30.6% 15.8%

Large Small Rural

Figure 3-2. Drug and Alcohol Reports Received by Employer Size 

Figure 3-3 presents the distribution of drug and alcohol reports received from transit 

system employers and contractors by region. 

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Transit Systems 130 65 104 322 320 163 283 82 99 63

Contractors 73 63 86 144 169 64 34 36 112 65

Percent Contractors 31.3%49.2%45.3% 30.9%34.6%28.2%10.4%30.5% 53.1%50.8%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Figure 3-3. Number of FTA Drug and Alcohol Reports Received by Region 
1998 Annual Report 3-3 

3.2 Rail and Non-Rail Employers 

For this report, rail entities are considered to be those entities, along with their 

contractors, which operate rapid rail transit operations within an urban area and are not 

connected to the general railroad system of transportation. These transit vehicles include 

rail cars and trolley cars. The FTA and the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) have 

agreed that commuter railroad operations that receive FTA funds must comply with 

FRA’s drug and alcohol testing regulation, and are therefore not included in these 

numbers. 

In 37 of 39 cases, rail systems are considered “large.” It is important to note that rail 

systems have a different employee demographic than non-rail, with rail employers ten 

having fewer revenue vehicle operators and a greater concentration of mechanics. 

Figure 3-4 compares the distribution of reports received for both rail and non-rail for 

transit systems and contractors. See Appendix C for a list of rail systems and rail 

contractors that submitted reports. 

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

Transit Systems 39 1,592

Contractors 172 674

Percent Contractors 81.5% 29.7%

Rail Non-Rail

Figure 3-4. Reports Received - Rail Versus Non-Rail 

3.3 FTA-Covered Employees 

Under the FTA’s drug and alcohol testing regulations, employees who perform safetysensitive functions must be included in the substance abuse management program. The 

following figures present the distribution of these FTA-covered employees. 

Figure 3-5 presents the distribution of FTA-covered employees by employee category for 

both transit systems and contractors, and the percent of the labor force that was 

contracted.
1998 Annual Report 3-4 

FTA-Covered Employees By Employee Category

0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 140000

Revenue Vehicle Operations

Vehicle and Equip. Maint.

Rev. Vehicle Cntrl/Dsptch

CDL/Non-Revenue

Armed Security Personnel

Transit Systems 121,963 38,387 13,734 3,994 3,384

Contractors 33,402 5,314 3,408 341 769

Percent Contracted 21.5% 12.2% 19.9% 7.9% 18.5%

Revenue 

Vehicle 

Operations

Vehicle and 

Equip. 

Maint.

Rev. Vehicle 

Cntrl/Dsptch

CDL/NonRevenue

Armed 

Security 

Personnel

Figure 3-5. Number of FTA-Covered Employees by Employee Category/Percent of 

Labor Force that was Contracted 

Figure 3-6 shows the percent of FTA-Covered Employees of Transit Systems. 

Armed Security 

Personnel

2%

CDL/NonRevenue

2%

Revenue Vehicle 

Operation

67%

Revenue Vehicle 

Control/Disp. Vehicle and 8%

Equip. 

Maintenance

21%

Figure 3-6. Percent of FTA-Covered Employees for Transit Systems 
1998 Annual Report 3-5 

Figure 3-7 shows the percent of FTA-covered employees of contractors in each employee 

category. 

Armed Security 

Personnel

2%

CDL/NonRevenue

1%

Revenue Vehicle 

Operation

77%

Revenue Vehicle 

Control/Disp.

8%

Vehicle and 

Equip. 

Maintenance

12%

Figure 3-7. Percent of FTA-Covered Employees in Each Employee Category – 

Contractors 

Figure 3-8 illustrates all FTA-covered employees by employee category. Figure 3-9 

shows the percent of all FTA-covered employees for larger operators. Figure 3-10 shows 

the percent of all FTA employees covered for small operators. Figure 3-11 shows the 

percent of all FTA-covered employees for rural operators. 
1998 Annual Report 3-6 

All FTA-Covered Employees By Employee Category

0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 140000

Revenue Vehicle Operations

Vehicle and Equip. Maint.

Rev. Vehicle Cntrl/Dsptch

CDL/Non-Revenue

Armed Security Personnel

Large 120,732 39,301 12,561 3,894 4,103

Small 13,616 2,541 1,586 274 50

Rural 21,017 1,559 2,995 167 0

Revenue 

Vehicle 

Operations

Vehicle and 

Equip. 

Maint.

Rev. Vehicle 

Cntrl/Dsptch

CDL/NonRevenue

Armed 

Security 

Personnel

Figure 3-8. All FTA-Covered Employees by Employee Category 

Armed Security 

Personnel

2%

CDL/NonRevenue

2%

Revenue Vehicle 

Operation

67%

Revenue Vehicle 

Control/Disp.

7% Vehicle and 

Equip. 

Maintenance

22%

Figure 3-9. Percent of All FTA-Covered Employees for Large Operators 
1998 Annual Report 3-7 

Armed Security 

Personnel

0%

CDL/NonRevenue

2%

Revenue Vehicle 

Operation

75%

Revenue Veh. 

Control/Disp.

9%

Veh. and Equip. 

Maintenance

14%

Figure 3-10. Percent of All FTA-Covered Employees for Small Operators 

Armed Security 

Personnel

0%

CDL/NonRevenue

1%

Revenue Vehicle 

Operation

81%

Revenue Veh. 

Control/Disp.

12%

Veh. and Equip. 

Maintenance

6%

Figure 3-11. Percent of All FTA-Covered Employees Reporting for Rural Operators 

Figure 3-12 shows FTA-covered employees by employee category and by size of 

employer. 
1998 Annual Report 3-8 

0 20000 40000 60000 80000 100000 120000 140000 160000

Large

Small

Rural

Transit Systems 146,250 13,341 21,571

Contractors 34,341 4,726 4,167

Percent Contractors 19.0% 26.2% 16.2%

Large Small Rural

Figure 3-12. All FTA-Covered Employees by Employer Size 

Figure 3-13 shows FTA-covered employees by employer category for rail and non-rail. 

0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000

Revenue Vehicle

Operations

Vehicle and Equip.

Maintenance

Revenue Vehicle

Control/Dispatch

CDL/Non-Revenue

Armed Security

Personnel

Rail 65,827 26,843 7,814 2,641 3,390

Non-Rail 89,538 16,858 9,328 1,694 763

Revenue 

Vehicle 

Operations

Vehicle and 

Equip. 

Maintenance

Revenue 

Vehicle 

Control/Dispatc

CDL/NonRevenueArmed Security 

Personnel

Figure 3-13. FTA-Covered Employees by Employee Category for Rail and Non-Rail 
1998 Annual Report 3-9 

Figures 3-14 and 3-15 show the percent of FTA-covered employees in each employee 

category for rail and non-rail operators.

Armed Security 

Personnel

3%

CDL/Non-Revenue

2%

Revenue Vehicle 

Operation

63%

Revenue Vehicle 

Control/Disp.

7%

Vehicle and Equip. 

Maintenance

25%

Figure 3-14. Percent of FTA-Covered Employees in Each Employee Category – 

Rail Operators

Armed Security 

Personnel

1%

CDL/Non-Revenue

1%

Revenue Vehicle 

Operation

76%

Revenue Vehicle 

Control/Dispatch

8%

Vehicle and Equip. 

Maintenance

14%

Figure 3-15. Percent of FTA-Covered Employees in Each Employee Category – 

Non-Rail Operators 
1998 Annual Report 3-10 

Figures 3-16 and 3-17 show FTA-covered employees by region and by region and size. 

FTA-Covered Employees By Region

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

Transit Systems 9,519 36,498 22,825 19,717 29,679 13,911 8,733 5,136 24,040 11,104

Contractors 3,091 5,437 4,350 5,503 5,717 3,694 669 1,398 11,218 2,157

Percent Contracted 24.5% 13.0% 16.0% 21.8% 16.2% 21.0% 7.1% 21.4% 31.8% 16.3%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Figure 3-16. FTA-Covered Employees by Region 

FTA-Covered Employees By Region/Size

0

5,000

10,000

15,000

20,000

25,000

30,000

35,000

40,000

45,000

Large 10,516 39,454 22,300 17,003 28,323 13,299 3,561 4,174 31,936 10,025

Small 1,278 865 2,151 3,227 2,831 1,484 1,522 980 1,926 1,803

Rural 816 1,616 2,724 4,990 4,242 2,822 4,319 1,380 1,396 1,433

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Figure 3-17. FTA-Covered Employees by Region/Size 
1998 Annual Report 3-11 

3.4 Federal Funds 

Transit systems are required to report the types of FTA funds they received. Specifically, 

transit systems are required to identify the particular sections of the Federal Transit Act 

under which they received Federal funds (that is, Sections 5309, 5307, 5310, and 5311). 

Some of the transit systems received funding under multiple sections. Figure 3-18 shows 

the breakdown of Federal funds received by transit systems that submitted Drug and 

Alcohol MIS forms. Figure 3-19 shows the percent of transit systems that received 

Federal funds in 1998 by source of funding. 

Section 5309 refers to discretionary grants and loans for capital projects, new and 

existing fixed guideway systems, an efficient mass transportation system coordinated 

with other transportation systems, the introduction of new technologies, the enhancement 

of urban economic development or the incorporation of private investment, and mass 

transportation projects to meet the needs of the elderly and individuals with disabilities. 

Section 5307 refers to block grants for capital projects and to finance the planning, 

improvement, and operating costs of equipment, facilities, and associated capital 

maintenance items for use in mass transportation. Section 5310 refers to grants and loans 

for the special needs of the elderly and individuals with disabilities. Section 5311 refers 

to financial assistance for non-urbanized areas. 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200

5309

5307

5310

5311

Transit Systems 435 537 357 1152

Percent of Transit

Systems

26.7% 32.9% 21.9% 70.6%

5309 5307 5310 5311

Figure 3-18. Number and Percent of Transit Systems that Received Federal Funds 

by Source of Funding 
1998 Annual Report 3-12 

5311

46%

5309

18%

5310

14%

5307

22%

Figure 3-19. Percent of Total Funds by Funding Source 

Figure 3-20 shows transit systems that received Federal funds in 1998 by FTA region. 

Following this is a breakdown by size, in Figure 3-21. 
1998 Annual Report 3-13 

0

50

100

150

200

250

5309 31 18 35 70 72 36 112 12 31 18

5307 87 26 51 88 120 50 27 19 49 20

5310 40 12 24 66 36 31 92 26 13 17

5311 55 46 68 246 212 115 246 67 55 42

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Figure 3-20. Number of Transit Systems that Received Federal Funds 

by Source of Funding and by FTA Region 

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

1100

5309 139 110 186

5307 280 212 45

5310 39 44 274

5311 62 60 1030

Large Small Rural

Figure 3-21. Number of Transit Systems that Received Federal Funds by Size and 

Source of Funding 
1998 Annual Report

4-1

4. DRUG TEST RESULTS 

This chapter provides background information and a summary of the 1998 drug testing results. 

For drug testing, a urine specimen is collected for analysis. Prohibited drugs for which each 

urine specimen must be tested are marijuana, cocaine, phencyclidine (PCP), opiates, and 

amphetamines. 

A total of 200,748 samples were collected for all types of drug testing in 1998. Six types of tests 

were administered: pre-employment; random; post-accident; reasonable suspicion; return-toduty; and follow-up. The results of the random drug testing provide an indication of the overall 

level of industry-wide drug use among FTA-covered transit system and contractor employees. 

As Table 4-1 shows, a total of 111,490 specimens were collected under random drug testing in 

1998. Overall, 1.07 percent of those specimens tested positive for one or more of the five 

prohibited drugs. Among transit systems, 0.94 percent of all random specimens tested positive; 

among contractors 1.69 percent tested positive. 

Table 4-1. 1998 Random Drug Test Results 

Employer Number of 

Specimens 

Number 

Positive 

Percent 

Positive 

Transit 

Systems 90,855 847 0.94 

Contractors 20,635 349 1.69 

Totals 111,490 1,196 1.07 

 

Among large operators, 1.06 percent of all random specimens tested positive, among small 

operators, 1.19 percent tested positive, and among rural operators, 1.12 percent tested positive, as 

depicted in Table 4-2. The FTA drug rule provides that, if the results from industry-wide drug 

testing are less than 1 percent for 2 consecutive years, the FTA may lower the required random 

drug testing rate from the current 50 percent requirement to 25 percent. However, in 1995, 1996, 

and 1997, the industry-wide random positive rate exceeded 1 percent. 

Table 4-2. Random Drug Test Results by Operator Size 

Operator Size Number of 

Specimens 

Number 

Positive 

Percent 

Positive 

Large 90,980 961 1.06 

Small 8,585 102 1.19 

Rural 11,925 133 1.12 

Totals 111,490 1,196 1.07 

4.1 Drug Test Results by FTA Region 

This section reports random drug test results by FTA region. As shown in Figure 4-3, of the ten 

FTA regions, regions 5 and 8 had the highest percent of specimens testing positive for one or 

more drugs. 
1998 Annual Report

4-2

Table 4-3. Random Drug Test Results 

by FTA Region 

Region Number of 

Specimens 

Number 

Positive 

Percent 

Positive 

1 6,069 59 0.97 

2 21,475 146 0.68 

3 13,132 121 0.92 

4 13,114 153 1.17 

5 17,493 249 1.42 

6 9,206 110 1.19 

7 4,074 46 1.13 

8 3,039 43 1.41 

9 17,370 211 1.21 

10 6,518 58 0.89 

Totals 111,490 1,196 1.07 

Table 4-4 presents random drug test results for rail systems and non-rail systems. 

Table 4-4. Random Drug Test Results for Rail and Non-Rail 

Employer Number of 

Specimens 

Number 

Positive 

Percent 

Positive 

Rail Systems 54,173 520 0.96 

Non-Rail 

Systems 57,317 676 1.18 

Totals 111,490 1,196 1.07 

4.2 Results of Drug Tests Presented by Test Types 

Table 4-5 presents drug test results by the six drug test types for transit systems, contractors, and 

their combined totals. It shows the number of specimens collected, the number of positive 

results, and the percent of positive results. The totals indicate that the positive drug test results 

show some variation when viewed by test types. Over all employment categories, 8.04 percent of 

the reasonable suspicion tests were positive. Of the return-to-duty tests, 2.98 percent were 

positive. Pre-employment, post-accident, and follow-up tests tested positive at 2.74, 1.45, and 

1.53 percent, respectively. Random tests had the lowest percentage of positive results at 1.07 

percent. 

