Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 31, 2006 / Notices 5109 

other means; * * *’’ FTA has 

interpreted this exception as applying to 

the construction cost of these facilities, 

not their ongoing reasonable costs of 

maintenance. FTA will encourage 

public transportation agencies to 

negotiate shared maintenance 

agreements to ensure satisfactory 

condition and usefulness of the joint 

development project over its full term. 

Proportion of Incidental Use—FTA is 

considering establishing a percentage of 

additional space that may be supported 

with transit grant funds for joint 

development and/or incidental use 

purposes. Taking as given that the 

primary purpose of the expenditure is a 

transit project—say, a bus transfer 

facility—how much more space would 

be reasonable to include for a join 

development activity such as a day care 

center, congregate meal facility, or 

health care facility? Is it reasonable for 

the physical capacity of the jointly 

developed improvement to exceed the 

transit facility in size and/or cost? This 

question arises particularly in the 

context of an intercity bus or rail station 

which, since its service area is likely to 

be considerably larger than the transit 

agency’s, may require even more ‘‘peak’’

than the transit agency does. 

Related to this issue is the question of 

how to treat changes in the use of joint 

development space after the project is 

complete. For example, if space was 

made available for a day care center but 

three years after the project is complete, 

the day care center manager moves the 

operation to another location. FTA seeks 

comment on whether the transit agency 

should be required to replace the day 

care center only with another eligible 

transit activity (such as a senior care or 

public health activity), or whether the 

space might be made available for lease 

by a public or private sector activity. 

FTA is considering requiring the transit 

agency to perform a new market 

analysis on the basis of replacing the 

initial joint development activity with a 

market-based joint development 

activity. 

Finally, the public transit agency may 

reasonably seek to build a large enough 

facility to allow for future expansion. 

Given that such facilities may have a 

useful life of 40 years or more, it is 

reasonable to anticipate some growth in 

the transit agency and its service over 

that term. The transit agency may then 

wish to offer this additional space for 

rent on a non-interfering basis until it is 

needed for transit operations. FTA seeks 

comment on a method for determining 

what growth is ‘‘reasonable’’ to project 

in this instance. FTA is considering 

linking this projected growth to 

population forecasts for the region, as 

used by the Metropolitan Planning 

Organization for its long range plans. 

Issued on: January 24, 2006. 

Sandra K. Bushue, 

Deputy Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 06–871 Filed 1–30–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–57–M 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Transit Administration 

Prevention of Alcohol Misuse and 

Prohibited Drug Use in Transit 

Operations 

AGENCY: Federal Transit Administration 

(FTA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of random drug and 

alcohol testing rates. 

SUMMARY: This notice announces the 

random testing rates for employers 

subject to the Federal Transit 

Administration’s (FTA) drug and 

alcohol rules. 

DATES: Effective Date: January 31, 2006. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jerry 

Powers, Drug and Alcohol Program 

Manager for the Office of Safety and 

Security, (202) 366–2896 (telephone) 

and (202) 366–7951 (fax). Electronic 

access to this and other documents 

concerning FTA’s drug and alcohol 

testing rules may be obtained through 

the FTA World Wide Web home page at 

http://www.fta.dot.gov, click on ‘‘Safety 

and Security.’’

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

January 1, 1995, FTA required large 

transit employers to begin drug and 

alcohol testing employees performing 

safety-sensitive functions and to begin 

submitting annual reports by March 15 

of each year beginning in 1996. The 

annual report includes the number of 

employees who had a verified positive 

for the use of prohibited drugs, and the 

number of employees who tested 

positive for the misuse of alcohol. Small 

employers commenced their FTArequired testing on January 1, 1996, and 

began reporting the same information as 

the large employers beginning March 

15, 1997. The testing rules were updated 

on August 1, 2001, and established a 

random testing rate for prohibited drugs 

and the misuse of alcohol. 

The rules require that employers 

conduct random drug tests at a rate 

equivalent to at least 50 percent of their 

total number of safety-sensitive 

employees for prohibited drug use and 

at least 25 percent for the misuse of 

alcohol. The rules provide that the drug 

random testing rate may be lowered to 

25 percent if the ‘‘positive rate’’ for the 

entire transit industry is less than one 

percent for two preceding consecutive 

years. Once lowered, it may be raised to 

50 percent if the positive rate equals or 

exceeds one percent for any one year 

(‘‘positive rate’’ means the number of 

positive results for random drug tests 

conducted under 49 CFR 655.45 plus 

the number of refusals of random tests 

required by 49 CFR 655.49, divided by 

the total number of random drug tests, 

plus the number of refusals of random 

tests required by 49 CFR part 655). 

