ML081790193 

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION 

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS 

WASHINGTON, DC 20555-0001 

September 2, 2008 

NRC INFORMATION NOTICE 2008-16: SUMMARY OF FITNESS-FOR-DUTY PROGRAM 

PERFORMANCE REPORTS FOR CALENDAR 

YEAR 2007 

ADDRESSEES 

All holders of operating licenses for nuclear power reactors and licensees authorized to 

possess, use, or transport formula quantities of special strategic nuclear material (SSNM). 

PURPOSE 

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing this Information Notice (IN) to report 

the lessons learned by licensees as detailed in their 2007 fitness-for-duty (FFD) program 

performance reports. The agency expects that recipients of this IN will review the information 

for applicability to their facilities and consider, as appropriate, taking corrective actions to 

improve the future performance of their FFD programs. However, suggestions contained in this 

IN are not NRC requirements and, therefore, no specific action or written response is required. 

DESCRIPTION OF CIRCUMSTANCES 

Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Section 26.71(d), requires NRC licensees 

to submit their FFD program performance reports to the agency within 60 days of the end of 

each 6-month reporting period (January - June and July - December). In the past, the NRC 

summarized and analyzed the performance data and published an annual volume, NUREG/CR5758, “Fitness for Duty in the Nuclear Power Industry – Annual Summary of Program 

Performance Reports.” Beginning with calendar year 1996 data, the summary and analysis of 

FFD program performance data has been published through the NRC’s generic communication 

program. The enclosure to this IN provides FFD program performance data for calendar year 

2007. 

This IN presents FFD program performance information covering 74 sites: 

• 64 Reactor Sites. Note: one utility aggregated the performance data for two different 

reactor sites into one performance report. Therefore, while this IN only distinguishes 

between 64 reactor sites in the following analyses, the actual test results address all 65 

reactor sites. 

• 6 Corporate FFD Program Offices. Some utilities with multiple reactor sites administer 

the FFD program at a location different from the reactor sites and therefore, report data 

for these personnel separately. 

• 4 Contractors/SSNM. These include Nuclear Fuel Services, BWX Technologies, 

Institute of Nuclear Power Operations, and Westinghouse Electric Company. 
IN 2008-16 

Page 2 of 5 

DISCUSSION 

This section is divided into four categories (Certified Laboratories; Random Testing; Policies 

and Procedures; Program and System Management) that provide summaries of the problems 

encountered and lessons learned, management initiatives, and associated corrective actions 

taken by licensees in 2007. 

The use of the term licensee in this IN is based on how FFD program performance data are 

reported to the NRC. Each nuclear power reactor licensee reports performance data by site 

(i.e., one or more reactors at single location). Therefore, in the four category discussions below, 

a licensee refers to information reported for a specific reactor site or by a SSNM licensee. 

1. Certified Laboratories

Five licensees experienced problems with laboratory performance involving equipment 

malfunctions and/or potential weaknesses related to human error. 

• One licensee reported that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) 

certified laboratory reported a negative test result for a pre-access test using an incorrect 

marijuana cutoff level (the licensee required initial testing at a 50 nanograms per milliliter 

(ng/mL) cutoff level; the laboratory used a 100 ng/mL cutoff level). This error was not 

detected by the licensee and the individual was granted access. Three days after 

granting access the HHS-certified laboratory provided the licensee with an amended 

report indicating a positive marijuana test result for the individual using the 50 ng/mL 

cutoff level. The licensee removed the individual from site, a medical review officer 

interview was conducted, unescorted access was denied, the NRC was notified, a 

prompt investigation was conducted, and an on-site investigation of HHS-certified 

laboratory process was performed. The licensee replaced the HHS-certified laboratory. 

• One licensee reported that the HHS-certified laboratory reported a false negative test 

result for a blind performance test sample containing amphetamine/methamphetamine. 

The HHS-certified laboratory determined that the error resulted from an inadvertent 

oversight by the certifying scientist. The laboratory implemented corrective action to 

address the situation. 

• One licensee reported that the HHS-certified laboratory reported a false negative test 

result for a blind performance test sample containing amphetamine/methamphetamine. 

The testing error occurred because the sample, which initially screened positive, was 

sent for additional testing at a 1:10 dilution. Confirmatory testing at the 1:10 dilution 

resulted in a negative test result. The certifying scientist did not follow the correct 

laboratory procedure to rerun the specimen at a lower dilution level. 

• One licensee reported that the HHS-certified laboratory reported a false negative test 

result for a blind performance test sample containing opiates. An investigation 

determined that the blind performance test sample supplier spiked the specimen with an 

opiate concentration too close to the initial drug test cutoff level which could have 
IN 2008-16 

Page 3 of 5 

resulted in the negative test result. The blind performance test sample supplier replaced 

the opiate-spiked specimens from the batch in question. The performance of the 

HHS-certified laboratory was determined to be acceptable. 

• One licensee reported that the HHS-certified laboratory returned a false negative test 

result for a blind performance test specimen. The licensee had not concluded its 

investigation on this matter at the time of the FFD performance report submission. 

2. Random Testing 

One licensee reported a problem related to the random drug and alcohol testing selection 

process. 

• The licensee incorrectly coded some workers as licensee or contractor employees which 

resulted in some individuals being assigned to the incorrect random testing pool. To 

address this situation the licensee conducted an evaluation of all workers granted 

unescorted access and ensured that each employee was assigned to the correct 

random testing pool. 

3. Policies and Procedures 

Two licensees reported issues involving testing program policies and procedures. 

• One licensee reported that a self-assessment team concluded that the employee 

assistance program (EAP) could improve the methods used to notify management in 

instances when an individual constituted a risk to himself/herself or others. The selfassessment team determined that the EAP provider needed to develop a more 

structured protocol to effect notification from the EAP provider to management when 

required by regulation. The self-assessment team also determined that the notification 

protocol should be included in the scope of services for EAP providers and that a 

subsequent effectiveness review needed to be conducted at least six months after the 

closure of the final action. 

