Document ID: NHTSA-2022-0007-0001
Agency: nhtsa
Document Type: Notice
Title: Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposals, Submissions, and Approvals: Barriers and Solutions for Submitting Toxicology Data to the Fatality Analysis Reporting System Pursuant to Recommendationsfor Toxicological Investigation of Drug-Impaired Driving and Motor Vehicle Fatalities
Posted Date: 2022-04-25T04:00Z

[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 79 (Monday, April 25, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 24390-24394]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-08776]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

[Docket No. NHTSA-2022-0007]

Request for Comments on Barriers and Solutions for Submitting 
Toxicology Data to the Fatality Analysis Reporting System Pursuant to 
Recommendations for Toxicological Investigation of Drug-Impaired 
Driving and Motor Vehicle Fatalities

AGENCY: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 
Department of Transportation (DOT).

ACTION: Request for comments on barriers to and solutions for providing 
toxicological data on drug-impaired driving investigations of motor 
vehicle fatalities to the Fatality Analysis

[[Page 24391]]

Reporting System (FARS) that meet the recommendations described in 
Recommendations for Toxicological Investigations of Drug-Impaired 
Driving and Motor Vehicle Fatalities--2021 Update.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: Section 25025 of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act 
requires NHTSA to submit a report to Congress that, in accordance with 
recommendations made in Recommendations for Toxicological 
Investigations of Drug-Impaired Driving and Motor Vehicle Fatalities--
2021 Update, (1) ``identifies any barriers the States encounter in 
submitting alcohol and drug toxicology results to the Fatality Analysis 
Reporting System;'' and (2) ``provides recommendations on how to 
address the barriers identified'' pursuant to providing the data 
described in the above recommendations for toxicological 
investigations. This notice requests public comments on any barriers 
that States may encounter that would affect their ability to provide 
the toxicological data described in the 2021 Update of the 
Recommendations document to FARS, as well as recommendations to address 
those barriers identified.

DATES: The request for comments is effective on April 25, 2022.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments identified by DOT Docket ID Number 
NHTSA-2022-0007 using any of the following methods:
    Electronic submissions: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow 
the on-line instructions for submitting comments.
    Mail: Docket Management Facility, M-30, U.S. Department of 
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, West Building Ground Floor, 
Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590.
    Hand Delivery: West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 1200 New 
Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    Fax: 1-202-493-2251.
    Instructions: Each submission must include the Agency name and the 
Docket number for this Notice. Note that all comments received will be 
posted without change to https://www.regulations.gov including any 
personal information provided.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For more information, contact Dr. 
Randolph Atkins, Jr., Chief, Behavioral Research Division, NPD-310, 
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, 1200 New Jersey Avenue 
SE, Washington, DC 20590; Telephone number: (202) 366-5597; Email: 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    There is a growing concern with drug impaired driving in the United 
States and around the globe. While alcohol is the drug most often 
linked to impaired driving and crashes, there are many other drugs that 
can impair driving ability and contribute to crashes.\i\ Other 
potentially impairing drugs include some over-the-counter (OTC) drugs, 
some prescription drugs, and most illegal drugs. The use of drugs other 
than alcohol and in combination with alcohol is widespread. The 
National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) estimated that 53.2 
million people in the United States used illegal drugs in 2018, an 
increase of 2 million people since 2017. The 2018 survey also found 
that 16.9 million people reported misusing psychotherapeutics in 2018, 
and 12.6 million people reported driving under the influence of illegal 
drugs.\ii\ The 2020 NSDUH found use of illicit drugs in the past year 
had increased to 59.3 million people or 21.4% of the U.S. population 
age 12 or older,\iii\ and an increase of 6.1 million people since 2018.
    NHTSA's 2013-2014 National Roadside Survey of Alcohol and Drug Use 
by Drivers reported that 20.1% of all drivers surveyed on weekend 
nights tested positive for the presence of some drug, legal and/or 
illegal, other than alcohol, a statistically significant increase from 
the 16.3% of drug-positive drivers found in the 2007 survey.\iv\ 
NHTSA's study of drug prevalence in road users with serious or fatal 
injuries admitted to five Level-1 trauma centers or their corresponding 
Medical Examiner's offices, found that in the months just prior to the 
current pandemic 50.8% of the drivers in the study had at least one 
drug in their system (including alcohol) with 17.6% having multiple 
drugs in their systems. This increased to 64.7% and 25.3%, 
respectively, during the pandemic in the second quarter of 2020. During 
this time cannabis presence increased from 20.8% to 32.7% and opioid 
presence increased from 7.5% to 13.9% in this sample of drivers.\v\ 
Clearly, many drivers on the roads today pose a potential danger to 
themselves and others because of potentially impairing drugs in their 
systems.
    Prescription and OTC drug use is quite common in America. The 
National Center for Health Statistics estimated that, from 2015-2018, 
48.6% of Americans used at least one prescription medication in the 
past 30 days, with 24% using three or more prescription medications in 
the last 30 days and 12.8% using five or more prescription medications 
in the last 30 days. The most frequently prescribed drugs were 
analgesics,\vi\ which is reflected in the current opioid epidemic. 
Drivers increase the risk of drug-impaired driving because they may not 
be able to distinguish between prescription drugs that are impairing 
and those that are not.\vii\ Furthermore, the simultaneous use of 
multiple therapeutic drugs or combining therapeutics with alcohol 
increases the risk of motor vehicle crashes because of the potential 
for interaction effects.\viii\
    Another trend fueling concerns about drug-impaired driving is the 
shift in use, social acceptance, and policies regarding the use of 
marijuana. Marijuana is defined here as ``all substances containing 
tetrahydrocannabinol.'' \ix\ The terms marijuana and cannabis are used 
interchangeably in this document. From 2001-2002 to 2012-2013, the use 
of marijuana doubled from 4.1% to 9.5% of the U.S. adult population, 
with 30% of these users meeting the criteria for marijuana use 
disorder.\x\ In 2020, 17.9% of Americans 12 years or older reported 
using cannabis in the past year (approximately 49.6 million people), 
and an estimated 5.1% of people 12 and older (approximately 14.2 
million people) had a cannabis use disorder.\xi\ Though marijuana is 
still illegal under federal law, eighteen States and the District of 
Columbia have now legalized both recreational and medical use of 
marijuana and seventeen States have legalized the use of medical 
marijuana. Another thirteen states have legalized marijuana for 
specific medical conditions.\xii\ In 2018, Canada legalized the 
recreational use of marijuana at the national level, and Mexico passed 
a bill legalizing recreational cannabis in 2021. This trend towards 
legalization has been accompanied by an increase in the presence of 
marijuana found in drivers. NHTSA's National Roadside Survey found 
tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) presence in 12.7% of surveyed drivers in 
2013-2014, up from 8.7% in the 2007 survey. In a 2018 study by 
Washington State, 39.1% of drivers admitted to driving within 3 hours 
of using marijuana at least once in the previous year, and the 
biological results from the survey indicated that the presence of 
marijuana in surveyed drivers had doubled, from approximately 10%, to 
20% of all drivers after the state's implementation of retail marijuana 
sales.\xiii\ A NHTSA roadside survey in Washington State found similar 
results, with 7.8% of drivers testing positive for presence of THC 
prior to the