The alcohol provisions provide that 

the random rate may be lowered to 10 

percent if the ‘‘violation rate’’ for the 

entire transit industry is less than 0.5 

percent for two consecutive years. It 

will remain at 25 percent if the 

‘‘violation rate’’ is equal to or greater 

than 0.5 percent but less than one 

percent, and it will be raised to 50 

percent if the ‘‘violation rate’’ is one 

percent or greater for any one year 

(‘‘violation rate’’ means the number of 

covered employees found during 

random tests given under 49 CFR 655.45 

to have an alcohol concentration of .04 

or greater, plus the number of 

employees who refuse a random test 

required by 49 CFR 655.49, divided by 

the total reported number of random 

alcohol tests plus the total number of 

refusals of random tests required by 49 

CFR part 655). 

49 CFR 655.45(b) states that, ‘‘the 

Administrator’s decision to increase or 

decrease the minimum annual 

percentage rate for random drug and 

alcohol testing is based, in part, on the 

reported positive drug and alcohol 

violation rates for the entire industry. 

The information used for this 

determination is drawn from the drug 

and alcohol Management Information 

System (MIS) reports required by 49 

CFR part 655. In determining the 

reliability of the data, the Administrator 

shall consider the quality and 

completeness of the reported data, may 

obtain additional information or reports 

from employers, and make appropriate 

modifications in calculating the 

industry’s verified positive results and 

violation rates.’’

In 2005, the FTA required a random 

drug testing rate of 50 percent of the 

total number of their ‘‘safety-sensitive’’

employees for prohibited drugs based 

on the ‘‘positive rate’’ for random drug 

test data from 2002 and 2003. FTA has 

received and analyzed the latest 

available data (CY2004) from a 

representative sample of transit 

employers. Based on the data, the 

random drug rate was lower than 1.0 

percent for the two preceding 

consecutive years (0.96 percent for 2003 

and 0.89 percent for 2004). However, 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES
5110 Federal Register / Vol. 71, No. 20 / Tuesday, January 31, 2006 / Notices 

1These performance requirements were 

established using a 6-year-old child dummy. The 

weight of the dummy is 51.6 pounds. According to 

U.S. Department of Health & Human Services 

statistics, 51.7 pounds is the average weight of a 6- 

year-old child. Cynthia L. Ogden, Ph.D., et al, U.S. 

Department of Health and Human Services, Mean 

Body Weight, Height, and Body Mass Index, United 

States 1960–2002 (2004). 2The 2003 performance requirements were 

established using a 6-year-old child dummy 

modified through the addition of weight (10.4 

pounds) to represent approximately the weight of 

an 8-year-old child. 3OGDEN, supra note 1, at 3. 

based on additional information noted 

herein, the Administrator has 

determined that the random drug testing 

rate shall remain at 50 percent for 2006. 

The Department has noted the 

proliferation of products to defraud the 

USDOT urine screens. Congressional 

hearings on these products and the GAO 

Report of 17 May 2005 are indicative of 

the potential adverse impact these 

products marketed as adulterate 

specimens may have on reported 

random rates and the reliability of those 

results. 

The Secretary of Transportation’s 

Office of Drug &Alcohol Policy & 

Compliance (ODAPC) has proposed to 

amend 49 CFR part 40 to require 

specimen validity tests for all urine 

specimens collected pursuant to part 40. 

The Department proposes that each 

DOT specimen be tested for products 

that can be used to adulterate and 

substitute a urine specimen (70 FR 209 

October 31, 2005). The Department 

would require each HHS-certified 

laboratory to conduct specimen validity 

testing. This will have the effect of 

identifying more adulterated and 

substituted urine specimens and 

enhance the reliability of test results. 

The Department believes the safety 

concerns associated with random testing 

warrant a one year delay in order to 

analyze reported random rates after SVT 

testing has been implemented. 

In 2005, the FTA retained the random 

alcohol testing rate of 10 percent 

(reduced previously from 25 percent) 

based on the ‘‘positive rate’’ for random 

alcohol test data from 2003 and 2004. 

Because the random alcohol violation 

rate was again lower than 0.5 percent for 

the two preceding consecutive years 

(0.20 percent for 2003 and 0.11 percent 

for 2004), the random alcohol testing 

rate will remain at 10 percent for 2006. 