• One licensee implemented new software, the Security Screening Information System, to 

standardize and streamline many processes in the implementation of both the Access 

Authorization and FFD programs. 

4. Program and System Management

In previous years, this sub-section employed the term “licensee” to mean an FFD program, 

which can encompass one or more reactor sites. To improve clarity, this IN uses “licensee” to 

mean one reactor site or license holder. 
IN 2008-16 

Page 4 of 5 

Licensees continue to report improvements in overall FFD program management. 

Alcohol Testing:

• Two licensees reported testing at a stricter cutoff level than required by the NRC 

(0.02 percent blood alcohol content (BAC)) for pre-access and follow-up testing. 

• Twelve licensees reported testing at stricter cutoff levels (four at 0.011 - 0.039 percent 

BAC and eight at 0.02 - 0.039 percent BAC) due to the range of extrapolation. 

Drug Testing: 

• Marijuana cutoff level: 

o 60 licensees reported testing at a stricter cutoff level than required by the 

NRC (50 ng/15 mL). 

o Two licensees reported testing at a stricter cutoff level than required by the 

NRC (50 ng/10 mL). 

o Three licensees reported testing at a stricter cutoff level than required by the 

NRC (20 ng/15 mL). 

• Opiate cutoff level: 

o One licensee reported testing at a stricter cutoff level than required by the 

NRC (300 ng/150 mL). 

• Amphetamine cutoff level: 

o One licensee reported testing at a stricter cutoff level than required by the 

NRC (1000 ng/250 mL). 

• Testing for other drugs: 

o One licensee reported testing for Barbiturates, Benzodiazepines, Methadone, 

and Methaqualone. 

o One licensee reported testing for barbiturates, benzodiazepines, and 

propoxyphene until November 2007. This testing resulted in one positive test 

result. 

o One licensee reported testing for barbiturates, benzodiazepines, methadone, 

and propoxyphene. 

o One licensee reported testing for benzodiazepines which resulted in one 

positive test result. 

• One licensee reported re-screening dilute negative specimens (i.e., specimens with a 

creatinine concentration of less than 20 milligrams per deciliter). 

• One licensee implemented an accelerated random testing program because of an 

increase in the number of amphetamine/methamphetamine positive test results. 
IN 2008-16 

Page 5 of 5 

CONTACT

This information notice requires no specific action or written response. Please direct any 

questions about this matter to the technical contact listed below. 

/RA/ /RA/ 

Michael J. Case, Director 

Division of Policy and Rulemaking 

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 

Daniel H. Dorman, Director 

Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards 

Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards 

Technical Contact: Timothy McCune, NSIR 

301-415-6474 

E-mail: fitnessforduty@nrc.gov

Enclosure: As stated 

Note: NRC generic communications may be found on the NRC public Web site, 

http://www.nrc.gov, under Electronic Reading Room/Document Collections. 
IN 2008-16 

Page 5 of 5 

CONTACT

This information notice requires no specific action or written response. Please direct any 

questions about this matter to the technical contact listed below. 

/RA/ /RA/ 

Michael J. Case, Director 

Division of Policy and Rulemaking 

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation 

Daniel H. Dorman, Director 

Division of Fuel Cycle Safety and Safeguards 

Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards 

Technical Contact: Timothy McCune, NSIR 

301-415-6474 

E-mail: fitnessforduty@nrc.gov

Enclosure: As stated 

Note: NRC generic communications may be found on the NRC public Web site, 

http://www.nrc.gov, under Electronic Reading Room/Document Collections. 

DISTRIBUTION: IN Reading File 

ADAMS Accession Number: ML081790193 

OFFICE NSIR:RSLPB TECH EDITOR NSIR:RSLPB NSIR:RSB:BC NSIR:DDRSR:DD 

NAME TMcCune CHse PPrescott DHuyck SMorris 

DATE 06/30/08 08/14/08 06/30/08 06/30/08 07/02/08 

OFFICE NSIR:D OGC PGCB:DPR PGCB:DPR 

NAME SMorris for RCorreia HBenowitz DBeaulieu CHawes 

DATE 08/08/08 08/20/08 08/27/08 08/28/08 

OFFICE PGCB:DPR:BC DPR:D D:NMSS:FCSS 

NAME MMurphy MCase DDorman 

DATE 09/02/08 09/02/08 08/28/08 

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
Enclosure 

Summary of FFD Program Performance Reports for 2007 

Since the fitness-for-duty (FFD) rule (10 CFR Part 26) was published in 1989, licensees have 

submitted program performance reports to the NRC as required by 10 CFR 26.71(d). In the 

past, the NRC published a summary and analysis of calendar year data submitted by the 

licensees in an annual volume of NUREG/CR-5758, “Fitness for Duty in the Nuclear Power 

Industry - Annual Summary of Program Performance Reports.” The tables and charts below 

present information for calendar year 2007 and in some cases present data over longer periods 

to present trends (e.g., 1990 to 2007). 