The positive results were higher for contractors than for transit systems in all six testing 

categories. For pre-employment testing, contractors had 3.77 percent positive versus 2.02 percent 

for transit systems. Positive random testing rates were 1.69 percent and 0.93 percent for 

contractors and transit systems, respectively. For post-accident testing, contractors exceeded 

transit systems with a positive rate of 2.34 percent versus 1.19 percent. Reasonable suspicion 

testing yielded a testing rate of 13.39 percent positive for contractors and 6.51 percent for transit 

systems. Contractors had 6.13 percent positive rate for return-to-duty testing versus 2.45 percent 
1998 Annual Report

4-3

for transit systems. For follow-up testing, contractors and transit systems had positive rates of 

4.08 percent and 1.39 percent, respectively. 

Table 4-6 presents drug test results by the six drug test types by employee category for large, 

small, and rural systems and their combined totals. 

Table 4-7 presents drug test results by the six drug test types by employee category for rail and 

non-rail systems and their combined totals. 
Table 4-5. Drug Test Results by Test Type and Employee Category 

Transit Systems Contractors Totals 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

ST TYPE, ALL EMPLOYEE CATEGORIES

35,039 707 2.02% 24,574 927 3.77% 59,613 1,634 2.74%90,855 847 0.93% 20,635 349 1.69% 111,490 1,196 1.07%10,763 128 1.19% 3,205 75 2.34% 13,968 203 1.45%

cion 784 51 6.51% 224 30 13.39% 1,008 81 8.04%

978 24 2.45% 163 10 6.13% 1,141 34 2.98%

12,818 178 1.39% 710 29 4.08% 13,528 207 1.53%

151,237 1,935 1.28% 49,511 1,420 2.87% 200,748 3,355 1.67%

Transit Systems Contractors Totals 

gory 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

MENT 

Operation 28,148 575 2.04% 22,028 841 3.82% 50,176 1,416 2.82%

 Equip. Maint. 4,731 104 2.20% 1,286 51 3.97% 6,017 155 2.58%

trol/Disp. 1,310 10 0.76% 724 24 3.31% 2,034 34 1.67%

 Vehicle 381 17 4.46% 58 7 12.07% 439 24 5.47%

rsonnel 469 1 0.21% 478 4 0.84% 947 5 0.53%

Operation 61,288 570 0.93% 15,913 283 1.78% 77,201 853 1.10%

 Equip. Maint. 19,827 218 1.10% 2,634 39 1.48% 22,461 257 1.14%

trol/Disp. 6,309 30 0.48% 1,565 17 1.09% 7,874 47 0.60%

 Vehicle 2,079 24 1.15% 131 3 2.29% 2,210 27 1.22%

rsonnel 1,352 5 0.37% 392 7 1.79% 1,744 12 0.69%
Table 4-5. Drug Test Results by Test Type and Employee Category (continued) 

Transit Systems Contractors Totals

ype 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

T 

peration 9,735 122 1.25% 3,018 71 2.35% 12,753 193 1.51%

Equip. Maint. 666 4 0.60% 148 4 2.70% 814 8 0.98%

rol/Disp. 177 0 0.00% 21 0 0.00% 198 0 0.00%

Vehicle 85 2 2.35% 14 0 0.00% 99 2 2.02%

sonnel 100 0 0.00% 4 0 0.00% 104 0 0.00%

SUSPICION 

peration 622 37 5.95% 202 28 13.86% 824 65 7.89%

Equip. Maint. 96 8 8.33% 15 2 13.33% 111 10 9.01%

rol/Disp. 36 1 2.78% 5 0 0.00% 41 1 2.44%

Vehicle 24 5 20.83% 0 0 0.00% 24 5 20.83%

sonnel 6 0 0.00% 2 0 0.00% 8 0 0.00%

TY 

peration 693 15 2.16% 142 8 5.63% 835 23 2.75%

Equip. Maint. 231 7 3.03% 13 1 7.69% 244 8 3.28%

rol/Disp. 27 2 7.41% 7 1 14.29% 34 3 8.82%

Vehicle 27 0 0.00% 1 0 0.00% 28 0 0.00%

sonnel 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%

peration 8,105 115 1.42% 592 26 4.39% 8,697 141 1.62%

Equip. Maint. 3,407 40 1.17% 90 3 3.33% 3,497 43 1.23%

rol/Disp. 457 6 1.31% 28 0 0.00% 485 6 1.24%

Vehicle 841 17 2.02% 0 0 0.00% 841 17 2.02%

sonnel 8 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 8 0 0.00%
Table 4-6. Drug Test Results by Test Type and Employee Category by Size 

Large Small Rural 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

ST TYPE, ALL EMPLOYEE CATEGORIES

45,479 1,355 2.98% 5,240 126 2.40% 8,894 153 1.72%90,980 961 1.06% 8,585 102 1.19% 11,925 133 1.12%12,402 188 1.52% 820 8 0.98% 746 7 0.94%

cion 941 63 6.69% 37 9 24.32% 30 9 30.00%

1,032 27 2.62% 57 5 8.77% 52 2 3.85%

13,248 197 1.49% 190 8 4.21% 90 2 2.22%

164,082 2,791 1.70% 14,929 258 1.73% 21,737 306 1.41%

Large Small Rural 

gory 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

ENT 

peration 37,526 1,168 3.11% 4,598 109 2.37% 8,052 139 1.73%

Equip. Maint. 5,254 131 2.49% 423 17 4.02% 340 7 2.06%

trol/Disp. 1,382 28 2.03% 178 0 0.00% 474 6 1.27%

Vehicle 375 23 6.13% 36 0 0.00% 28 1 3.57%

rsonnel 942 5 0.53% 5 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%

peration 61,005 681 1.12% 6,480 67 1.05% 9,788 105 1.07%

Equip. Maint. 20,410 217 1.06% 1,307 27 2.07% 744 13 1.75%

trol/Disp. 5,824 28 0.48% 730 6 0.82% 1,320 13 0.98%

Vehicle 2,017 23 1.14% 120 2 1.67% 73 2 2.74%

rsonnel 1,724 12 0.70% 20 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%
Table 4-6. Drug Test Results by Test Type and Employee Category by Size (continued) 

Large Small Rural 

ype 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

T 

peration 11,289 178 1.58% 743 8 1.08% 721 7 0.97%

Equip. Maint. 753 8 1.06% 52 0 0.00% 9 0 0.00%

rol/Disp. 168 0 0.00% 16 0 0.00% 14 0 0.00%

Vehicle 88 2 2.27% 9 0 0.00% 2 0 0.00%

sonnel 104 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%

SUSPICION 

peration 775 50 6.45% 24 7 29.17% 25 8 32.00%

Equip. Maint. 102 8 7.84% 6 1 16.67% 3 1 33.33%

rol/Disp. 36 1 2.78% 3 0 0.00% 2 0 0.00%

Vehicle 21 4 19.05% 3 1 33.33% 0 0 0.00%

sonnel 7 0 0.00% 1 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%

TY 

peration 743 17 2.29% 48 4 8.33% 44 2 4.55%

Equip. Maint. 234 8 3.42% 7 0 0.00% 3 0 0.00%

rol/Disp. 28 2 7.14% 1 1 100.00% 5 0 0.00%

Vehicle 27 0 0.00% 1 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%

sonnel 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%

peration 8,488 135 1.59% 138 4 2.90% 71 2 2.82%

Equip. Maint. 3,449 40 1.16% 39 3 7.69% 9 0 0.00%

rol/Disp. 462 5 1.08% 13 1 7.69% 10 0 0.00%

Vehicle 841 17 2.02% 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%

sonnel 8 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%
able 4-7. Drug Test Results by Test Type and Employee Category by Rail and Non-Rail 

Rail Systems Non-Rail Systems Totals 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

ST TYPE, ALL EMPLOYEE CATEGORIES

22,640 706 3.11% 36,973 928 2.51% 59,613 1,634 2.74%54,173 520 0.96% 57,317 676 1.18% 111,490 1,196 1.07%

6,913 106 1.53% 7,055 97 1.39% 13,968 203 1.45%

cion 719 36 5.01% 289 45 15.57% 1,008 81 8.04%

630 13 2.06% 511 21 4.11% 1,141 34 2.98%

10,870 111 1.02% 2,658 96 3.62% 13,528 207 1.53%

95,945 1,492 1.56% 104,803 1,873 1.79% 200,748 3,355 1.67%

Rail Systems Non-Rail Totals 

gory 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

MENT 

Operation 17,617 588 3.34% 32,559 828 2.54% 50,176 1,416 2.82%

 Equip. Maint. 3,252 82 2.52% 2,765 73 2.64% 6,017 155 2.58%

trol/Disp. 818 20 2.44% 1,216 14 1.15% 2,034 34 1.67%

 Vehicle 219 13 5.94% 220 11 5.00% 439 24 5.47%

rsonnel 734 3 0.41% 213 2 0.94% 947 5 0.53%

Operation 33,809 351 1.04% 43,392 502 1.16% 77,201 853 1.10%

 Equip. Maint. 14,032 129 0.92% 8,429 128 1.52% 22,461 257 1.14%

trol/Disp. 3,443 15 0.44% 4,431 32 0.72% 7,874 47 0.60%

 Vehicle 1,466 18 1.23% 744 9 1.21% 2,210 27 1.22%

rsonnel 1,423 7 0.49% 321 5 1.56% 1,744 12 0.69%
7. Drug Test Results by Test Type and Employee Category by Rail and Non-Rail (continued) 

Rail Systems Non-Rail Systems Totals

ype 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

T 

peration 6,171 99 1.60% 6,582 94 1.43% 12,753 193 1.51%

Equip. Maint. 468 5 1.07% 346 3 0.87% 814 8 0.98%

rol/Disp. 134 0 0.00% 64 0 0.00% 198 0 0.00%

Vehicle 59 2 3.39% 40 0 0.00% 99 2 2.02%

sonnel 81 0 0.00% 23 0 0.00% 104 0 0.00%

SUSPICION 

peration 588 27 4.59% 236 38 16.10% 824 65 7.89%

Equip. Maint. 73 6 8.22% 38 4 10.53% 111 10 9.01%

rol/Disp. 33 0 0.00% 8 1 12.50% 41 1 2.44%

Vehicle 19 3 15.79% 6 2 33.33% 25 5 20.83%

sonnel 6 0 0.00% 2 0 0.00% 8 0 0.00%

TY 

peration 426 8 1.88% 409 15 3.67% 835 23 2.75%

Equip. Maint. 162 5 3.09% 82 3 3.66% 244 8 3.28%

rol/Disp. 18 0 0.00% 16 3 18.75% 34 3 8.82%

Vehicle 24 0 0.00% 4 0 0.00% 28 0 0.00%

sonnel 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%

peration 6,766 67 0.99% 1931 74 3.84% 8,697 141 1.62%

Equip. Maint. 2,908 27 0.93% 589 16 2.72% 3,497 43 1.23%

rol/Disp. 387 3 0.78% 98 3 3.06% 485 6 1.24%

Vehicle 802 14 1.75% 39 3 7.69% 841 17 2.02%

sonnel 7 0 0.00% 1 0 0.00% 8 0 0.00%
1998 Annual Report 4-10

4.3 Post-Accident Testing 

FTA regulations require testing for prohibited drugs in the case of certain mass transit accidents. 

Post-accident testing is mandatory for accidents where there is a loss of life and other non-fatal 

accidents unless employee performance can be discounted completely as a causative or 

contributing factor. 

4.4 Accidents 

An accident is defined as an occurrence associated with the operation of a vehicle in which 

• An individual dies; 

• An individual suffers a bodily injury and immediately receives medical attention away 

from the scene of an accident; 

• The mass transit or other vehicles involved incur disabling damage as the result of the 

occurrence and is transported away from the scene by a tow truck or other vehicle; 

• The mass transit vehicle involved is a rail car, trolley car, trolley bus, or vessel, and is 

removed from revenue service. See Tables 4-8 to 4-10. 

Table 4-8. 1998 Accidents with Drug Positives 

Employer 

Number of 

Non-Fatal 

Accidents 

Number of 

Fatal 

Accidents 

Number of 

Fatalities 

Accidents per 

Covered 

Employee 

Transit 

Systems 128 0 0 0.07 

Contractors 71 0 0 0.16 

Totals 199 0 0 0.09 

Table 4-9. Accidents with Drug Positives 

by Size 

Operator Size 

Number of 

Non-Fatal 

Accidents 

Number of 

Fatal 

Accidents 

Number of 

Fatalities 

Large 183 0 0 

Small 10 0 0 

Rural 6 0 0 

Totals 199 0 0 
1998 Annual Report 4-11

Table 4-10. Accidents with Drug Positives 

by Region 

Region 

Number of 

Non-Fatal 

Accidents 

Number of 

Fatal 

Accidents 

Number 

of 

Fatalities 

Accidents 

per Covered 

Employee 

1 11 0 0 0.09 

2 13 0 0 0.03 

3 25 0 0 0.09 

4 33 0 0 0.13 

5 43 0 0 0.12 

6 21 0 0 0.12 

7 2 0 0 0.02 

8 9 0 0 0.14 

9 36 0 0 0.10 

10 6 0 0 0.05 

Totals 199 0 0 0.09 

Whenever there is an accident meeting the FTA threshold, post-accident testing is mandatory 

unless employee performance can be discounted completely as a causative or contributing factor. 

This means that safety-sensitive employees not on the vehicle (e.g., maintenance personnel), 

whose performance could have contributed to the accident (as determined by the transit agency 

using the best information available at the time of the accident) must be tested. As a result, it is 

possible for there to be multiple positive post-accident results in a single accident. See Table 4-

11. 

Table 4-11. Post-Accident Drug Test Positives 

Employer 

Revenue 

Vehicle 

Operations 

Vehicle and 

Equip. Maint.

Rev. 

Vehicle 

Cntl/Dsptch

CDL/NonRevenue Armed 

Security 

Personnel 

Transit 

Systems 122 4 0 2 0 

Contractors 71 4 0 0 0 

Totals 193 8 0 2 0 

4.5 Distribution of Positive Drug Test Results by Type of Drug 

This section presents the distribution of positive drug test results for employees who tested 

positive for 1 or more of the 5 prohibited drugs. To be recorded as a positive result, an employee 

may have tested positive for 1 drug or a combination of drugs (e.g., marijuana and cocaine). 