FTA detailed reports on the drug and 

alcohol testing data collected from 

transit employers may be obtained from 

the Office of Safety and Security, 

Federal Transit Administration, 400 

Seventh Street, SW., Room 9301, 

Washington, DC 20590, (202) 366–2896 

or at http://transit-safety.volpe.dog.gov/ 

Publications. 

Issued on: January 24, 2006. 

Sandra K. Bushue, 

Deputy Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 06–859 Filed 1–30–06; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–57–M 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

National Highway Traffic Safety 

Administration 

[Docket No. NHTSA–2006–23628] 

Child Safety and Child Booster Seats 

Incentive Grants 

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration, DOT. 

ACTION: Announcement of grants for 

child safety and child booster seats. 

SUMMARY: The National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration (NHTSA) 

announces a grant program under 

Section 2011 of the Safe, Accountable, 

Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity 

Act—A Legacy of Users (SAFETEA–LU) 

to implement programs to purchase and 

distribute child restraints, support 

enforcement of child restraint laws, 

train child passenger safety 

professionals concerning all aspects of 

child restraint use, and educate the 

public concerning the proper use and 

installation of child restraints. This 

notice solicits applications from the fifty 

States, the District of Columbia, and 

Puerto Rico. 

DATES: Applications must be received 

by the office designated below on or 

before July 1 of the applicable fiscal 

year. 

ADDRESSES: Applications must be 

submitted to the appropriate National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration 

Regional Administrator. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

program issues: Judy Hammond, Injury 

Control Operations and Resources, NTI–

200, telephone (202) 366–2121, fax (202) 

366–7394. For legal issues: David 

Bonelli, Office of Chief Counsel, NCC–

113, telephone (202) 366–1834, fax (202) 

366–3820, NHTSA, 400 Seventh Street, 

SW., Washington, DC 20590. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Background 

Incentive Grants for Child Safety Seats 

and Child Booster Seats 

Section 2011 of SAFETEA–LU (Pub. 

L. 109–59) establishes an incentive grant 

program for child safety seats and child 

booster seats. To qualify for grant funds, 

States must ‘‘enforc[e] a law requiring 

that any child riding in a passenger 

motor vehicle in the State who is too 

large to be secured in a child safety seat 

be secured in a child restraint that meets 

the requirements prescribed by the 

Secretary under section 3 of Anton’s 

Law.’’ Prior to Anton’s Law, NHTSA’s 

performance requirements for child 

safety seats covered children weighing 

only up to 50 pounds.1 Anton’s Law 

(Pub. L. 107–318) was enacted to 

improve the safety and use of child 

restraints for children between the ages 

of 4 and 8. To accomplish these 

purposes, Congress directed the 

Department of Transportation, in 

Section 3 of Anton’s Law, to make 

Federal performance requirements 

applicable to child restraints 

recommended for children weighing 

more than 50 pounds. On June 3, 2003, 

pursuant to this mandate, NHTSA 

published a final rule setting 

performance requirements for child 

restraints recommended for children 

weighing up to 65 pounds.2

The Section 2011 grant program 

advances the purposes of Anton’s Law 

by awarding funds to States that extend 

their child restraint laws to cover 

children who are too large to fit in child 

safety seats. Based on the final rule 

promulgated under Section 3 of Anton’s 

Law, Section 2011 requires States to 

enforce child restraint laws whose 

coverage extends to children weighing 

up to 65 lbs. 

Virtually all State child restraint laws 

use the age of the child as a means of 

specifying the children required to be 

secured in child restraints. However, 

not all State laws use the weight of the 

child in defining coverage. Moreover, 

enforcing a child restraint law based on 

the age of the child is likely to be more 

practicable for State and local 

enforcement officials. For these reasons, 

we are defining our grant criteria 

according to the age that correlates to a 

65-pound child. According to the most 

recent U.S. Department of Health & 

Human Services (DHHS) publication on 

average body weight for children, the 

average weight of a 7-year-old child is 

59.8 pounds and the average weight of 

an 8-year-old child is 72 pounds.3 On 

the basis of this information, we have 

selected 7 years old as the age that is 

reasonably representative of a 65-pound 

child for the purposes of this grant 

program. 

Minimum Requirements for a Grant 

To qualify for a grant under this 

program, therefore, a State must enact 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC70 with NOTICES