Table 1 

2007 Test Results for Each Test Category 

Test Category Number of Tests Positive Tests Percent Positive 

Pre-Access 

Random 

For-Cause 

 Observed Behavior 

 Post-Accident 

Follow-Up 

Other 

81,932 

51,665 

720 

895 

4,991 

1,866 

668 

117 

81 

10 

31 

43

0.82% 

0.23% 

11.25% 

1.12% 

0.62% 

2.30% 

TOTAL* 

TOTAL w/o Test 

Category “Other”

142,069 

140,203

950 

907

0.67% 

0.65%

*Includes the “Other” test category. Although some licensees specified the nature of the tests included in 

the “Other” category (e.g., return to work), most licensees did not provide clarifying information. 
IN 2008-16 

Page 2 of 25 

Table 2 

2007 Test Results by Test Category and Work Category 

(January through December 2007) 

Test Category Licensee 

Employees 

Long-Term 

Contractors* 

Short-Term 

Contractors* Total 

Pre-Access 

 Number Tested 9,783 640 71,509 81,932

 Number Positive 34 8 626 668

 Percent Positive 0.35% 1.25% 0.88% 0.82%

Random 

 Number Tested 34,984 1,534 15,147 51,665

 Number Positive 55 5 57 117

 Percent Positive 0.16% 0.33% 0.38% 0.23%

For-Cause 

Observed Behavior 

 Number Tested 292 22 406 720

 Number Positive 15 2 64 81

 Percent Positive 5.14% 9.09% 15.76% 11.25%

Post-Accident 

 Number Tested 373 24 498 895

 Number Positive 3 0 7 10

 Percent Positive 0.80% 0.00% 1.41% 1.12%

Follow-Up 

 Number Tested 2,542 31 2,418 4,991

 Number Positive 8 0 23 31

 Percent Positive 0.31% 0.00% 0.95% 0.62%

Other 

 Number Tested 1,116 36 714 1,866

 Number Positive 6 2 35 43

 Percent Positive 0.54% 5.56% 4.90% 2.30%

TOTAL 

 Number Tested 49,090 2,287 90,692 142,069

 Number Positive 121 17 812 950

 Percent Positive 0.25% 0.74% 0.90% 0.67%

TOTAL w/o Test 

Category “Other” 

 Number Tested 47,974 2,251 89,978 140,203

 Number Positive 115 15 777 907

 Percent Positive 0.24% 0.67% 0.86% 0.65%

*Some licensees distinguished between short term and long-term contractors, while others reported all as 

short-term. 
IN 2008-16 

Page 3 of 25 

Table 3 

2007 Test Results by Test Category 

(January through December 2007) 

Test Category First 

Six Months 

Second 

Six Months Year 

Pre-Access 

 Number Tested 44,471 37,461 81,932

 Number Positive 384 284 668

 Percent Positive 0.86% 0.76% 0.82%

Random 

 Number Tested 26,832 24,833 51,665

 Number Positive 64 53 117

 Percent Positive 0.24% 0.21% 0.23%

For-Cause 

 Observed Behavior 

 Number Tested 308 412 720

 Number Positive 41 40 81

 Percent Positive 13.31% 9.71% 11.25%

 

 Post-Accident 

 Number Tested 411 484 895

 Number Positive 5 5 10

 Percent Positive 1.22% 1.03% 1.12%

Follow-Up 

 Number Tested 2,633 2,358 4,991

 Number Positive 17 14 31

 Percent Positive 0.65% 0.59% 0.62%

Other 

 Number Tested 1,251 615 1,866

 Number Positive 24 19 43

 Percent Positive 1.92% 3.09% 2.30%

TOTAL 

 Number Tested 75,906 66,163 142,069

 Number Positive 535 415 950

 Percent Positive 0.70% 0.63% 0.67%

TOTAL w/o Test Category “Other” 

 Number Tested 74,655 65,548 140,203

 Number Positive 511 396 907

 Percent Positive 0.68% 0.60% 0.65%
IN 2008-16 

Page 4 of 25 

Table 4 

2007 Confirmed Positive Test Results by Substance and by Work Category 

(All Test Types) 

(January through December 2007) 

Licensee 

Employees 

Contractors 

(Long-Term/Short-Term) Positive Total 

Test Result Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 

Marijuana 35 24.82% 351 42.39% 386 39.83%

Cocaine 17 12.06% 215 25.97% 232 23.94%

Opiates 4 2.84% 18 2.17% 22 2.27%

Amphetamines 7 4.96% 22 2.66% 29 2.99%

Phencyclidine 2 1.42% 3 0.36% 5 0.52%

Alcohol 54 38.30% 135 16.30% 189 19.50%

Refusal to Test 22 15.60% 84 10.14% 106 10.94%

TOTAL* 141 100.00% 828 100.00% 969 100.00%

The totals in this table may be higher than those reported in Tables 1, 2, and 3 due to instances where an 

individual tested positive for more than one substance. 

Chart 1 

2007 Positive Test Results by Substance - 

Licensee Employees 

Chart 2 

2007 Positive Test Results by Substance - 

Contractors 

Cocaine

12.06%

Alcohol

38.30%

Refusal to Test

15.60% Marijuana

24.82%

Opiates

2.84%

Amphetamines

Phencyclidine 4.96%

1.42%

Alcohol

16.30%

Cocaine

25.97%

Phencyclidine

0.36%

Amphetamines

2.66%

Opiates

2.17%

Marijuana

42.39%

Refusal to Test

10.14%
IN 2008-16 

Page 5 of 25 

Table 5 

Significant Fitness-for-Duty Events (1990 - 2007) 

Year Reactor 

Operators 

Licensee 

Supervisors 

Contract 

Supervisors 

FFD Program 

Personnel 

Substances 

Found 

Adulterated 

Specimen* Total

1990 19 26 12 1 6 - 64 

1991 16 18 24 5 8 - 71 

1992 18 22 28 0 6 - 74 

1993 8 25 16 0 2 - 51 

1994 7 11 11 1 0 - 30 

1995 8 16 10 0 5 - 39 

1996 8 19 8 2 5 - 42 

1997 9 16 10 0 4 - 39 

1998 5 10 10 3 0 - 28 

1999 5 2 12 2 2 - 23 

2000 5 11 8 0 3 - 27 

2001 4 9 12 0 0 - 25 

2002 3 3 12 3 1 - 22 

2003 6 3 8 0 2 9 28 

2004 9 7 4 0 9 23 52 

2005 5 13 14 1 9 29 71 

2006 3 6 6 0 2 60 77 

2007 3 7 1 1 0 47 59 

*Licensees did not consistently report adulterated specimens. For this report, an adulterated specimen is 

reported if the original specimen was determined to be adulterated, dilute, or possessed unusually 

low/high temperature, specific gravity, or creatinine levels and the individual either refused to provide a 

second specimen or the specimen collected under observed collection had a positive test result. 
Table 6A 