Marijuana is a common name for the plant cannabis sativa. The primary active ingredient in 

marijuana is Delta-9-Tetrhydrocannabinol (THC). THC is absorbed quickly into fatty tissues 

and stored for a long time. People use marijuana for the mildly tranquilizing and mood and 

perception-altering effects it produces. 
1998 Annual Report 4-12

Cocaine is a chemical that has both local anesthetic properties, like Novocaine, and stimulant 

properties similar to adrenaline. Cocaine is used medically as a local anesthetic. Cocaine causes 

the brain to experience an exhilaration caused by a large release of neurohormones associated 

with mood elevation. 

Opiates, also called narcotics, are drugs that alleviate pain, depress body functions and reactions, 

and, when taken in large doses, cause a strong euphoric feeling. 

Phencyclidine (PCP) was originally developed as an anesthetic, but adverse side effects 

prevented its use except as a tranquilizer for large animals. PCP acts as both a depressant and a 

hallucinogen, and sometimes as a stimulant. 

Amphetamines are central nervous system stimulants that speed up the mind and body. Although 

widely prescribed at one time for weight reduction and mood elevation, the legal use of 

amphetamines is now limited to a very narrow range of medical conditions. 

 

Figures 4-1 to 4-8 and Table 4-12 provide details on the distribution of test results by type of 

drug. 

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

THC

Cocaine

PCP

Opiates

Amphetamines

Positives 1,887 1,348 21 126 102

Percent of Positives 56.24% 40.18% 0.63% 3.76% 3.04%

THC Cocaine PCP Opiates Amphetamines

Figure 4-1. Number and Percent of Positive Specimens by Type of Drug 
1998 Annual Report 4-13

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200

THC

Cocaine

PCP

Opiates

Amphetamines

Transit Systems 1,076 783 9 68 53

Contractors 811 565 12 58 49

THC Cocaine PCP Opiates Amphetamines

Figure 4-2. Number of Positive Specimens by Type of Drug for Each Employer Type 

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

Transit Systems 54.1% 39.4% 0.5% 3.4% 2.7%

Contractors 54.2% 37.8% 0.8% 3.9% 3.3%

THC Cocaine PCP Opiates Amphetamines

Figure 4-3. Percent of Positive Specimens by Type of Drug for Each Employer Type 
1998 Annual Report 4-14

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

Large 54.3% 43.0% 0.8% 3.5% 3.7%

Small 62.8% 29.8% 0.0% 3.5% 5.0%

Rural 71.6% 22.9% 0.0% 4.9% 4.2%

THC Cocaine PCP Opiates Amphetamines

Figure 4-4. Percent of Positive Specimens by Type of Drug and Operator Size 

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

THC 73 216 194 231 371 210 77 75 357 93

Cocaine 72 215 185 188 261 124 22 36 209 36

PCP 0620350050

Opiates 5 25 10 10 31 3 3 1 32 6

Amphetamines 0 0 2 4 5 3 3 7 68 10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Figure 4-5. Number and Type of Drug by FTA Region 
1998 Annual Report 4-15

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

THC 49.7% 49.5% 52.0% 54.1% 57.3% 64.8% 74.0% 64.1% 56.1% 64.6%

Cocaine 49.0% 49.3% 49.6% 44.0% 40.3% 38.2% 21.2% 30.8% 32.9% 25.0%

PCP 0.0% 1.4% 0.5% 0.0% 0.5% 1.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.8% 0.0%

Opiates 3.4% 5.7% 2.7% 2.3% 4.8% 0.9% 2.9% 0.9% 50.0% 4.2%

Amphetamines 0.0% 0.0% 0.5% 0.9% 0.8% 0.9% 2.9% 6.0% 10.7% 6.9%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Figure 4-6. Percent of Positive Specimens by FTA Region 

and Type of Drug 

0

500

1000

1500

2000

RVO 1,532 1,083 18 103 69

RVM 267 194 2 12 25

RVCD 49 35 0 7 4

CDL 40 26 1 4 4

ASP 9 10 0 0 0

THC Cocaine PCP Opiates Amphetamines

Figure 4-7. Number of Positive Specimens by Employee Category 

and Type of Drug 
1998 Annual Report 4-16

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

THC 56.9% 55.5% 53.8% 53.3% 52.9%

Cocaine 40.2% 40.3% 38.5% 34.7% 58.8%

PCP 0.7% 0.4% 0.0% 1.3% 0.0%

Opiates 3.8% 2.5% 7.7% 5.3% 0.0%

Amphetamines 2.6% 5.2% 4.4% 5.3% 0.0%

RVO RVM RVCD CDL ASP

Figure 4-8. Percent of Positive Specimens by Type of Drug and Employee Category 

Table 4-12. Multiple Drug Combinations 

Drug Combination Number of 

Specimens 

THC/Cocaine 77 

THC/PCP 11 

THC/Opiates 4 

THC/Amphetamines 15 

Cocaine/PCP 1 

Cocaine/Opiates 15 

Cocaine/Amphetamines 3 

THC/Cocaine/PCP 2 

THC/Cocaine/Opiates 6 

THC/Cocaine/PCP/Opiates/

Amphetamines 1 

Totals 135 

4.6 Drug Test Refusals 

When directed to provide specimens for drug testing, some employees refused to be tested. In 

1998, there were 143 reported cases of a covered employee refusing a random drug test and 54 

cases of a covered employee refusing a non-random drug test. These refusals reflect 0.10 

percent of the total number of drug tests attempted. See Figure 4-9. 
1998 Annual Report 4-17

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Transit

Systems

Contractors

Random Test Refusals 74 69

Non-Random Test

Refusals

24 30

Percent of Random Tests 0.06% 0.20%

Transit Systems Contractors

Figure 4-9. Drug Test Refusals 

4.7 Return-to-Duty Positive Rate 

The total number of employees who returned to duty after a positive drug test or after refusing to 

take a drug test was 954. Because the consequences for refusing a drug test and for testing 

positive are the same, the MIS form used to collect information from employers combines these 

figures. See Table 4-13. 

Table 4-13. Returned-to-Duty Covered 

Employees

Employer Returned-to-Duty Percent of Total 

Transit 

Systems 821 86.1 

Contractors 133 13.9 

Totals 954 100.0 

4.8 Results of Drug Tests Presented by Employee Category 

This section presents drug test results by employee category for transit systems and contractors 

and their combined totals. Table 4-14 identifies the number of specimens collected, the number 

of positive results, and the percent of positive results. Table 4-15 presents drug test results by 

employee category for large, small, and rural systems and their combined totals. Table 4-16 

presents drug test results by employee category for transit systems and contractors and their 

combined totals. 
14. Drug Test Results by Employee Category and Test Type by Transit System and Contractor 

Transit Systems Contractors Totals 

gory 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

LOYEE CATEGORY, ALL TEST TYPES

eration 108,591 1,434 1.32% 41,895 1,257 3.00% 150,486 2,691 1.79%

quip. Maint. 28,958 381 1.32% 4,186 100 2.39% 33,144 481 1.45%

ol/Disp. 8,316 49 0.59% 2,350 42 1.79% 10,666 91 0.85%

ehicle 3,437 65 1.89% 204 10 4.90% 3,641 75 2.06%

onnel 1,935 6 0.31% 876 11 1.26% 2,811 17 0.60%

151,237 1,935 1.28% 49,511 1,420 2.87% 200,748 3,355 1.67%

Transit Systems Contractors Totals 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

LE OPERATOR

28,148 575 2.04% 22,028 841 3.82% 50,176 1,416 2.82%61,288 570 0.93% 15,913 283 1.78% 77,201 853 1.10%

9,735 122 1.25% 3,018 71 2.35% 12,753 193 1.51%

on 622 37 5.95% 202 28 13.86% 824 65 7.89%

693 15 2.16% 142 8 5.63% 835 23 2.75%

8,105 115 1.42% 592 26 4.39% 8,697 141 1.62%

LE AND EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 

4,731 104 2.20% 1,286 51 3.97% 6,017 155 2.58%

19,827 218 1.10% 2,634 39 1.48% 22,461 257 1.14%

666 4 0.60% 148 4 2.70% 814 8 0.98%

on 96 8 8.33% 15 2 13.33% 111 10 9.01%

231 7 3.03% 13 1 7.69% 244 8 3.28%

3,407 40 1.17% 90 3 3.33% 3,497 43 1.23%
ug Test Results by Employee Category and Test Type by Transit System and Contractor (continued) 

Transit Systems Contractors Totals 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

LE CONTROL/ DISPATCH 

1,310 10 0.76% 724 24 3.31% 2,034 34 1.67%6,309 30 0.48% 1,565 17 1.09% 7,874 47 0.60%

177 0 0.00% 21 0 0.00% 198 0 0.00%

on 36 1 2.78% 5 0 0.00% 41 1 2.44%

27 2 7.41% 7 1 14.29% 34 3 8.82%

457 6 1.31% 28 0 0.00% 485 6 1.24%

NUE VEHICLE

381 17 4.46% 58 7 12.07% 439 24 5.47%

2,079 24 1.15% 131 3 2.29% 2,210 27 1.22%

85 2 2.35% 14 0 0.00% 99 2 2.02%

on 24 5 20.83% 0 0 0.00% 24 5 20.83%

27 0 0.00% 1 0 0.00% 28 0 0.00%

841 17 2.02% 0 0 0.00% 841 17 2.02%

TY PERSONNEL 

469 1 0.21% 478 4 0.84% 947 5 0.53%

1,352 5 0.37% 392 7 1.79% 1,744 12 0.69%

100 0 0.00% 4 0 0.00% 104 0 0.00%

on 6 0 0.00% 2 0 0.00% 8 0 0.00%

0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%8 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 8 0 0.00%
Table 4-15. Drug Test Results by Employee Category and Test Type by Size 

Large Small Rural 

gory 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

LOYEE CATEGORY, ALL TEST TYPES

eration 119,826 2,229 1.86% 11,959 199 1.66% 18,701 263 1.41%

quip. Maint. 30,202 412 1.36% 1,834 48 2.62% 1,108 21 1.90%

ol/Disp. 7,900 64 0.81% 941 8 0.85% 1,825 19 1.04%

ehicle 3,369 69 2.05% 169 3 1.78% 103 3 2.91%

onnel 2,785 17 0.61% 44 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%

164,082 2,791 1.70% 14,947 258 1.73% 21,737 306 1.41%

Large Small Rural 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

LE OPERATOR

37,526 1,168 3.11% 4,598 109 2.37% 8,052 139 1.73%61,005 681 1.12% 6,408 67 1.05% 9,788 105 1.07%11,289 178 1.58% 743 8 1.08% 721 7 0.97%

on 775 50 6.45% 24 7 29.17% 25 8 32.00%

743 17 2.29% 48 4 8.33% 44 2 4.55%

8,488 135 1.59% 138 4 2.90% 71 2 2.82%

LE AND EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 

5,254 131 2.49% 423 17 4.02% 340 7 2.06%

20,410 217 1.06% 1,307 27 2.07% 744 13 1.75%

753 8 1.06% 52 0 0.00% 9 0 0.00%

on 102 8 7.84% 6 1 16.67% 3 1 33.33%

234 8 3.42% 7 0 0.00% 3 0 0.00%

3,449 40 1.16% 39 3 7.69% 9 0 0.00%
able 4-15. Drug Test Results by Employee Category and Test Type by Size (continued) 

Large Small Rural 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

LE CONTROL/ DISPATCH 

1,382 28 2.03% 178 0 0.00% 474 6 1.27%5,824 28 0.48% 726 6 0.83% 1,320 13 0.98%

168 0 0.00% 16 0 0.00% 14 0 0.00%

on 36 1 2.78% 3 0 0.00% 2 0 0.00%

28 2 7.14% 1 1 100.00% 5 0 0.00%

462 5 1.08% 13 1 7.69% 10 0 0.00%

NUE VEHICLE

375 23 6.13% 36 0 0.00% 28 1 3.57%

2,017 23 1.14% 120 2 1.67% 73 2 2.74%

88 2 2.27% 9 0 0.00% 2 0 0.00%

on 21 4 19.05% 3 1 33.33% 0 0 0.00%

27 0 0.00% 1 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%

841 17 2.02% 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00

TY PERSONNEL 

942 5 0.53% 5 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%

1,724 12 0.70% 20 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%

104 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%

on 7 0 0.00% 1 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%

0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%8 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%
ble 4-16. Drug Test Results by Employee Category and Test Type by Rail and Non-Rail 

Rail Non-Rail Totals 

gory 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

LOYEE CATEGORY, ALL TEST TYPES

eration 65,377 1,140 1.74% 85,109 1,551 1.82% 150,486 2,691 1.79%

quip. Maint. 20,895 254 1.22% 12,249 227 1.85% 33,144 481 1.45%

ol/Disp. 4,833 38 0.79% 5,833 53 .091% 10,666 91 0.85%

ehicle 2,589 50 1.93% 1,052 25 2.38% 3,641 75 2.06%

onnel 2,251 10 0.44% 560 7 1.25% 2,811 17 0.60%

95,945 1,492 1.56% 104,803 1,863 1.78% 200,748 3,355 1.67%

Rail Non-Rail Totals 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

LE OPERATOR

17,617 588 3.34% 32,559 828 2.54% 50,176 1,416 2.82%33,809 351 1.04% 43,212 502 1.16% 77,201 853 1.10%

6,171 99 1.60% 6,582 94 1.43% 12,753 193 1.51%

on 588 27 4.59% 236 38 16.10% 824 65 7.89%

426 8 1.88% 409 15 3.67% 835 23 2.75%

6,766 67 0.99% 1,931 74 3.83% 8,697 141 1.62%

LE AND EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 

3,252 82 2.52% 2,765 73 2.64% 6,017 155 2.58%

14,032 129 0.92% 8,429 128 1.52% 22,461 257 1.14%

468 5 1.07% 346 3 0.87% 814 8 0.98%

on 73 6 8.22% 38 4 10.53% 111 10 9.01%

162 5 3.09% 82 3 3.66% 244 8 3.28%

2,908 27 0.93% 589 16 2.72% 3,497 43 1.23%
16. Drug Test Results by Employee Category and Test Type by Rail and Non-Rail (continued) 

Rail Non-Rail Totals 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

Number of Specimens Collected 

Number of Positive Results 

Percent Positive 

LE CONTROL/ DISPATCH 

818 20 2.44% 1,216 14 1.15% 2,034 34 1.67%

3,443 15 0.44% 4,431 32 0.72% 7,874 47 0.60%

134 0 0.00% 64 0 0.00% 198 0 0.00%

on 33 0 0.00% 8 1 12.50% 41 1 2.44%

18 0 0.00% 16 3 18.75% 34 3 8.82%

387 3 0.78% 98 3 3.06% 485 6 1.24%

NUE VEHICLE

219 13 5.94% 220 11 5.00% 439 24 5.47%

1,466 18 1.23% 744 9 1.21% 2,210 27 1.22%

59 2 3.39% 40 0 0.00% 99 2 2.02%

on 19 3 15.79% 5 2 40.00% 24 5 20.83%

24 0 0.00% 4 0 0.00% 28 0 0.00%

802 14 1.75% 39 3 7.69% 841 17 2.02%

TY PERSONNEL 

734 3 0.41% 229 2 0.87% 963 5 0.52%

1,423 7 0.49% 322 5 1.55% 1,745 12 0.69%

81 0 0.00% 24 0 0.00% 105 0 0.00%

on 6 0 0.00% 2 0 0.00% 8 0 0.00%

0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%7 0 0.00% 2 0 0.00% 9 0 0.00%
1998 Annual Report 5-1 

5. ALCOHOL TEST RESULTS 

This chapter provides background information on the alcohol testing procedures and a summary 

of the 1998 alcohol test results. This section also discusses results of random alcohol testing for 

transit systems and contracts, by size, by rail, and by region. 