Trends in Testing by Test Type (1990 - 1999) 

Type of Test 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994* 1995 1996 1997 Pre-Access 

Number Tested 122,491 104,508 104,842 91,471 80,217 79,305 81,041 84,320 Number Positive 1,548 983 1,110 952 977 1,122 1,132 1,096 Percent Positive 1.26% 0.94% 1.06% 1.04% 1.22% 1.41% 1.40% 1.30% 

Random 

Number Tested 148,743 153,818 156,730 146,605 78,391 66,791 62,307 60,829 Number Positive 550 510 461 341 223 180 202 172 Percent Positive 0.37% 0.33% 0.29% 0.23% 0.28% 0.27% 0.32% 0.28% 

For-Cause 

Number Tested 732 727 696 751 758 763 848 722 Number Positive 214 167 178 163 122 139 138 149 Percent Positive 29.23% 22.97% 25.57% 21.70% 16.09% 18.22% 16.27% 20.64% 

Followup 

Number Tested 2,633 3,544 4,283 4,139 3,875 3,262 3,262 3,296 Number Positive 65 62 69 56 50 35 40 31 Percent Positive 2.47% 1.75% 1.61% 1.35% 1.29% 1.07% 1.23% 0.94% 

TOTAL†

Number Tested 274,599 262,597 266,551 242,966 163,241 150,121 147,458 149,167 Number Positive 2,377 1,722 1,818 1,512 1,372 1,476 1,512 1,448 Percent Positive 0.87% 0.66% 0.68% 0.62% 0.84% 0.98% 1.03% 0.97% 

* Beginning in 1994, the NRC reduced the minimum annual random testing rate from 100% to 50% of the subject populatio† Does not include results from the “Other” test category. 
Test 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 

Table 6B 

Trends in Testing by Test Type (2000 - 2007) 

Type of Pre-Access 

Number Tested 68,333 63,744 73,155 72,988 76,119 79,005 Number Positive 965 720 805 757 737 648 Percent Positive 1.41% 1.13% 1.10% 1.04% 0.97% 0.82% 

Random 

Number Tested 51,955 50,080 49,741 49,402 51,239 50,286 Number Positive 204 148 114 132 127 147 Percent Positive 0.39% 0.30% 0.23% 0.27% 0.25% 0.29% 

For-Cause 

Number Tested 883 730 1,072 1,052 1,159 1,161 Number Positive 138 101 112 126 139 106 Percent Positive 15.63% 13.84% 10.45% 11.98% 11.99% 9.13% 

Followup 

Number Tested 2,861 2,649 2,892 3,142 3,752 4,057 Number Positive 49 35 21 42 31 31 Percent Positive 1.71% 1.32% 0.73% 1.34% 0.83% 0.76% 

TOTAL* 

Number Tested 124,032 117,203 126,86

0 126,584 132,269 134,509 

Number Positive 1,356 1,004 1,052 1,057 1,034 932 Percent Positive 1.09% 0.86% 0.83% 0.84% 0.78% 0.69% 

*

Does not include results from the “Other” test category. 
IN 2008-16 

Page 8 of 25 

Table 6C 

Trends in Testing by Test Type (2002 - 2007) 

Type of Test 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 

Pre-Access 

Number Tested 73,155 72,988 76,119 79,005 79,980 81,932

Number Positive 805 757 737 648 747 668

Percent Positive 1.10% 1.04% 0.97% 0.82% 0.93% 0.82%

Random 

Number Tested 49,741 49,402 51,239 50,286 52,557 51,665

Number Positive 114 132 127 147 132 117

Percent Positive 0.23% 0.27% 0.25% 0.29% 0.25% 0.23%

For-Cause 

Number Tested 1,072 1,052 1,159 1,161 1,621 1,615

Number Positive 112 126 139 106 109 91

Percent Positive 10.45% 11.98% 11.99% 9.13% 6.72% 5.63%

Followup 

Number Tested 2,892 3,142 3,752 4,057 4,766 4,991

Number Positive 21 42 31 31 37 31

Percent Positive 0.73% 1.34% 0.83% 0.76% 0.78% 0.62%

TOTAL† 

Number Tested 126,860 126,584 132,269 134,509 138,924 140,203

Number Positive 1,052 1,057 1,034 932 1,025 907

Percent Positive 0.83% 0.84% 0.78% 0.69% 0.74% 0.65% *

Does not include results from the “Other” test category. 
IN 2008-16 

Page 9 of 25 

Chart 3 

Trends in Positive Random Testing Rates (1990 - 2007) 

0.00%

0.05%

0.10%

0.15%

0.20%

0.25%

0.30%

0.35%

0.40%

0.45%

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

Positive Rate

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Positive Random Tests

Positive Rate Number of Positive Tests

Beginning in 1994, the NRC reduced the minimum annual random testing rate from 100% to 50% of the 

subject population. 
IN 2008-16 

Page 10 of 25 

Table 7 

Trends in Substances Identified (1990 - 2007) 