FTA regulations prohibit covered employees who perform safety-sensitive functions from 

reporting to duty or staying on duty while having an alcohol concentration ≥ 0.02. In addition, 

employees are prohibited from using 

alcohol within four hours prior to 

performing safety-sensitive functions and 

from consuming alcohol while on call. 

Because employees are prohibited from 

using alcohol while performing safetysensitive functions, an employer who 

knows that an employee is using alcohol 

must prohibit that employee from 

performing these functions. (An on-call 

employee must be given the opportunity to 

acknowledge use of alcohol at the time he 

or she is called to duty and must be given 

an alcohol test if the employee claims to be 

able to perform his or her safety-sensitive 

function). The FTA provides different sets 

of consequences (see Figure 5-1) should an 

alcohol confirmation test show that an 

employee’s alcohol concentration is (1) ≥ 0.02 but < 0.04, or (2) ≥ 0.04. A confirmation test that 

shows an alcohol concentration ≥ 0.04 results in the employee’s removal from his or her safetysensitive position. The alcohol concentration level is the alcohol in a volume of breath expressed 

in terms of grams of alcohol per 210 liters of breath. Alcohol tests are conducted in two parts: a 

screening test, followed by a confirmation test for those employees whose screening test result 

indicates a ≥ 0.02 alcohol concentration. 

The data collected by the FTA from transit systems and contractors include information on the 

number of screening tests conducted, the number of confirmation tests conducted, and the results 

from these confirmation tests. In this report, the alcohol test results are derived from the number 

of screening tests conducted and found to be ≥ 0.04. The number of screening tests is used to 

better reflect accurate testing percentages. Because confirmation tests are only performed once a 

screening test has resulted in ≥ 0.02, to report results ≥ 0.04 of confirmation tests would result in 

high and misleading percentages. 

An employee with an alcohol concentration 

of ≥ 0.02 but < 0.04 must be removed from 

his or her safety-sensitive position for 8 

hours or until a re-test shows an alcohol 

concentration of < 0.02. 

An employee with an alcohol concentration 

of ≥ 0.04 must be removed from his or her 

safety-sensitive position, be told about 

educational and treatment programs 

available, and be referred to a substance 

abuse professional. 

Figure 5-1. Consequences of an Alcohol Test 

for FTA-Covered Employees 
1998 Annual Report 5-2 

Table 5-1 shows the percent of alcohol forms received for 1998 from transit systems and 

contractors with at least one positive test result. 

Table 5-1. Percent of Alcohol Forms Received for 1998 With at Least One 

Positive Test Result 

Employer Number of 

Reporters 

Number 

0.02 - 0.04

Percent with a 

Test 0.02 – 0.04

Number 

> 0.04 

Percent with 

a Positive 

Transit 

Systems 1,631 33 2.02 50 3.07 

Contractors 846 10 1.18 43 5.08 

Totals 2,477 43 1.73 93 3.75 

Table 5-2 shows the results of random alcohol testing for transit systems and contractors. For 

1998, the FTA reduced the random alcohol testing rate to 10 percent. The January 6, 1998 issue 

of the Federal Register announced that this was effective as of January 1, 1998. 

Random alcohol testing was the type of test conducted most frequently, 41,206 tests out of 

64,546 total tests. Although Table 5-2 shows the number of random “positives” for alcohol tests 

≥ 0.02 but < 0.04, for reporting purposes verified positives are considered ≥ 0.04. 

Table 5-2 provides the random test results for transit systems and contractors and their combined 

totals at both the lower level (0.02 to < 0.04) and at the higher level (≥ 0.04) alcohol 

concentrations. The results differed only slightly between transit systems and contractors. 

Transit systems had a slightly greater percent of random alcohol test results at the higher level, ≥

0.04. At the higher level of ≥ 0.04, transit systems had a 0.13 percent positive rate and 

contractors had a 0.14 percent positive rate. At the lower level, transit systems had a 0.14 

percent positive rate and contractors were lower with a 0.03 percent positive rate. Since there 

were a greater number of tests administered by transit systems, the number of random alcohol 

tests at ≥ 0.04 percent are also greater for transit systems (44) than for contractors (10). 

Table 5-2. Random Alcohol Test Results at Both Levels for Transit Systems 

and Contractors 

Employer Total 

Screens 

Number 

0.02 - 0.04 

Number 

≥ 0.04 

Percent 

0.02 - 0.04 

Percent

≥ 0.04 

Transit Systems 34,039 47 44 0.14 0.13 

Contractors 7,167 2 10 0.03 0.14 

Totals 41,206 49 54 0.12 0.13 
1998 Annual Report 5-3 

Table 5-3 provides random alcohol test results at both levels by size. 

Table 5-3. Random Alcohol Test Results at Both Levels by Size 

Size Total 

Screens 

Number 

0.02 - 0.04 

Number 

≥ 0.04 

Percent 

0.02 - 0.04 

Percent

≥ 0.04 

Large 34,315 37 52 0.11 0.15 

Small 2,867 2 1 0.07 0.03 

Rural 4,024 10 1 0.25 0.02 

Totals 41,206 49 54 0.12 0.13 

Table 5-4 presents random alcohol test results by rail and non-rail systems. 

Table 5-4. Random Alcohol Test Results by Rail and Non-Rail 

Size Total 

Screens 

Number 

0.02 - 0.04 

Number 

≥ 0.04 

Percent 

0.02 - 0.04 

Percent

≥ 0.04 

Rail 20,474 27 34 0.13 0.17 

Non-Rail 20,732 22 20 0.11 0.10 

Totals 41,206 49 54 0.12 0.13 

5.1 Alcohol Tests by FTA Region 

This section reports alcohol test results by FTA region. A list of states found in each FTA region 

can be found in Appendix A. As shown in Table 5-5, of the ten FTA regions, regions 2 and 4 

had the highest percent of specimens testing positive for alcohol. 

Table 5-5. Random Alcohol Test Results at Both Levels by Region 

Region Total 

Screens 

Number 

0.02 - 0.04 

Number 

≥ 0.04 

Percent 

0.02 - 0.04 

Percent

≥ 0.04 

1 1,954 4 2 0.20 0.10 

2 7,570 13 15 0.17 0.20 

3 5,663 5 13 0.09 0.23 

4 6,152 12 11 0.19 0.18 

5 6,050 8 9 0.13 0.15 

6 4,082 1 1 0.02 0.02 

7 1,613 1 0 0.06 0.00 

8 822 0 1 0.00 0.12 

9 4,913 5 2 0.10 0.04 

10 2,387 0 0 0.00 0.00 

Totals 41,206 49 54 0.12 0.13 
1998 Annual Report 5-4 

5.2 Results of Alcohol Testing by Test Types 

Alcohol test information was required from transit systems and their contractors for five test 

types: random; post-accident; reasonable suspicion; return-to-duty; and follow-up. The 

requirement to conduct pre-employment testing was suspended by the FTA as of May 10, 1995. 

Table 5-6 presents the alcohol test results by test type and by employee category for transit 

systems and contractors and identifies the combined totals. This table presents the number of 

screening tests administered, the number of test results ≥ 0.04, and the percent of test results ≥

0.04. 

The totals indicate that alcohol test results ranged from 0.12 percent for random to 9.52 percent 

for reasonable suspicion. 

Table 5-7 presents the alcohol test results by test type and employee category for large, small, 

and rural systems. Table 5-8 presents the alcohol test results by test type and employee category 

for rail and non-rail systems. 

5.3 Results of Alcohol Testing by Employee Category 

Table 5-9 presents alcohol testing information by employee category and test type for transit 

systems, contractors, and totals. This table information shows the number of screening tests 

administered, the number of test results ≥ 0.04, and the percent of test results ≥ 0.04. In 

examining each employee category, random tests were the most frequently conducted test and 

may be the most indicative of alcohol use by FTA-covered employees of transit systems and 

contractors. 

Table 5-10 presents the alcohol test results by employee category and test type for large, small, 

and rural systems and their combined totals. Table 5-11 presents the alcohol test results by 

employee category and test type for rail and non-rail systems and their combined totals. 
 Alcohol Test Results by Test Type and Employee Category by Transit System and Contractor Transit Systems Contractors Totals 

Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 

TYPE, ALL EMPLOYEE CATEGORIES 

34,039 44 0.13% 7,167 10 0.14% 41,206 54 0.13% 10,315 7 0.68% 2,556 8 0.32% 12,871 15 0.12% 

763 56 7.34% 203 36 17.73% 966 92 9.52% 661 0 0.00% 58 4 6.90% 719 4 0.56% 

8,328 24 0.29% 456 0 0.00% 8,784 24 0.27% 

54,106 131 0.24% 10,440 58 0.56% 64,546 189 0.29% Transit Systems Contractors Totals 

y Number of Screening 

Tests 

Number of 

Results ≥

0.04 

Percent ≥

0.04 

Number of 

Screening 

Tests 

Number of 

Results ≥

0.04 

Percent ≥

0.04 

Number of 

Screening 

Tests 

Number of 

Results ≥

0.04 

Percent ≥

0.04 

ons 23,003 22 0.10% 5,437 6 0.11% 28,440 28 0.10%

Maintenance 7,237 18 0.25% 1,014 4 0.39% 8,251 22 0.27%

/Dispatch 2,086 3 0.14% 537 0 0.00% 2,623 3 0.11%

e 1,041 1 0.10% 58 0 0.00% 1,099 1 0.09%

el 672 0 0.00% 121 0 0.00% 793 0 0.00%
hol Test Results by Test Type and Employee Category by Transit System and Contractor (continued) Transit Systems Contractors Totals 

y Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 

ons 9,352 7 0.07% 2,406 8 0.33% 11,758 15 0.13% 

aintenance 629 0 0.00% 115 0 0.00% 744 0 0.00% 

/Dispatch 160 0 0.00% 18 0 0.00% 178 0 0.00% 

e 79 0 0.00% 12 0 0.00% 91 0 0.00% 

el 95 0 0.00% 5 0 0.00% 100 0 0.00% 

ICION 

ons 595 36 6.05% 166 31 18.67% 761 67 8.80% 

aintenance 105 12 11.42% 27 3 11.11% 132 15 11.36%

/Dispatch 33 5 15.15% 8 2 25.00% 41 7 17.07%

e 24 3 12.50% 0 0 0.00% 24 3 12.50%

el 6 0 0.00% 2 0 0.00% 8 0 0.00%

ons 450 0 0.00% 47 1 2.13% 497 1 0.20%

aintenance 172 0 0.00% 7 1 14.29% 179 1 0.56%

/Dispatch 21 0 0.00% 3 1 33.33% 24 1 4.17%

e 18 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 18 0 0.00%

el 0 0 0.00% 1 0 0.00% 1 0 0.00%

ons 4,944 9 0.18% 357 0 0.00% 5,301 9 0.17%

aintenance 2,388 8 0.33% 86 0 0.00% 2,474 8 0.32%

/Dispatch 310 4 1.29% 13 0 0.00% 323 4 1.24%

e 680 3 0.44% 0 0 0.00% 690 3 0.44%

el 6 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 6 0 0.00%
Table 5-7. Alcohol Test Results by Test Type and Employee Category by Size Large Small Rural 

Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 

TYPE, ALL EMPLOYEE CATEGORIES 

34,315 52 0.15% 2,867 1 3.49% 4,024 1 0.25% 11,654 14 0.12% 675 0 0.00% 542 1 1.84% 

902 79 8.76% 32 4 12.50% 32 9 28.12% 681 1 0.15% 32 2 6.25% 6 1 16.67% 

8,668 23 0.27% 84 1 1.19% 32 0 0.00% 

56,220 169 0.30% 3,690 8 0.22% 4,636 12 0.26% Large Small Rural 

y 

Number of 

Screening 

Tests 

Number of 

Results ≥

0.04 

Percent ≥

0.04 

Number of 

Screening 

Tests 

Number of 

Results ≥

0.04 

Percent ≥

0.04 

Number of 

Screening 

Tests 

Number of 

Results ≥

0.04 

Percent ≥

0.04 

ons 23,090 28 0.12% 2,090 0 0.21% 3,260 0 0.00%

Maintenance 7,498 20 0.27% 480 1 0.00% 273 1 0.37%

/Dispatch 1,919 3 0.16% 245 0 0.00% 459 0 0.00%

e 1,026 1 0.10% 41 0 0.00% 32 0 0.00%

el 782 0 0.00% 11 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%
able 5-7. Alcohol Test Results by Test Type and Employee Category by Size (continued) Large Small Rural 

y Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 

ons 10,606 14 0.13% 621 0 0.00% 531 1 0.19% 

aintenance 698 0 0.00% 41 0 0.00% 5 0 0.00% 

/Dispatch 167 0 0.00% 6 0 0.00% 5 1 0.00% 

e 83 0 0.00% 7 0 0.00% 1 1 0.00% 

el 100 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 1 0.00% 

ICION 

ons 711 56 7.88% 21 4 19.05% 29 7 24.14% 

aintenance 126 14 11.11% 5 0 0.00% 1 1 100.00%

/Dispatch 36 6 16.67% 3 0 0.00% 2 1 50.00%

e 22 3 13.64% 2 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%

el 7 0 0.00% 1 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%

ons 466 1 0.21% 26 0 0.00% 5 0 0.00%

aintenance 173 0 0.00% 6 1 16.67% 0 0 0.00%

/Dispatch 23 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 1 1 100.00%

e 18 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%

el 1 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%

ons 5,228 9 0.17% 49 0 0.00% 24 0 0.00%

aintenance 2,443 7 0.29% 26 1 3.85% 5 0 0.00%

/Dispatch 314 4 1.27% 9 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%

e 677 3 0.44% 0 0 0.00% 3 0 0.00%

el 6 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%
ble 5-8. Alcohol Test Results by Test Type and Employee Category by Rail and Non-Rail Rail Non-Rail Totals 

Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 

TYPE, ALL EMPLOYEE CATEGORIES 

20,474 34 0.17% 20,732 20 0.14% 41,206 54 0.13% 

6,532 9 0.14% 6,339 6 0.32% 12,871 15 0.12% 

688 39 5.67% 278 53 17.73% 966 92 9.52% 457 0 0.00% 262 4 6.90% 719 4 0.56% 

7,155 18 0.25% 1,629 6 0.00% 8,784 24 0.27% 

35,306 100 0.28% 29,240 89 0.30% 64,546 189 0.29% Rail Non-Rail Totals 

y Number of Screening 

Tests 

Number of 

Results ≥

0.04 

Percent ≥

0.04 

Number of 

Screening 

Tests 

Number of 

Results ≥

0.04 

Percent ≥

0.04 

Number of 

Screening 

Tests 

Number of 

Results ≥

0.04 

Percent ≥

0.04 

ons 13,038 17 0.13% 15,402 11 0.07% 28,440 28 0.10%

Maintenance 4,857 14 0.29% 3,394 8 0.24% 8,251 22 0.27%

/Dispatch 1,130 2 0.18% 1,493 1 0.01% 2,623 3 0.11%

e 791 1 0.13% 308 0 0.00% 1,099 1 0.09%

el 658 0 0.00% 135 0 0.00% 793 0 0.00%
. Alcohol Test Results by Test Type and Employee Category by Rail and Non-Rail (continued) Rail Non-Rail Totals 

y Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 

ons 5,804 9 0.16% 5,954 6 0.10% 11,758 15 0.13% 

aintenance 457 0 0.00% 287 0 0.00% 744 0 0.00% 

/Dispatch 134 0 0.00% 44 0 0.00% 178 0 0.00% 

e 56 0 0.00% 35 0 0.00% 91 0 0.00% 

el 81 0 0.00% 19 0 0.00% 100 0 0.00% 

ICION 

ons 552 26 4.71% 209 41 19.62% 761 67 8.80% 

aintenance 79 7 8.86% 53 8 15.09% 132 15 11.36% 

/Dispatch 31 4 12.90% 10 3 30.00% 41 7 17.07%

e 20 2 10.00% 4 1 25.00% 24 3 12.50%

el 6 0 0.00% 2 0 0.00% 8 0 0.00%

ons 307 0 0.00% 190 1 0.53% 497 1 0.20%

aintenance 121 0 0.00% 58 1 1.72% 179 1 0.56%

/Dispatch 13 0 0.00% 11 1 9.09% 24 1 4.17%

e 16 0 0.00% 2 0 0.00% 18 0 0.00%

el 1 0 0.00% 1 0 0.00% 1 0 0.00%

ons 4,169 7 0.17% 1,132 2 0.18% 5,301 9 0.17%

aintenance 2,068 7 0.34% 406 1 0.25% 2,474 8 0.32%

/Dispatch 258 2 0.78% 65 2 3.08% 323 4 1.24%

e 655 2 0.31% 35 1 2.86% 690 3 0.44%

el 5 0 0.00% 1 0 0.00% 6 0 0.00%
 Alcohol Test Results by Employee Category and Test Type by Transit System and Contractor Transit Systems Contractors Totals 

Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 

EE CATEGORY, ALL TEST TYPES 

ns 38,344 74 0.19% 8,413 46 0.55% 46,757 120 0.26% 

Maint. 10,531 38 0.36% 1,249 8 0.64% 11,780 46 0.39% 

atch 2,610 12 0.46% 579 3 0.52% 3,189 15 0.47% 

1,842 7 0.38% 70 1 1.43% 1,912 8 0.42% 

779 0 0.00% 129 0 0.00% 908 0 0.00% 

54,106 131 0.24% 10,440 58 0.56% 64,546 189 0.29% Transit Systems Contractors Totals 

Number of Screening 

Tests 

Number of 

Results ≥

0.04 

Percent ≥

0.04 

Number of 

Screening 

Tests 

Number of 

Results ≥

0.04 

Percent ≥

0.04 

Number of 

Screening 

Tests 

Number of 

Results ≥

0.04 

Percent ≥

0.04 

PERATIONS

23,003 22 0.10% 5,437 6 0.11% 28,440 28 0.10%

9,352 7 0.07% 2,406 8 0.33% 11,758 15 0.13%

595 36 6.05% 166 31 18.67% 761 67 8.80%450 0 0.00% 47 1 2.13% 497 1 0.20%

4,944 9 0.18% 357 0 0.00% 5,301 9 0.17%

ND EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE

7,237 18 0.25% 1,014 4 0.39% 8,251 22 0.27%

629 0 0.00% 115 0 0.00% 744 0 0.00%105 12 11.43% 27 3 11.11% 132 15 11.36%172 0 0.00% 7 1 14.29% 179 1 0.56%

2,388 8 0.33% 86 0 0.00% 2,474 8 0.32%
hol Test Results by Employee Category and Test Type by Transit System and Contractor (continued) Transit Systems Contractors Totals 

Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 

CONTROL/DISPATCH 

2,086 3 0.14% 537 0 0.00% 2,623 3 0.11% 

160 0 0.00% 18 0 0.00% 178 0 0.00% 

33 5 15.15% 8 2 25.00% 41 7 17.07% 21 0 0.00% 3 1 33.33% 24 1 4.17% 

310 4 1.29% 13 0 0.00% 323 4 1.24% 

VEHICLE 

1,041 1 0.10% 58 0 0.00% 1,099 1 0.09% 

79 0 0.00% 12 0 0.00% 91 0 0.00%24 3 12.50% 0 0 0.00% 24 3 12.50%18 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 18 0 0.00%

680 3 0.44% 0 0 0.00% 323 4 1.24%

ERSONNEL

672 0 0.00% 121 0 0.00% 793 0 0.00%

95 0 0.00% 5 0 0.00% 100 0 0.00%

6 0 0.00% 2 0 0.00% 8 0 0.00%0 0 0.00% 1 0 0.00% 1 0 0.00%6 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 6 0 0.00%
Table 5-10. Alcohol Test Results by Employee Category and Test Type by Size Large Small Rural 

Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 

E CATEGORY, ALL TEST TYPES 

 40,101 108 0.27% 2,807 4 0.14% 3,849 8 0.21% 

aint. 10,938 41 0.37% 558 3 0.54% 284 2 0.70% 

tch 2,459 13 0.53% 263 0 0.00% 467 2 0.43% 

1,826 7 0.38% 50 1 2.00% 36 0 0.00% 

896 0 0.00% 12 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 

56,220 169 0.30% 3,690 8 0.22% 4,636 12 0.26% Large Small Rural 

Number of Screening 

Tests 

Number of 

Results ≥

0.04 

Percent ≥

0.04 

Number of 

Screening 

Tests 

Number of 

Results ≥

0.04 

Percent ≥

0.04 

Number of 

Screening 

Tests 

Number of 

Results ≥

0.04 

Percent ≥

0.04 

ERATIONS

23,090 28 0.12% 2,090 0 0.00% 3,260 0 0.00%10,606 14 0.13% 621 0 0.00% 531 1 0.19%

711 56 7.88% 21 4 19.05% 29 7 24.14%466 1 0.21% 26 0 0.00% 5 0 0.00%

5,228 9 0.17% 49 0 0.00% 24 0 0.00%

D EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE

7,498 20 0.27% 480 1 0.21% 273 1 0.37%

698 0 0.00% 41 0 0.00% 5 0 0.00%126 14 11.11% 5 0 0.00% 1 1 100.00%173 0 0.00% 6 1 16.67% 0 0 0.00%

2,443 7 0.29% 26 1 3.85% 5 0 0.00%
ble 5-10. Alcohol Test Results by Employee Category and Test Type by Size (continued) Large Small Rural 

Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 

CONTROL/DISPATCH 

1,919 3 0.16% 245 0 0.00% 459 0 0.00% 

167 0 0.00% 6 0 0.00% 5 0 0.00% 

36 6 16.16% 3 0 0.00% 2 1 50.00% 23 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 1 1 100.00% 

314 4 1.27% 9 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 

VEHICLE 

1,026 1 0.10% 41 0 0.00% 32 0 0.00% 

83 0 0.00% 7 0 0.00% 1 0 0.00%22 3 13.64% 2 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%18 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%

677 3 0.44% 0 0 0.00% 3 0 0.00%

ERSONNEL

782 0 0.00% 11 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%100 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%

7 0 0.00% 1 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%1 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%6 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00%
le 5-11. Alcohol Test Results by Employee Category and Test Type by Rail and Non-Rail Rail Non-Rail Totals 

Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 

EE CATEGORY, ALL TEST TYPES 

ns 23,870 59 0.25% 22,887 61 0.27% 46,757 120 0.26% 

Maint. 7,582 28 0.37% 4,198 18 0.43% 11,780 46 0.39% 

atch 1,566 8 0.51% 1,623 7 0.43% 3,189 15 0.47% 

1,538 5 0.33% 374 3 0.80% 1,912 8 0.42% 

751 0 0.00% 157 0 0.00% 908 0 0.00% 

35,307 100 0.28% 29,239 89 0.30% 64,546 189 0.29% Rail Non-Rail Totals 

Number of Screening 

Tests 

Number of 

Results ≥

0.04 

Percent ≥

0.04 

Number of 

Screening 

Tests 

Number of 

Results ≥

0.04 

Percent ≥

0.04 

Number of 

Screening 

Tests 

Number of 

Results ≥

0.04 

Percent ≥

0.04 

PERATIONS

13,038 17 0.13% 15,402 11 0.07% 28,440 28 0.10%

5,804 9 0.16% 5,954 6 0.10% 11,758 15 0.13%

552 26 4.71% 209 41 19.62% 761 67 8.80%307 0 0.00% 190 1 0.53% 497 1 0.20%

4,169 7 0.17% 1,132 2 0.18% 5,301 9 0.17%

ND EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE

4,857 14 0.29% 3,394 8 0.24% 8,251 22 0.27%

457 0 0.00% 287 0 0.00% 744 0 0.00%

79 7 8.86% 53 8 15.09% 132 15 11.36%

121 0 0.00% 58 1 1.72% 179 1 0.56%

2,068 7 0.34% 406 1 0.25% 2,474 8 0.32%
1. Alcohol Test Results by Employee Category and Test Type by Rail and Non-Rail (continued) Rail Non-Rail Totals 

Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 Number of Screening Tests Number of Results ≥ 0.04 Percent ≥ 0.04 

CONTROL/DISPATCH 

1,130 2 0.18% 1,493 1 0.07% 2,623 3 0.11% 

134 0 0.00% 44 0 0.00% 178 0 0.00% 

31 4 12.90% 10 3 30.00% 41 7 17.07% 13 0 0.00% 11 1 9.09% 24 1 4.17% 

258 2 0.18% 65 2 3.08% 323 4 1.24% 

VEHICLE 

791 1 0.13% 308 0 0.00% 1,099 1 0.09% 

56 0 0.00% 35 0 0.00% 91 0 0.00%20 2 10.00% 4 1 25.00% 24 3 12.50%16 0 0.00% 2 0 0.00% 18 0 0.00%

655 2 0.31% 25 2 8.00% 680 4 0.59%

ERSONNEL

658 0 0.00% 135 0 0.00% 793 0 0.00%

81 0 0.00% 19 0 0.00% 100 0 0.00%

6 0 0.00% 2 0 0.00% 8 0 0.00%1 0 0.00% 0 0 0.00% 1 0 0.00%5 0 0.00% 1 0 0.00% 6 0 0.00%
1998 Annual Report 5-17

5.4 Employees Who Refused Alcohol Testing 

The FTA regulations stipulate that no employer shall permit an employee who refuses to submit 

to a required alcohol test to perform safety-sensitive functions. Figure 5-2 shows that the 

number of employees who refused to be tested is small. 

0 5 10 15 20 25

Transit Systems

Contractors

Random Test Refusals 21 14

Non-Random Test

Refusals

10 14

Percent of Total Tests 0.06% 0.27%

Transit Systems Contractors

Figure 5-2. Alcohol Test Refusals 

5.5 Employees Returned to Duty 

For 1998, 239 employees who had previously engaged in alcohol misuse or who had refused to 

take an alcohol test were returned to duty. Each individual had to undergo a return-to-duty test 

and have a result indicating an alcohol concentration < 0.02. This figure was the total of all 

responses to the question on the MIS form that instructed employers to record the number of 

employees who had engaged in alcohol misuse and were returned to duty during the reporting 

period. In another section of the form, employers were asked to record the total number of 

return-to-duty tests conducted. See Table 5-12. 

Table 5-12. Covered Employees Returned-to-Duty 

Employer Returned-to-Duty Percent of Total 

Transit 

Systems 206 86.2 

Contractors 33 13.8 

Totals 239 100.0 
1998 Annual Report 5-18

5.6 Accidents 

FTA regulations require testing for drugs and alcohol following an accident in which there is a 

loss of human life. For non-fatal accidents meeting FTA-defined conditions, testing is required 

unless the covered employee’s performance can be discounted completely as a causative or 

contributing factor. 

Post-accident drug tests must be performed within 32 hours of an accident meeting the abovedescribed conditions; post-accident alcohol tests must be performed within 8 hours. 

According to the regulations, employers should be conducting an equal number of drug and 

alcohol post-accident tests (i.e., with each accident requiring such testing, both a drug and 

alcohol post-accident test should be performed). If both tests are not conducted, reasons should 

be documented. 

Tables 5-13 and 5-14 present the 1998 accident data for non-fatal and fatal accidents with 

alcohol positives, by both transit systems and contractors and by size, respectively. 

Table 5-13. Accidents with Alcohol Positives 

Employer 

Number of 

Non-Fatal 

Accidents 

Number of 

Fatal 

Accidents 

Number of 

Fatalities 

Transit 

Systems 7 0 0 

Contractors 8 0 0 

Totals 15 0 0 

Table 5-14. Accidents with Alcohol Positives by Size 

Employer 

Number of 

Non-Fatal 

Accidents 

Number of 

Fatal 

Accidents 

Number of 

Fatalities 

Large 14 0 0 

Small 0 0 0 

Rural 1 0 0 

Totals 15 0 0 
1998 Annual Report 5-19

5.7 Post-Accident Positives 

Employers are required to report the number of accidents that resulted in a post-accident alcohol 

test indicating an alcohol concentration ≥ 0.04. Results appear in Table 5-15 below. 

Table 5-15. Post-Accident Alcohol Positives 

Employer 

Revenue 

Vehicle 

Operations 

Vehicle and 

Equip. Maint.

Rev. 

Vehicle 

Cntl/Dsptch

CDL/NonRevenue Armed 

Security 

Personnel 

Number 0.02 – 0.04 6 2 0 4 0 

Number > 0.04 15 0 0 0 0 

Totals 21 2 0 4 0 

5.8 Violation Rate 

The FTA alcohol testing rule defines the violation rate as the number of random alcohol test 

results ≥ 0.04 plus the number of FTA-covered employees who refused a random test, divided by 

the total number of random tests plus the number of FTA-covered employees who refused a 

random test. See Tables 5-16 to 5-18 for details. 

Random alcohol test results ≥ 0.04% + number refused random testing (54 + 35) 89 

_________________________________________________________ = __________ = _______ = 0.22%

Total random tests + number refused random testing (41,206 +35) 41,241 

Table 5-16. Violation Rate by Transit System/Contractor

Employer Total 

Screens

Number 

≥ 0.04 

Random Test 

Refusals 

Violation 

Rate 

Transit Systems 34,039 44 21 0.20 

Contractors 7,167 10 14 0.29 

Totals 41,206 54 35 0.22 

Table 5-17. Violation Rate by Employer Size

Employer Total 

Screens

Number 

≥ 0.04 

Random Test 

Refusals 

Violation 

Rate 

Large 34,315 52 27 0.23 

Small 2,867 1 2 0.10 

Rural 4,024 1 6 0.17 

Totals 41,206 54 35 0.22 
1998 Annual Report 5-20

Table 5-18. Violation Rate by FTA Region

Region Total 

Screens

Number 

≥ 0.04 

Random Test 

Refusals 

Violation 

Rate 

1 1,954 2 1 0.15 

2 7,570 15 3 0.24 

3 5,663 13 4 0.30 

4 6,152 11 4 0.24 

5 6,050 9 10 0.31 

6 4,082 1 1 0.05 

7 1,613 0 2 0.12 

8 822 1 3 0.48 

9 4,913 2 5 0.14 

10 2,387 0 2 0.08 

Totals 41,206 54 35 0.22 

5.9 Other Violations 

Table 5-19 provides information for alcohol violations other than those detected through the 

alcohol testing process. 

Table 5-19. Other Alcohol Violations

Number of 

Covered 

Employees 

Transit 

Systems 

Contractors

Other Violations 

45 25 20 Covered employee used alcohol while 

performing safety-sensitive function. 

35 21 14 Covered employee used alcohol within 4 

hours of performing safety-sensitive function.

2 0 2 Covered employee used alcohol before 

taking a required post-accident alcohol test.

82 46 36 
1998 Annual Report 6-1 

6. TREND ANALYSIS 

This chapter provides a trend analysis of the drug and alcohol testing conducted by all of 

the employers reporting in 1996, 1997, and 1998. 

6.1 Drug and Alcohol Reports Received 

In 1996, a total of 2,287 individual employees submitted MIS forms. In 1997, a total of 

2,317 individual employers submitted MIS forms; in 1998 the total was 2,477. The 

number of drug and alcohol reports received has increased from 1996 to 1998 by 8.7 

percent. Most of this growth is due to the increase in number of contractors reporting – 

the increase may be indicative of an industry-wide trend in contracting for services. 

Figure 6-1 illustrates this trend. 

1,580 1,613 1,631

707 704

846

0

500

1000

1500

2000

Transit Systems 1,580 1,613 1,631 +3.2%

Contractors 707 704 846 +19.7%

% Contractors 30.9% 30.4% 34.2% \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

1996 1997 1998 % Change 1996-98

Figure 6-1. Drug and Alcohol Reports Received 

The number of FTA-covered contract employees has increased at half the rate as the 

number of contract employers, indicating that these employers have, on the average, 

fewer FTA-covered employees. The number of FTA-covered employees per contractor 

has decreased by 8.3 percent from 1996 to 1998. The average number of FTA-covered 

employees and contractor employers has declined from 55.7 in 1996 to 53.6 in 1997 to 

51.1 in 1998. The number of FTA-covered employees per transit system has remained 

constant, fluctuating by approximately 1 percent. See Figure 6-2. 
1998 Annual Report 6-2 

174,256 176,656 181,462

43,234 39,401 37,745

0

50000

100000

150000

200000

Transit Systems 174,256 176,656 181,462 +4.1%

Contractors 39,401 37,745 43,234 +9.7%

% Contractors 18.4% 17.6% 19.2% //////////////////

1996 1997 1998 % Change 1996-

98

Figure 6-2. FTA-Covered Employees 

The number of drug MIS reports with at least one positive test result has decreased for 

each of the last three years for both transit systems and contractors; however, the percent 

of drug reports with a positive result is significantly higher for contractors than for transit 

systems. The total number of alcohol reports with test results > 0.04 has also decreased 

overall, but has increased for contractors. See Table 6-1. 

Table 6-1. Percent of Drug Reports with a Positive and 

Alcohol Reports with a Test > 0.04 

Drug Alcohol 

Employer 1996 1997 1998 1996 1997 1998 

Transit 

Systems 24.56 23.56 23.06 4.30 3.66 3.06 

Contractors 37.34 40.91 35.10 3.82 4.26 5.08 

Totals 30.95 28.83 27.57 4.06 3.84 3.75 
1998 Annual Report 6-3 

0.00%

0.50%

1.00%

1.50%

2.00%

1996 1.42% 1.84% 1.50%

1997 1.06% 1.92% 1.21%

1998 0.93% 1.69% 1.07%

% Change 1996-98 -34.51% -8.15% -28.7%

Transit Systems Contractors Totals

Figure 6-3. Comparison of Positive Random Drug Results 

6.2 Positive Random Drug Tests 

The transit industry-wide positive random drug test rate and random alcohol test results >

0.04 have declined over three consecutive years. Consistent with that trend is the random 

positive testing rate of the transit systems. However, the results of contractor testing are 

not consistent with that trend; contractors’ positive random drug rates are at a much 

higher level than transit systems, and in the case of random alcohol tests > 0.04 are 

increasing. The overall rates for both random positive drug test results and random 

alcohol test results > 0.04 are declining, but the rates of decline appear to be slowing. 

See Figures 6-3 and 6-4. 

0.00%

0.05%

0.10%

0.15%

0.20%

1996 0.17% 0.11% 0.16%

1997 0.15% 0.09% 0.14%

1998 0.13% 0.14% 0.13%

% Change 1996-98 -23.5% +27.2% -18.7%

Transit Systems Contractors Totals

Figure 6-4. Comparison of Random Alcohol Test Results > 0.04 
1998 Annual Report 6-4 

0.00%

0.50%

1.00%

1.50%

2.00%

2.50%

3.00%

1996 1.75% 2.75% 2.00%

1997 1.41% 3.01% 1.77%

1998 1.28% 2.87% 1.67%

% Change 1996-98 -26.85% +4.36% -16.5%

Transit Systems Contractors Totals

Figure 6-5. Total Positive Drug Test Rate 

The positive drug test rate for all types of tests declined for three consecutive years. Test 

rates for contractors were significantly higher than those of transit systems and in fact 

have showed an opposite trend from the transit systems. As with the positive random 

drug tests rates, the positive drug rate for all types of tests is declining but the rate of 

decline is slowing. See Figure 6-5 (above) and Figure 6-6. 

 

0.00%

0.10%

0.20%

0.30%

0.40%

0.50%

0.60%

1996 0.27% 0.32% 0.28%

1997 0.24% 0.31% 0.25%

1998 0.24% 0.56% 0.29%

% Change 1996-98 -11.1% +75.0% +3.6%

Transit Systems Contractors Totals

Figure 6-6. Total Results of Alcohol Tests > 0.04 

The alcohol test rate > 0.04 for all types of tests has remained fairly constant for three 

consecutive years, increasing slightly between 1997 and 1998. Test rates for contractors 

were significantly higher than those of transit systems and, in fact, have shown an 

opposite trend from the transit systems. Unlike the random alcohol tests rates > 0.04, the 

alcohol rate > 0.04 for all types of tests is not declining in a consistent manner. 
1998 Annual Report 6-5 

0.00%

0.10%

0.20%

0.30%

0.40%

1996 0.22% 0.16% 0.21%

1997 0.18% 0.28% 0.19%

1998 0.19% 0.31% 0.22%

% Change 1996-98 -13.6% +93.7% +4.8%

Transit Systems Contractors Totals

Figure 6-7. Violation Rate (Alcohol) 

The FTA alcohol testing rule defines the violation rate as the number of random alcohol 

test results > 0.04 plus the number of FTA-covered employees who refused a random 

test, divided by the total number of random tests plus the number of FTA-covered 

employees who refused a random test. Random alcohol test results > 0.04 have declined, 

but the violation rate has increased. The reason for the increase of the violation rate is the 

increase in the rate of random alcohol test refusals. Random alcohol test refusals have 

increased in actual number despite the fact that the requirement for random alcohol 

testing has been lowered from 25 percent to 10 percent, resulting in a decrease in the 

actual number of random alcohol tests conducted. See Figure 6-7 (above) and Figure 6-8. 

0

10

20

30

40

50

Random 33 36 35 +6.1%

Non-Random 46 17 24 -47.8%

1996 1997 1998* % Change 1996-

98

Figure 6-8. Alcohol Test Refusals 

* Required random alcohol test rate lowered from 25 percent to 10 percent. 
1998 Annual Report 6-6 

Overall, positive drug test results have declined, as have the drug test results for 

individual test types with the exception of reasonable suspicion testing. See Figure 6-9. 

Reasonable suspicion tests are conducted when a determination based on training is made 

Pre-Employment Random

0.00%

2.00%

4.00%

6.00%

8.00%

1996 2.34% 3.37%

1997 1.98% 3.81%

1998 2.02% 3.77%

% Change 1996-98 -13.68% +11.87%

Transit Systems Contractors

0.00%

1.00%

2.00%

3.00%

4.00%

5.00%

1996 2.24% 4.24%

1997 1.65% 4.05%

1998 1.39% 4.08%

% Change 1996-98 -37.95% -3.77%

Transit Systems Contractors

Post-Accident Reasonable Suspicion 

0.00%

1.00%

2.00%

3.00%

4.00%

1996 1.85% 2.97%

1997 1.59% 2.94%

1998 1.19% 2.34%

% Change 1996-98 -35.6% -21.2%

Transit Systems Contractors

0.00%

4.00%

8.00%

12.00%

16.00%

1996 5.10% 15.87%

1997 6.70% 15.20%

1998 6.51% 13.90%

% Change 1996-98 +27.65% -15.63%

Transit Systems Contractors

Return-to-Duty Follow-up 

0.00%

2.00%

4.00%

6.00%

8.00%

1996 3.69% 2.61%

1997 2.80% 6.67%

1998 2.45% 6.13%

% Change 1996-98 -33.60% +134.87%

Transit Systems Contractors

0.00%

1.00%

2.00%

3.00%

4.00%

5.00%

1996 2.24% 4.24%

1997 1.65% 4.05%

1998 1.39% 4.08%

% Change 1996-98 -37.95% -3.77%

Transit Systems Contractors

Figure 6-9. Drug Test Results by Test Type 1996 to 1998 
1998 Annual Report 6-7 

by supervisors. The goal is to become more proficient in making this determination, 

which would result in a higher positive drug test rates and a lower number of reasonable 

suspicion tests conducted, for this particular test type. This is the trend with transit 

systems but it is the opposite for contractors where the number of reasonable suspicion 

drug tests conducted has increased by 18.5 percent between 1996 and 1998 and the 

positive drug test result has declined. See Figures 6-10 to 6-14.

 Random 

0.00%

0.05%

0.10%

0.15%

0.20%

1996 0.17% 0.11%

1997 0.15% 0.09%

1998 0.13% 0.14%

% Change 1996-98 -23.5% +27.3%

Transit Systems Contractors

Post-Accident Reasonable Suspicion

0.00%

0.10%

0.20%

0.30%

0.40%

1996 0.14% 0.14%

1997 0.11% 0.23%

1998 0.07% 0.32%

% Change 1996-98 -50.0% +128.6%

Transit Systems Contractors

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

1996 6.52% 21.14%

1997 7.65% 17.14%

1998 7.34% 17.73%

% Change 1996-98 +12.6% -16.1%

Transit Systems Contractors

Return-to-Duty Follow-up 

-1.00%

1.00%

3.00%

5.00%

7.00%

1996 0.14% 0.00%

1997 0.21% 0.00%

1998 0.00% 6.90%

% Change 1996-98 -100.0% +100.0%

Transit Systems Contractors

0.00%

0.20%

0.40%

0.60%

0.80%

1.00%

1996 0.36% 0.98%

1997 0.28% 0.57%

1998 0.29% 0.00%

% Change 1996-98 -17.9% -100.0%

Transit Systems Contractors

Figure 6-10. Alcohol Test Results > 0.04 by Test Type 1996 to 1998
1998 Annual Report 6-8 

Overall, alcohol test results > 0.04 have increased slightly from 1996 to 1998. Generally, 

transit systems’ rates have declined and contractors’ rates have increased. Comparisons 

between results from 1998 and results prior to 1998 are difficult due to the fact that the 

required random testing rate was reduced from 25 percent to 10 percent, thereby reducing 

the actual number of tests conducted. 