Year Marijuana Cocaine Alcohol Amphetamines Opiates Phencyclidine Total 

1990 1,153 706 452 69 45 8 2,433 

1991 746 549 401 31 24 11 1,762 

1992 953 470 427 31 8 4 1,893 

1993 781 369 357 51 13 5 1,576 

1994 739 344 251 54 11 1 1,400 

1995 819 374 265 61 17 7 1,543 

1996 868 352 281 53 14 2 1,570 

1997 842 336 262 49 39 0 1,528 

1998 606 269 212 46 19 1 1,153 

1999 672 273 230 40 16 2 1,233 

2000 620 251 211 50 32 1 1,165 

2001 523 225 212 50 17 2 1,029 

2002 560 228 214 47 21 3 1,073 

2003 518 228 199 64 17 0 1,026 

2004 514 247 222 60 14 1 1,058 

2005 432 246 196 59 16 2 951 

2006 446 307 206 53 14 1 1,027 

2007 386 232 189 29 22 5 863 
IN 2008-16 

Page 11 of 25 

Table 8 

Trends in Positive Test Rates for Workers with Unescorted Access (1990 - 2007) 

Random 

Testing 

For-Cause 

Testing 

Total 

(Random and 

Year For-Cause Testing) 

Number 

of Tests 

Percent 

Positive 

Number 

of Tests 

Percent 

Positive 

Number 

of Tests 

Percent 

Positive 

1990 148,743 0.37% 732 29.23% 149,475 0.54% 

1991 153,818 0.33% 727 22.97% 154,545 0.47% 

1992 156,730 0.29% 696 25.57% 157,426 0.44% 

1993 146,605 0.23% 751 21.70% 147,356 0.37% 

 1994* 78,391 0.28% 758 16.09% 79,149 0.48% 

1995 66,791 0.27% 763 18.22% 67,554 0.50% 

1996 62,307 0.32% 848 16.27% 63,155 0.57% 

1997 60,829 0.28% 722 20.64% 61,551 0.54% 

1998 56,969 0.28% 720 13.89% 57,689 0.50% 

1999 54,457 0.26% 736 16.30% 55,193 0.50% 

2000 51,955 0.39% 883 15.63% 52,838 0.70% 

2001 50,080 0.30% 730 13.84% 50,810 0.53% 

2002 49,741 0.23% 1,072 10.45% 50,813 0.46% 

2003 49,402 0.27% 1,052 11.98% 50,454 0.56% 

2004 51,239 0.25% 1,159 11.99% 52,398 0.51% 

2005 50,286 0.29% 1,161 9.13% 51,447 0.49% 

2006 52,557 0.25% 1,621 6.72% 54,178 0.44% 

2007 51,665 0.23% 1,615 5.63% 53,014 0.39% 

* Minimum annual random testing rate reduced from 100% to 50% of subject population. 
IN 2008-16 

Page 12 of 25 

Table 9 

Trends in Positive Test Rates (All Test Types)* by Work Category (1993 - 2007) 

Licensee 

Employees 

Long-Term 

Contractors 

Short-Term 

Contractors 

Year Number 

Positive 

Percent 

Positive 

Number 

Positive 

Percent 

Positive 

Number 

Positive 

Percent 

Positive 

1993 274 0.25% 17 0.21% 1,221 0.97% 

1994 219 0.33% 25 0.49% 1,128 1.22% 

1995 197 0.34% 14 0.40% 1,265 1.44% 

1996 244 0.43% 21 0.69% 1,247 1.42% 

1997 187 0.34% 29 0.80% 1,232 1.37% 

1998 169 0.33% 22 0.67% 931 1.25% 

1999 159 0.32% 22 0.65% 1,043 1.39% 

2000 206 0.44% 78 1.51% 1,072 1.48% 

2001 147 0.32% 22 0.64% 835 1.24% 

2002 117 0.26% 12 0.46% 923 1.18% 

2003 146 0.33% 12 0.61% 899 1.13% 

2004 123 0.27% 15 0.58% 896 1.06% 

2005 122 0.27% 19 0.78% 791 0.90% 

2006 118 0.25% 14 0.68% 893 1.00% 

2007 115 0.24% 15 0.67% 777 0.86% 

* Includes all test categories with the exception of the “Other” test category. 

Table 10 

Trends in Positive Pre-Access Testing Rates by Work Category (1993 - 2007) 

Licensee 

Employees 

Long-Term 

Contractors 

Short-Term 

Contractors 

Year Number 

Positive 

Percent 

Positive 

Number 

Positive 

Percent 

Positive 

Number 

Positive 

Percent 

Positive 

1993 47 0.42% 7 0.47% 898 1.14% 

1994 49 0.48% 12 0.86% 916 1.34% 

1995 60 0.57% 7 0.61% 1,055 1.56% 

1996 94 0.95% 13 1.21% 1,025 1.46% 

1997 62 0.55% 17 1.34% 1,017 1.42% 

1998 50 0.53% 12 0.88% 760 1.30% 

1999 44 0.52% 10 0.75% 880 1.48% 

2000 51 0.67% 60 2.06% 854 1.48% 

2001 44 0.52% 16 0.98% 660 1.23% 

2002 28 0.35% 10 0.80% 767 1.20% 

2003 41 0.49% 8 1.03% 708 1.11% 

2004 35 0.46% 8 0.73% 694 1.03% 

2005 28 0.34% 12 1.56% 608 0.87% 

2006 24 0.26% 7 1.33% 716 1.02% 

2007 34 0.35% 8 1.25% 626 0.88% 
IN 2008-16 

Page 13 of 25 

Table 11 

Trends in Positive Random Test Rates by Work Category (1993 - 2007) 