1996 Percent of Total Drug Tests 1997 Percent of Total Drug Tests 

0.00%

25.00%

50.00%

75.00%

Pre-Employment 19.2% 49.0%

Random 63.9% 43.2%

Post-Accident 7.0% 5.5%

Reasonable

Suspicion

0.7% 0.4%

Return-to Duty 1.4% 0.6%

Transit Systems Contractors

0.00%

25.00%

50.00%

75.00%

Pre-Employment 21.9% 47.9%

Random 60.0% 42.6%

Post-Accident 7.4% 6.9%

Reasonable

Suspicion

0.6% 0.4%

Return-to Duty 1.2% 0.7%

Transit Systems Contractors

 

0.00%

25.00%

50.00%

75.00%

Pre-Employment 23.2% 49.6%

Random 60.0% 41.7%

Post-Accident 7.1% 6.5%

Reasonable

Suspicion

0.5% 0.5%

Return-to Duty 0.6% 0.3%

Transit Systems Contractors

 Figure 6-11. 1998 Percent of Total Drug Tests 

The highest percentage of specimens collected has been for random drug tests for transit 

systems and pre-employment drug tests for contractors. Contractors may conduct more pre-
1998 Annual Report 6-9 

employment drug tests due to a higher turnover rate. Industry-wide, positive pre-employment 

drug test rates are approximately double that of positive random drug test rates. Preemployment drug testing is the one test conducted on individuals who do not yet occupy a 

safety-sensitive position and who have not undergone the required 60 minutes of training. 

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

THC 60.6% 53.6% 47.5% 36.0% 52.4% 41.0%

Cocaine 31.2% 38.5% 46.7% 53.8% 40.2% 54.0%

PCP 0.8% 0.5% 0.3% 0.7% 0.5% 0.0%

Opiates 4.1% 2.9% 3.4% 5.8% 2.1% 3.2%

Amphetamines 3.3% 4.6% 2.1% 3.6% 4.8% 6.1%

PreEmployment Random PostAccidentReasonable 

Suspicion

Return-toDuty Follow-Up

Figure 6-12. Comparison of Test Results by Drug Type 

From 1996 through 1998 marijuana (THC) has been the most frequently detected drug, 

followed by cocaine. Pre-employment drug testing accounts for the largest differential of 

the positive drug test rate between marijuana and other prohibited drugs. In the other 5 

test types, the percent of differential is much less. Cocaine is detected more often in two 

of the other five test types and is virtually equal in a third test type. Marijuana and 

cocaine were responsible for 50.4 percent and 42.4 percent, respectively, of drug tests 

conducted for non pre-employment tests, in 1996. For 1998 the figures were 47.8 percent 

and 45.0 percent, indicating a trend toward an increased detection of cocaine. This is 

especially significant given the fact that marijuana is usually detectable for a longer 

period of time than cocaine. 
1998 Annual Report 6-10 

Figure 6-13. Random Alcohol Test Results > 0.04 by Region 

Figure 6-14. Positive Random Drug Tests by Region

0.00%

0.50%

1.00%

1.50%

2.00%

1996 1.44% 1.10% 1.47% 1.66% 1.86% 1.53% 1.18% 1.94% 1.58% 1.32%

1997 1.04% 0.83% 1.08% 1.19% 1.69% 1.21% 1.31% 1.15% 1.43% 1.04%

1998 0.97% 0.68% 0.92% 1.17% 1.42% 1.19% 1.13% 1.41% 1.21% 0.89%

% Change 1996-98 -32.7% -38.2% -37.4% -29.5% -23.7% -22.2% -4.2% -27.3% -23.4% -32.6%

Region 

1

Region 

2

Region 

3

Region 

4

Region 

5

Region 

6

Region 

7

Region 

8

Region 

9

Region 

10

0.00%

0.05%

0.10%

0.15%

0.20%

0.25%

0.30%

1996 0.13% 0.28% 0.08% 0.21% 0.18% 0.12% 0.05% 0.07% 0.09% 0.14%

1997 0.23% 0.19% 0.17% 0.16% 0.15% 0.05% 0.10% 0.22% 0.09% 0.00%

1998 0.10% 0.20% 0.23% 0.18% 0.15% 0.02% 0.00% 0.12% 0.04% 0.00%

% Change 1996-98 -23.1% -28.6% +187.5% -14.3% -16.7% -83.3% -100.0% +71.4% -55.6% -100.0%

Region 

1

Region 

2

Region 

3

Region 

4

Region 

5

Region 

6

Region 

7

Region 

8

Region 

9

Region 

10
1998 Annual Report A-1

APPENDIX A 

GLOSSARY 
1998 Annual Report A-2

GLOSSARY 

Accident: An occurrence associated with the operation of a vehicle, if as a result 

(1) An individual dies;

(2) An individual suffers a bodily injury and immediately receives medical treatment away from 

the scene of the accident; 

(3) With respect to an occurrence in which the mass transit vehicle involved is a bus, electric 

bus, van, or automobile, one or more vehicles incurs disabling damage as the result of the 

occurrence and is transported away from the scene by a tow truck or other vehicle; or 

(4) With respect to an occurrence in which the mass transit vehicle involved is a rail car, trolley 

car, trolley bus, or vessel, the mass transit vehicle is removed from revenue service. 

Alcohol: The intoxicating agent in beverage alcohol, ethyl alcohol or other low molecular 

weight alcohols including methyl or isopropyl alcohol. 

Alcohol Concentration: The alcohol in a volume of breath expressed in terms of grams of 

alcohol per 210 liters of breath as indicated by a breath test. 

Alcohol Use: The consumption of any beverage, mixture or preparation, including any 

medication containing alcohol. 

Anti-Drug Program: A program to detect and deter the use of prohibited drugs as required by 

FTA regulations. 

Armed Security Personnel: Function including any person who provides security to protect 

persons or property and who carries a firearm. 

Canceled or Invalid Test: In drug testing, a drug test that has been declared invalid by a 

Medical Review Officer (MRO). In alcohol testing, a test that is deemed to be invalid. It is 

neither a positive nor a negative test. 

CDL/Non-Revenue Vehicle: Job category including any transit employee who holds a 

Commercial Driver's License (CDL), performs a function requiring a CDL, and is not included 

in any other job category. 

Confirmation (or Confirmatory) Test: In drug testing, a second analytical procedure to 

identify the presence of a specific drug or metabolite that is independent of the screening test and 

that uses a different technique and chemical principle from that of the screening test in order to 

ensure reliability and accuracy. In alcohol testing, a second test, following a screening test with 

a result of 0.02 or greater that provides quantitative data of alcohol concentration. 

Consortium: An entity, including a group or association of employers, operators, recipients, 

subrecipients, or contractors, which provides drug testing services and acts on behalf of the 

employer. 
1998 Annual Report A-3

Contractor: A person or organization that provides a service for a recipient, subrecipient, 

employer, or operator consistent with a specific understanding or arrangement. The 

understanding can be a written contract or an informal arrangement that reflects an ongoing 

relationship between the parties. 

Covered Employee: A person, including an applicant, transferee, and certain volunteers, who 

performs a safety-sensitive function for a recipient, subrecipient, employer, or operator. 

DOT: The United States Department of Transportation. 

DOT Agency: An agency (or "operating administration") of the United States Department of 

Transportation administering regulations requiring drug testing. 

Drug Metabolite: The specific substance produced when the human body metabolizes a given 

prohibited drug as it passes through the body and is excreted in urine. 

Drug Test: The laboratory analysis of a urine specimen collected in accordance with 49 CFR 

part 40 and analyzed in a DHHS-approved laboratory. 

Education: Efforts that include the display and distribution of informational materials, a 

community service hotline telephone number for employee assistance, and the transit entity 

policy regarding drug use and alcohol misuse in the workplace. 

Employee: An individual designated in a DOT agency regulation as subject to drug testing 

and/or alcohol testing. “Employee” includes an applicant for employment. 

Employer: A recipient or other entity that provides mass transportation services or which 

performs a safety-sensitive function for such recipient or other entity. This term includes 

subrecipients, operators, and contractors. 

Follow-up Test: Required of employees who have returned to duty in a safety-sensitive position 

following a positive drug test result or an alcohol test result of ≥ 0.04. A minimum of six tests 

must be performed during the first 12 months after the employee returned to duty. 

FTA: The Federal Transit Administration, an agency of the U.S. Department of Transportation. 

Large Operator: A recipient or subrecipient primarily operating in an area of 200,000 or more 

in population. 

Medical Review Officer (MRO): A licensed physician (medical doctor or doctor of 

osteopathy) responsible for receiving laboratory results generated by an employer's drug testing 

program who has knowledge of substance abuse disorders and has appropriate medical training 

to interpret and evaluate an individual's confirmed positive test result together with appropriate 

medical history and any other relevant biomedical information. 
1998 Annual Report A-4

Post-Accident Testing: Required testing for prohibited drugs and alcohol, following certain 

mass transit accidents. These accidents include those in which a death occurs, medical treatment 

away from the scene is required, or one or more of the vehicles involved incurs disabling 

damage. 

Pre-Employment Testing: Testing that is designed to identify applicants who have consumed a 

prohibited drug in the recent past. Employers are prohibited from hiring an applicant for a 

safety-sensitive function unless they have a verified negative drug test. 

Prohibited Drugs: Include marijuana (THC), cocaine, phencyclidine (PCP), opiates, or 

amphetamines. 

Rail Operators: A recipient and its contractors and subrecipients that operate rapid transit 

operations within an urban area and are not connected to the general railroad system. Rail 

vehicles include railcars, trolley cars, and trolley buses. 

Random Testing: Identifies employees who are using drugs or misusing alcohol by using an 

unpredictable and unannounced testing pattern. 

Random Testing Rate: The number of drug tests equal to at least 50 percent of the total 

number of safety-sensitive employees and alcohol tests equal to at least 25 percent of the total 

number of safety-sensitive employees must be conducted each year by this method. As of 1998, 

the random testing rate for alcohol was reduced to 10 percent by FTA. 

Reasonable Suspicion Testing: Required when an employer has reasonable suspicion that an 

employee has used a prohibited drug or has misused alcohol as defined in the regulations. 

Reasonable suspicion testing must be based on specific, contemporaneous, articulable 

observations made by a trained supervisor concerning the appearance, behavior, speech, or body 

odor of a safety-sensitive employee. 

Recipient: An entity receiving Federal financial assistance under Section 5307, 5309, or 5311 

of the Federal Transit Act or under sections 103(e)(4) of Title 23 of the U.S. Code. 

Refuse to Submit (to an alcohol test): A covered employee fails to provide adequate breath for 

testing without a valid medical explanation. 

Refuse to Submit (to a drug test): A covered employee fails to provide a urine sample as 

required by 49 CFR Part 40, without a valid medical explanation, after the employee has 

received notice of the requirement to be tested or engages in conduct that clearly obstructs the 

testing process. 

Return-to-Duty Testing: Required before any employee is allowed to return to duty to perform 

a safety-sensitive function following a verified positive drug test, an alcohol result of 0.04 or 

greater, a refusal to submit to a test, or any other activity that violates the regulation. 
1998 Annual Report A-5

Revenue Vehicle Control/Dispatch: Job function including any person who controls the 

dispatch or movement of revenue service vehicles. 

Revenue Vehicle Operations: Function including any person who operates or works as a 

crewman on revenue service vehicles at any time. 

Rural Operators: A subrecipient of 5311 funding primarily operating in an area of less than 

50,000 in population. 

Safety-Sensitive Function: Any of the following duties: 

• Operating a revenue service vehicle, including when not in revenue service; 

• Operating a non-revenue service vehicle, when required to be operated by a holder of 

Commercial Driver’s License; 

• Controlling dispatch or movement of a revenue service vehicle; 

• Maintaining a revenue service vehicle or equipment used in revenue service, unless the 

recipient receives section 5311 funding and contracts out such services; and/or 

• Providing security and carrying a firearm. 

Screening Test (or Initial Test): In drug testing, an immunoassay screen to eliminate 

"negative" urine specimens from further analysis. In alcohol testing, an analytic procedure to 

determine whether an employee may have a prohibited concentration of alcohol in a breath 

specimen.

Small Operators: A recipient or subrecipient primarily operating in an area equal or greater 

than 50,000 and less than 200,000 in population. 

Substance Abuse Professional (SAP): A licensed physician (Medical Doctor or Doctor of 

Osteopathy), or a licensed or certified psychologist, social worker, employee assistance 

professional, or addiction counselor (certified by the National Association of Alcoholism and 

Drug Abuse Counselors Certification Commission), with knowledge of and clinical experience 

in the diagnosis and treatment of drug and alcohol-related disorders. 

Transit System: The public entity that receives the Federal grant (direct grant recipient), 

whether or not that recipient provides mass transit services directly. 

Vehicle and Equipment Maintenance: Function including any person repairing or maintaining 

revenue service vehicles or other equipment used in revenue service. 

Verified Negative (drug test result): A drug test result reviewed by a medical review officer 

and determined to have no evidence of prohibited drug use. 

Verified Positive (drug test result): A drug test result reviewed by a medical review officer 

and determined to have evidence of prohibited drug use. 
1998 Annual Report B-1

APPENDIX B 

FTA REGIONS 
1998 Annual Report B-2

The Federal Transit Administration comprises the 10 regions identified below. The data 

provided by these regions has facilitated the comparison of drug and alcohol test results and the 

identification of regional trends and patterns. 