Licensee 

Employees 

Long-Term 

Contractors 

Short-Term 

Contractors 

Year Number 

Positive 

Percent 

Positive 

Number 

Positive 

Percent 

Positive 

Number 

Positive 

Percent 

Positive 

1993 157 0.17% 7 0.11% 177 0.39% 

1994 96 0.18% 7 0.19% 120 0.54% 

1995 82 0.18% 5 0.21% 93 0.50% 

1996 94 0.21% 4 0.21% 104 0.64% 

1997 76 0.18% 6 0.27% 90 0.54% 

1998 71 0.18% 9 0.48% 77 0.52% 

1999 71 0.18% 7 0.35% 62 0.45% 

2000 116 0.32% 5 0.24% 83 0.64% 

2001 64 0.18% 4 0.24% 80 0.65% 

2002 55 0.15% 1 0.08% 58 0.45% 

2003 61 0.18% 3 0.26% 68 0.48% 

2004 51 0.15% 6 0.43% 70 0.46% 

2005 60 0.18% 5 0.33% 82 0.54% 

2006 55 0.16% 5 0.35% 72 0.44% 

2007 55 0.16% 5 0.33% 57 0.38% 

Table 12 

Trends in Positive Observed Behavior Testing Rates by Work Category (1993 - 2007) 

Licensee 

Employees 

Long-Term 

Contractors 

Short-Term 

Contractors 

Year Number 

Positive 

Percent 

Positive 

Number 

Positive 

Percent 

Positive 

Number 

Positive 

Percent 

Positive 

1993 35 15.58% 2 16.67% 126 35.29% 

1994 39 19.60% 5 35.71% 75 24.35% 

1995 35 14.89% 2 16.67% 101 30.70% 

1996 34 13.93% 4 33.33% 98 26.85% 

1997 34 16.35% 6 37.50% 104 33.88% 

1998 26 14.05% 1 11.11% 70 26.82% 

1999 29 14.29% 4 23.53% 87 30.42% 

2000 21 10.24% 12 13.48% 99 31.43% 

2001 20 9.13% 2 10.00% 77 28.84% 

2002 23 9.47% 1 12.56% 86 23.50% 

2003 22 9.48% 0 0% 101 25.70% 

2004 23 8.65% 0 0% 111 26.62% 

2005 19 6.15% 2 12.50% 84 24.28% 

2006 24 7.45% 2 9.52% 78 20.91% 

2007 15 5.14% 2 9.09% 64 15.76% 
IN 2008-16 

Page 14 of 25 

FFD Performance Testing Results by Site 

Previous Information Notices (IN) did not provide FFD program performance testing data on a 

site-specific basis and primarily presented industry trends by test and work categories. This 

section of the 2008 IN presents distributional information by site for pre-access, random, and 

observed behavior testing. Distributional information is presented to provide licensees with 

additional information to evaluate the performance of their FFD programs. 

Table 13 

Industry Positive Test Results for Pre-Access, Random, and 

Observed Behavior Testing, by Work Category, 2007 

Pre-Access Testing 

Work Category Percent 

Positive 

Range of % Positive 

(by Site) 

 Licensee Employees 0.35 0 - 2.13 

 Contractors 0.88 0 - 3.08 

Industry Total 0.82 n/a 

Random Testing 

Work Category Percent 

Positive 

Range of % Positive 

(by Site) 

 Licensee Employees 0.16 0 - 0.71 

 Contractors 0.37 0 - 2.38 

Industry Total 0.23 n/a 

Observed Behavior Testing 

Work Category Percent 

Positive 

Range of % Positive 

(by Site) 

 Licensee Employees 5.14 0 - 100 

 Contractors 15.42 0 - 100 

Industry Total 11.25 n/a 

2007 Pre-Access Testing Positive Rates by Site 
IN 2008-16 

Page 15 of 25 

Table 14 

Distribution of Pre-Access Testing Positive Rates by Work Category by Site, 2007 

All Employees Licensee Employees Contractors 

Positive Rate 

Range (%) Sites Positive Rate Range (%) Sites Positive Rate Range (%) Sites 

0 13 0 55 0 11 

>0.0 - 0.2 3 >0.0 - 0.2 0 >0.0 - 0.3 4 

>0.2 - 0.4 7 >0.2 - 0.4 2 >0.3 - 0.6 14 

>0.4 - 0.6 9 >0.4 - 0.6 4 >0.6 - 0.9 12 

>0.6 - 0.8 9 >0.6 - 0.8 0 >0.9 - 1.2 11 

>0.8 - 1.0 10 >0.8 - 1.0 2 >1.2 - 1.5 8 

>1.0 - 1.2 9 >1.0 - 1.2 5 >1.5 - 1.8 4 

>1.2 - 1.4 5 >1.2 - 1.4 2 >1.8 - 2.1 2 

>1.4 - 1.6 2 >1.4 - 1.6 0 >2.1 - 2.4 3 

>1.6 - 1.8 2 >1.6 - 1.8 0 >2.4 - 2.7 0 

>1.8 - 2.0 2 >1.8 - 2.0 0 >2.7 - 3.0 0 

>2.0 - 2.2 1 >2.0 - 2.2 1 >3.0 - 3.3 1 

Total Sites* 72 Total Sites 71 Total Sites 70 

 * Total site counts may differ because a site may not have tested one work category. 

Chart 4 

Distribution of Pre-Access Testing Positive Rates (All Employees) by Site, 2007 

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

0

>0 - 0.2

>0.2 - 0.4

>0.4 - 0.6

>0.6 - 0.8

>0.8 - 1

>1 - 1.2

>1.2 - 1.4

>1.4 - 

1.6

>1.6 - 

1.8

>1.8 - 2

>2 - 2.2

Percent (%) Positive Rate

Number of Sites

Industry Rate: 0.82%
IN 2008-16 

Page 16 of 25 

Chart 5 

Distribution of Pre-Access Testing Positive Rates (Licensee Employees) by Site, 2007 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0

>0 - 0.2

>0.2 - 0.4

>0.4 - 0.6

>0.6 - 0.8

>0.8 - 1

>1 - 1.2

>1.2 - 1.4

>1.4 - 1.6

>1.6 - 1.8

>1.8 - 2

>2 - 2.2

Percent (%) Positive Rate 

Number of Sites

Industry Rate: 0.35%

Chart 6 

Distribution of Pre-Access Testing Positive Rates (Contractors) by Site, 2007 

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

0

>0 - 0.3

>0.3 - 0.6

>0.6 - 0.9

>0.9 - 

1.2

>1.2 - 

1.5

>1.5 - 1.8

>1.8 - 2.1

>2.1 - 2.4

>2.4 - 2.7

>2.7 - 3

>3 - 3.3

Percent (%) Positive Rate 

Number of Sites

Industry Rate: 0.88%
IN 2008-16 

Page 17 of 25 

2007 Random Testing Positive Rates by Site 

Table 15 

Distribution of Random Testing Positive Rates by Work Category by Site, 2007 

All Employees Licensee Employees Contractors 

Positive Rate 

Range (%) Sites Positive Rate Range (%) Sites Positive Rate Range (%) Sites 

0 28 0 38 0 39 

>0.0 - 0.1 1 >0.0 - 0.1 0 >0.0 - 0.3 4 

>0.1 - 0.2 7 >0.1 - 0.2 13 >0.3 - 0.6 10 

>0.2 - 0.3 17 >0.2 - 0.3 6 >0.6 - 0.9 6 

>0.3 - 0.4 7 >0.3 - 0.4 9 >0.9 - 1.2 8 

>0.4 - 0.5 5 >0.4 - 0.5 1 >1.2 - 1.5 4 

>0.5 - 0.6 6 >0.5 - 0.6 4 >1.5 - 1.8 0 

>0.6 - 0.7 1 >0.6 - 0.7 0 >1.8 - 2.1 0 

>0.7 - 0.8 1 >0.7 - 0.8 1 >2.1 - 2.4 1 

Total Sites 73 Total Sites 72 Total Sites 72 

 * Total site counts may differ because a site may not have tested one work category. 

Chart 7 

Distribution of Random Testing Positive Rates (All Employees) by Site, 2007 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0

>0 - 0.1

>0.1 - 0.2

>0.2 - 0.3

>0.3 - 0.4

>0.4 - 0.5

>0.5 - 0.6

>0.6 - 0.7

>0.7 - 0.8

Percent (%) Positive Rate

Number of Sites

Industry Rate: 0.23%
IN 2008-16 

Page 18 of 25 

Chart 8 

Distribution of Random Testing Positive Rates (Licensee Employees) by Site, 2007 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0

>0 - 0.1

>0.1 - 0.2

>0.2 - 0.3>0.3 - 0.4

>0.4 - 0.5

>0.5 - 0.6

>0.6 - 0.7

>0.7 - 0.8

Percent (%) Positive Rate 

Number of Sites

Industry Rate: 0.16%

Chart 9 

Distribution of Random Testing Positive Rates (Contractors) by Site, 2007 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0

>0 - 0.3

>0.3 - 0.6

>0.6 - 0.9

>0.9 - 1.2

>1.2 - 1.5

>1.5 - 

1.8

>1.8 - 2.1

>2.1 - 2.4

Percent (%) Positive Rate 

Number of Sites

Industry Rate: 0.37%
IN 2008-16 

Page 19 of 25 

2007 Observed Behavior Testing Rates by Site

Table 16 

Distribution of Observed Behavior Testing Positive Rates by Work Category by Site, 2007 

All Employees Licensee Employees Contractors 

Positive Rate 

Range (%) Sites Positive Rate Range (%) Sites Positive Rate Range (%) Sites 

0 30 0 40 0 27 

>0 - 10 7 >0 - 10 2 >0 - 10 3 

>10 - 20 7 >10 - 20 4 >10 - 20 6 

>20 - 30 7 >20 - 30 2 >20 - 30 3 

>30 - 40 4 >30 - 40 1 >30 - 40 7 

>40 - 50 4 >40 - 50 1 >40 - 50 0 

>50 - 60 1 >50 - 60 0 >50 - 60 3 

>60 - 70 0 >60 - 70 0 >60 - 70 1 

>70 - 80 0 >70 - 80 0 >70 - 80 0 

>80 - 90 0 >80 - 90 0 >80 - 90 0 

>90 - 100 5 >90 - 100 1 >90 - 100 7 

Total Sites 65 Total Sites 51 Total Sites 57 

* Total site counts may differ because a site may not have tested one work category. 

Chart 10 

Distribution of Observed Behavior Testing Positive Rates (All Employees) by Site, 2007 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

0

>0 - 10

>10 - 20

>20 - 30

>30 - 40

>40 - 50

>50 - 60

>60 - 70

>70 - 80

>80 - 90

>90 - 100

Percent (%) Positive Rate

Number of Sites

Industry Rate: 11.25%
IN 2008-16 

Page 20 of 25 

Chart 11 

Distribution of Observed Behavior Testing Positive Rates 

(Licensee Employees) by Site, 2007 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0

>0 - 10

>10 - 20

>20 - 30

>30 - 40

>40 - 50

>50 - 60

>60 - 70

>70 - 80

>80 - 90

>90 -

100

Percent (%) Positive Rate 

Number of Sites

Industry Rate: 5.14%

Chart 12 

Distribution of Observed Behavior Testing Positive Rates (Contractors) by Site, 2007 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

0

>0 - 10

>10 - 20

>20 - 30

>30 - 40

>40 - 50

>50 - 60

>60 - 70

>70 - 80

>80 - 90

>90 - 100

Percent (%) Positive Rate 

Number of Sites

Industry Rate: 15.42%
IN 2008-16 

Page 21 of 25 

2007 Distribution of Test Results by Sites and Work Category – Summary 

Chart 13: Comparison of Site Pre-Access Testing Positive Rates by Work Category, 2007 