U.S. States and Territories Reporting to the 10 FTA Regions 

Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4 Region 5 

Connecticut 

Maine 

Massachusetts 

New Hampshire 

Rhode Island 

Vermont 

New Jersey 

New York 

Puerto Rico 

Virgin Islands 

Delaware 

District of 

 Columbia 

Maryland 

Pennsylvania 

Virginia 

West Virginia 

Alabama 

Florida 

Georgia 

Kentucky 

Mississippi 

North Carolina 

South Carolina 

Tennessee 

Illinois 

Indiana 

Michigan 

Minnesota 

Ohio 

Wisconsin 

Region 6 Region 7 Region 8 Region 9 Region 10 

Arkansas 

Louisiana 

New Mexico 

Oklahoma 

Texas 

Iowa 

Kansas 

Missouri 

Nebraska 

Colorado 

Montana 

North Dakota 

South Dakota 

Utah 

Wyoming 

American Samoa 

Arizona 

California 

Guam 

Hawaii 

Nevada 

Northern 

 Mariana Islands 

Alaska 

Idaho 

Oregon 

Washington 
1998 Annual Report C-1

 

APPENDIX C 

RAIL EMPLOYERS 
1998 Annual Report C-2

MASSACHUSETTS BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY BOSTON MA

 VETERANS TRANSPORTATION SERVICES WALTHAM MA

 KIT CLARK SENIOR SERVICES DORCHESTER MA

 GREATER LYNN SENIOR SERVICES, INC. LYNN MA

 THOMPSON TRANSIT, INC. FRAMINGHAM MA

TOWN OF BEDFORD BEDFORD MA

 CAVALIER COACH CORP. BOSTON MA

 UNDA'S BUS SERVICE, INC. STOUGHTON MA

 H & L BLOOM, INC. TAUNTON MA

 J B L BUS LINES, INC. BRAINTREE MA

 YCN TRANSPORTATION NORWOOD MA

 JOSEPH'S LIMOUSINE SERVICES, INC. MEDFORD MA

 ABC BUS COMPANY, INC. NO. ANDOVER MA

 PAUL REVERE TRANSPORTATION CHELSEA MA

 BRUSH HILL TRANSPORTATION COMPANY RANDOLPH MA

 THE COACH COMPANY PLAISTOW NH

 PETER PAN BUS LINES, INC. SPRINGFIELD MA

 POWER LINE CONTRACTORS, INC. READING MA

 EXECUTIVE PERSONNEL SERVICES, INC. WASHINGTON DC

 KIESSLING TRANSIT, INC. BRAINTREE MA

 A+A CHARTER, INC. WOBURN MA

 HARBOR CRUISE, LLC BOSTON MA

 NATICK NEIGHBORHOOD BUS, TOWN OF NATICK NATICK MA

 KNORR BRAKE CORPORATION WESTMINSTER MD

 WATER TRANSPORTATION ALTERNATIVES QUINCY MA

 A&B COACH LINES BRAINTREE MA 

 LAIDLAW TRANSIT CAMBRIDGE MA 

NIAGARA FRONTIER TRANSPORTATION METRO SYSTEM, INC. BUFFALO NY 

MTA-NEW YORK CITY TRANSIT BROOKLYN NY

RJR PARATRANSIT CORPORATION STATEN ISLAND NY

HALLS SECURITY ANALYSTS, INC. BELLE ROSE NY

UNICCO SERVICE COMPANY MACCLENNY FL

GOODYEAR MILEAGE SALES AUTHORITY AKRON OH

AMERICAN AMBULETTE CORP. YONKERS NY

ATLANTIC PARATRANS RIDGEWOOD NY 

PORT AUTHORITY TRANSIT CORPORATION (PATCO) LINDENWOLD NJ 

NJ TRANSIT NEWARK NJ

ATLANTIC COUNTY GOVERNMENT NORTHFIELD NJ

SENIOR CITIZENS UNITED COMMUNITY SERVICES MT. EPHRAIM NJ

COUNTY OF GLOUCESTER WOODBURY NJ

LION CORP. RIO GRANDE NJ

GOODYEAR MILEAGE SALES AUTHORITY AKRON OH

UNICCO SERVICE COMPANY AUTHORITY MACCLENNY FL

FIRESTONE MILEAGE SALES SAN ANTONIO TX

LAIDLAW TRANSIT SERVICE, INC. UNION NJ

LAIDLAW TRANSIT SERVICES CINNAMINSON NJ

LAIDLAW TRANSIT SERVICES, INC. SAYERVILLE NJ

ATLANTIC PARATRANS EGG HARBOR TWP. NJ

CAMBRIA COUNTY TRANSIT AUTHORITY JOHNSTOWN PA

UNITED CEREBRAL PALSY JOHNSTOWN PA
1998 Annual Report C-3

SOUTHEASTERN PENNSYLVANIA TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY PHILADELPHIA PA

ATLANTIC PARATRANS, INC. PHILADELPHIA PA

METRO CARE INC. BONSALOM PA

COMMUNITY TRANSIT OF DELAWARE COUNTY EDDYSTONE PA

TRIAGE, INC. PHILADELPHIA PA

KRAPF'S PARA TRANSIT DIVISION GLENMOORE PA

GOODYEAR MILEAGE SALES AKRON OH

UNICCO SERVICE COMPANY MACCLENNY FL

KING PARATRANSIT SERVICE, INC. KING OF PRUSSIA PA 

PORT AUTHORITY OF ALLEGHENY PITTSBURGH PA

ACCESS TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS, INC. PITTSBURGH PA

DUQUESNE INCLINE PITTSBURGH PA

GENESIS VII, INC. - PITTSBURGH TITUSVILLE FL

EXECUTIVE PERSONNEL SERVICES, INC. WASHINGTON DC

FIRESTONE MILEAGE SALES SAN ANTONIO TX 

WASHINGTON METROPOLITAN AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY WASHINGTON DC

DIAMOND TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC. ALEXANDRIA VA

METRO ACCESS OF MARYLAND TUXEDO MD

CLEAN VENTURE, INC. BALTIMORE MD

BIG APPLE TIRE, INC. BROOKLYN NY

A&A WASTE OIL CO. LINTHICUM HEIGHTS MD

GOODYEAR MILEAGE SALES - WMATA AKRON OH

EASTER TRANS WASTE OF MD INC. CAPITOL HEIGHTS MD

TRANSPORTATION MGMT. SERVICES, INC. FORESTVILLE MD

MASS TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION BALTIMORE MD

EYRE BUS SERVICE, INC. GLENELY MD

DILLON'S BUS SERVICE, INC. MILLE RSVILLE MD

FIRESTONE MILEAGE SALES SAN ANTONIO TX

KELLER TRANSPORTATION INC WALDORF MD

CHATTANOOGA AREA REGIONAL TRANS AUTHORITY (CARTA) CHATTANOOGA TN

MIDSOUTH TRANSPORTATION MGMT., INC. (MATA) MEMPHIS TN

METROPOLITAN ATLANTA RAPID TRANSIT ATLANTA GA

MICHELIN NORTH AMERICA GREENVILLE SC

MAXIMUM SAFETY/SECURITY ASSOC., INC. DECATUR GA

S & W SERVICES OF ATLANTA, INC. TUCKER GA

ADVANCED RAIL MANAGEMENT CORPORATION INDIALANTIC FL

MARTA TRACK CONSTRUCTORS, INC. DECATUR GA

SPERRY RAIL SERVICE DANBURY CT

LAIDLAW TRANSIT SERVICES NEW ORLEANS LA

MIAMI-DADE TRANSIT AGENCY MIAMI FL

ALANIS SECURITY, INC. MIAMI FL

AMERICAN BRAKE & CLUTCH TROY MI

CUMMINS SOUTHEASTERN POWER, INC. HIALEAH GARDENS FL

FEICK SECURITY MIAMI FL

FLORIDA DETROIT DIESEL-ALLISON, INC. JACKSONVILLE FL 

HANDI-VAN, INC. MIAMI FL

KAUFFS OF MIAMI, INC. OPA-LOCKA FL

MILEX SECURITY SERVICES MIAMI FL

PRECISION AUTO & TRUCK SERVICE, INC. MIAMI FL

RED TOP TRANSPORTATION, INC. MIAMI FL
1998 Annual Report C-4

AMC MEDICAL TRANSPORTATION MIAMI FL

ZUNI TRANSPORTATION INC. MIAMI FL

AAA WHEELCHAIR/STS MIAMI FL

COMPREHENSIVE PARATRANSIT MIAMI FL

GOODYEAR MILEAGE SALES AKRON OH

GENESIS VII, INC. - MIAMI DADE COUNTY TITUSVILLE FL

UNICCO SERVICE COMPANY MACCLENNY FL

SUPER NICE LIMO MIAMI FL

MINORITY MOBILE SYSTEM, INC. HIALEAH FL

SUPER YELLOW CAB MIAMI FL

WRP TRANSPORTATION MIAMI SHORES FL

TRUCK TRAILER TRANSIT, INC. DETROIT MI

THE WACKENHUT CORPORATION MIAMI FL

JACKSONVILLE TRANSPORTATION AUTH. JACKSONVILLE FL

BUGGS TRANSPORTATION JACKSONVILLE FL

BROWNING TRANSPORTATION, INC. JACKSONVILLE FL

INTELITRAN JACKSONVILLE FL

GJTC/DAN BETH MEDIVAC JACKSONVILLE FL

GREATER CLEVELAND RTA CLEVELAND OH

HOPKINS AIRPORT LIMOUSINE SERVICE, INC. CLEVELAND OH

GOODYEAR MILEAGE SALES AKRON OH

INTRANS, INC. CLEVELAND OH

GENESIS VII, INC. TITUSVILLE FL

CHICAGO TRANSIT AUTHORITY CHICAGO IL

SIMTRAN TRANSPORTATION L.L.C. EVANSTON IL 

COOK-DUPAGE TRANSPORTATION CO., INC. CHICAGO IL

SCR MEDICAL TRANSPORTATION, INC. CHICAGO IL

ART'S TRANSPORTATION L.L.C. CHICAGO IL

DETROIT TRANSPORTATION CORPORATION DETROIT MI

BRAZOS TRANSIT-ISLAND TRANSIT BRYAN TX 

TRANSIT MANAGEMENT OF SOUTHEAST, LA, INC., NEW ORLEANS LA

WASHINGTON TRANSPORTATION, INC. NEW ORLEANS LA

CITY OF NEW ORLEANS NEW ORLEANS LA

BAYOU STATE SECURITY SERVICES, INC. NEW ORLEANS LA

PENSKE TRUCK LEASING CO., L.P. READING PA

EXECUTIVE PERSONNEL SERVICES, INC. WASHINGTON DC

FUELMAN WESTWEGO LA

DALLAS AREA RAPID TRANSIT DALLAS TX

TCT TRANSIT SERVICES DALLAS TX

ACCU-GUARD, INC. DALLAS TX

GOODYEAR MILEAGE SALES AKRON OH

GENESIS VII, INC. TITUSVILLE FL

BARRIER SYSTEMS, INC. CARSON CITY NV

ATE MANAGEMENT & SERVICE CO., INC. DALLAS TX

RYDER/ATE DALLAS TX

BI-STATE DEVELOPMENT AGENCY ST. LOUIS MO

BIG APPLE TIRE, INC. BROOKLYN NY

CCC&C, INC. ST. LOUIS MO

WHELAN SECURITY COMPANY, INC. ST. LOUIS MO

FIRESTONE MILEAGE SALES SAN ANTONIO TX
1998 Annual Report C-5

DENVER - RTD DENVER CO

SENIORS RESOURCE CENTER, INC. DENVER CO

SPECIAL TRANSPORTATION FOR BOULDER COUNTY BOULDER CO

FREEDOM CABS, INC. COMMERCE CITY CO

GOODYEAR MILEAGE SALES AKRON OH 

UNICCO SERVICE COMPANY MACCLENNY FL

A-1 SECURITY DENVER CO

LAIDLAW TRANSIT SERVICES COMMERCE CITY CO

LAIDLAW TRANSIT SERVICES DENVER CO

THE WACKENHUT CORPORATION AURORA CO

ATC\VANCOM OF COLORADO, L.P. DENVER CO

BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT OAKLAND CA

FRIENDLY TRANSPORTATION, INC. OAKLAND CA

M.V. TRANSPORTATION SAN LEANDRO CA

LAIDLAW TRANSIT SERVICES OVERLAND PARK KS

VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY SAN JOSE CA

M.V. TRANSPORTATION SAN JOSE CA

SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL RAILWAY SAN FRANCISCO CA

GOODYEAR MILEAG SALES AKRON OH

LAIDLAW TRANSIT SERVICES SAN FRANCISCO CA

M.V. TRANSPORTATION SAN FRANCISCO CA

SACRAMENTO REGIONAL TRANSIT DISTRICT SACRAMENTO CA

GOODYEAR MILEAGE SALES AKRON OH

UNICCO SERVICE COMPANY MACCLENNY FL

PARATRANSIT, INC. SACRAMENTO CA

SAN DIEGO TROLLEY, INC. SAN DIEGO CA

LOS ANGELES COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTH. LOS ANGELES CA

U.S. GUARDS CO., INC. LOS ANGELES CA

HARMON & SON TIRE CENTER, INC. GARDENA CA

PARKING CONCEPTS, INC. IRVINE CA

INTER-CON SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC. PASADENA CA

COMMUNITY JOINT VENTURE PARTNERS GARDENA CA

GOODYEAR MILEAGE SALES AKRON OH

BASZILE METALS SERVICE LOS ANGELES CA

ATC/VANCOM VALENCIA CA 

LAIDLAW TRANSIT SERVICES, INC. LOS ANGELES CA

RYDER/ATE LOS ANGELES CA

RYDER/ATE LOS ANGELES CA

KING COUNTY SEATTLE WA

 MULTI SERVICE CENTERS OF N & E KING COUNTY BELLEVUE WA

 3A/EDJ TRANSIT SEATTLE WA

 SEATTLE PERSONAL TRANSIT SEATTLE WA

 PACIFIC MOBILITY, INC. SEATTLE WA

 EMMETT KOELSCH COACHES REDMOND WA

 PARATRANSIT SERVICES BREMERTON WA

 HARTS AUTOMOTIVE SEATTLE WA

 ARGOSY L.P. SEATTLE WA

 FIRESTONE MILEAGE SALES SAN ANTONIO TX
1998 Annual Report C-6

 LAIDLAW TRANSIT SERVICES, INC. WOODINVILLE WA

 LAIDLAW TRANSIT SERVICES, INC. SEATTLE WA

 RYDER TRUCK RENTAL, INC. TUKWILA WA

 RYDER/ATE FEDERAL WAY WA

 ATC/VANCOM OF KING COUNTY KENT WA 

 

TRI-COUNTY METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT PORTLAND OR

 BROADWAY CAB , INC. PORTLAND OR

 LAIDLAW TRANSIT SERVICES PORTLAND OR

 LAIDLAW TRANSIT SERVICES PORTLAND OR

 ATC/VANCOM MANAGEMENT SERVICES PORTLAND OR

 LAIDLAW TRANSIT SERVICES BEAVERTON OR

 RYDER/ATE PORTLAND OR 

SEATTLE CENTER/CITY OF SEATTLE SEATTLE WA