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0

>0 - 0.3

>0.3 - 0.6

>0.6 - 0.9>0.9 - 1.2

>1.2 - 1.5>1.5 - 1.8

>1.8 - 2.1>2.1 - 2.4

>2.4 - 2.7

>2.7 - 3>3 - 3.3

Percent (%) Positive Rate

Number of Sites

Licensee Employees Contractors

Chart 14: Comparison of Site Random Testing Positive Rates by Work Category, 2007 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

0

>0 - 0.2

>0.2 - 0.4

>0.4 - 0.6

>0.6 - 0.8

>0.8 - 

1

>1 - 1.2

>1.2 - 1.4

>1.4 - 1.6

>1.6 - 1.8

>1.8 - 2

>2 - 2.2

>2.2 - 2.4

Percent (%) Positive Rate

Number of Sites

Licensee Employees Contractors
IN 2008-16 

Page 22 of 25 

Chart 15: Comparison of Site Observed Behavior Testing Positive Rates by Work Category, 2007 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

0

>0 - 10

>10 - 20

>20 - 30

>30 - 40

>40 - 50

>50 - 60

>60 - 70

>70 - 80

>80 - 90

>90 -

100

Percent (%) Positive Rate

Number of Sites

Licensee Employees Contractors
IN 2008-16 

Page 23 of 25 

Table of Changes – 2008 IN 

This table highlights the changes that have been made to the tables in this IN (2008 IN) relative 

to the 2007 IN (IN 2007-24, “Summary Of Fitness-For-Duty Program Performance Reports For 

Calendar Year 2006,” Agencywide Documents Access and Management System Accession No. 

ML071590308). The table below identifies each table in the 2007 IN, describes the change(s) 

made to the table, and identifies the table in this IN (2008 IN). 

2007 IN 2008 IN 

Table 

No. Table Title Table No. Table Title 

Changes Made 

1 2006 Test Results for 

Each Test Category 

1 2007 Test Results for 

Each Test Category 

• Broke out test results for the 

"For-Cause" test category into 

“Observed Behavior” and "PostAccident" results. 

• Slightly revised the note 

describing “Other” test category. 

2 2006 Test Results for 

Each Test Category 

and Work Category 

2 2007 Test Results by 

Test Category and 

Work Category 

• Added a table comment 

describing the “long-term” and 

“short-term” contractor work 

categories. 

• Minor title change. 

3 2006 Test Results by 

Test Category 

3 2007 Test Results by 

Test Category 

• None. 

4 2006 Test Results for 

Licensee Employees 

and Contractor 

Personnel 

- - • Deleted this table because most 

information is already included 

in other tables. 

• 2007 IN Table 2 presented the 

same test results as 2007 IN 

Table 4 with one exception. 

Table 4 presented the results for 

the first and second six month 

reporting periods while Table 2 

only presented total results for 

the year. 
IN 2008-16 

Page 24 of 25 

2007 IN 2008 IN 

Table 

No. Table Title Table No. Table Title 

Changes Made 

5 2006 Number of 

Confirmed Positives 

by Substance 

- - • Deleted this table because most 

information is already included 

in other tables. 

• 2007 IN Table 5 presented 

results by substance type by 

reporting period (i.e., first and 

second six months). 2007 IN 

Table 6 presented results by 

substance type by work 

category for the year (and not 

first/second six month reporting 

period). 

6 2006 Confirmed 

Positive Test Results 

by Substance and 

Work Category 

4 2007 Confirmed 

Positive Test Results 

by Substance and by 

Work Category (All 

Test Types) 

• Changed table number. 

• Minor title change. 

• Added columns to present total 

positive tests and percent 

positive by substance for all 

work categories. 

• Changed the column header 

“Type of Substance” to “Positive 

Test Result”. 

• Added positive test result type 

“Refusal to Test”. 

• Added table comment 

explaining that the totals may be 

higher than those in Tables 1, 2, 

and 3 because an individual 

might test positive for more than 

one substance. 
IN 2008-16 

Page 25 of 25 

2007 IN 2008 IN 

Table 

No. Table Title Table No. Table Title 

Changes Made 

7 Significant Fitness-forDuty Events (1990-

2006) 

5 Significant Fitness-forDuty Events (1990- 

2007) 

• Changed table number. 

• Reversed the table column 

header and row orientation such 

that the type of event (e.g., 

Substances Found) is the 

column header and the table 

rows present the results by year.

• Added a table comment for 

adulterated specimen. 

8 Trends in Testing by 

Test Type (1990-

2006) 

(Note: the table was 

split, one table for 

1990 - 1999 and one 

table for 2000 - 2006) 

6A 

6B 

6C 

Trends in Testing by 

Test Type (1990-1995) 

Trends in Testing by 

Test Type (1996-2001) 

Trends in Testing by 

Test Type (2002-2007) 

• Changed table numbers. 

• Added table comment to 

indicate that the minimum 

annual random testing rate was 

reduced from 100% to 50% in 

1994. 

9 Trends in Substances 

Identified (1990-2006) 

(Note: the table was 

split, one table for 

1990-1999 and one 

table for 2000-2006) 

7 Trends in Substances 

Identified (1990-2007) 

• Changed table number. 

• Reversed the table column 

header and row orientation such 

that the “substance” is the 

column header and the table 

rows present the results by year. 

This change consolidated the 

results into one table. 

10 Trends in Positive 

Test Rates for 

Workers with 

Unescorted Access 

(1990-2006) 

8 Trends in Positive Test 

Rates for Workers with 

Unescorted Access 

(1990-2007) 

• Changed table number. 

• 2007 IN presented a single 

positive rate by year, which 

accounted for random testing 

and for-cause testing positives. 

• Revised the table by adding 

separate columns for random 

and for-cause testing results 

(number of tests and positive 

rate).