[[Page 24392]]

implementation of legal marijuana in the state. NHTSA found significant 
increases in THC presence in drivers six months (18.4%) and one year 
(18.9%) after legalization.\xiv\ While linking the level of marijuana 
present in biological samples with level of impairment remains 
challenging, well-established evidence shows that marijuana use 
detrimentally affects driving-related skills. Marijuana use slows 
driver reaction time, creates problems with road tracking and 
maintaining lane position, and decreases cognitive performance and 
driver attention maintenance. Marijuana use in conjunction with other 
drugs, such as alcohol, can also have a compounding effect on 
impairment.\xv\ The current shifts in policy and marijuana use increase 
the public health concerns regarding drug-impaired driving.
    The lack of adequate data to determine the scope and magnitude of 
the drug impaired driving problem presents a major challenge in 
addressing the issue of drug-impaired driving.xi xvi 
Estimates show that comprehensive societal costs for alcohol-impaired 
driving were approximately $194 billion in 2010; \xvii\ however, the 
data required for conducting similar analyses for the comprehensive 
societal costs of drug-impaired driving are lacking. The data currently 
available on drug-impaired driving and motor vehicle crashes have many 
shortcomings.\xviii\ These include inconsistent drug testing policies 
and procedures across jurisdictions, such as considerable variability 
in who is tested, what drugs are tested for, detection capabilities of 
the laboratory, and what specimen matrices (blood, oral fluid, urine, 
etc.) are used.
    In 2009,\xii\ and again in 2017,\xi\ NHTSA recommended that States 
provide separate statutes for alcohol- and drug-impaired offenses, to 
provide incentive for ``law enforcement officers to pursue a possible 
drug-impaired driving charge even when a BAC equal to or above the 
limit of .08 g/dL has already been established,'' but few states 
currently have such statutes. Many jurisdictions only test for drugs 
when alcohol levels are below per se limits that indicate a driver, by 
law, is intoxicated by alcohol, and forego drug testing when alcohol 
per se limits are met. However, high percentages of specimens in 
impaired driving cases that were tested only for alcohol are often 
positive for other drugs, too.\xix\ Some jurisdictions do not perform 
any drug testing for motor vehicle crashes. Reporting of the toxicology 
findings is also inconsistent and often lacks sufficient specificity 
regarding whether it is reporting a screening test or a confirmation 
test, and other critical information, such as the drug panels and 
thresholds of detection used, is often left out. This widespread 
inconsistency in drug testing and lack of detail in reporting of 
toxicology on reports of motor vehicle crashes and fatalities creates 
significant problems for policy makers and traffic safety professionals 
trying to address the problem of drug-impaired driving.
    In many States, the large number of laboratories conducting post-
mortem drug testing (typically ordered at the county level by the 
coroner or medical examiner) often do not look for the same core list 
of drugs and do not use comparable testing techniques with similar 
thresholds of detection because there is a lack of standardization 
regarding the drug panels and detection thresholds used for motor 
vehicle crashes. This prevents data from different laboratories from 
being combined to get a clear picture of drug use within the State. 
Similarly, in many States, individual law enforcement agencies contract 
with different laboratories which do not screen for the same set of 
core drugs, nor use comparable testing techniques with similar 
thresholds of detection. This limits the ability to characterize and 
monitor/conduct surveillance and better understand the issue of 
statewide driver drug use. ``Currently, the limitations (in the drugged 
driving data) severely constrain interpretation of the data. 
Comparisons across labs, States, or years are problematic.'' This is 
reflected at the national level in the FARS data.\xx\
    A recent expert panel on the impact of marijuana on the driving 
while intoxicated (DWI) system, which included various experts from 
divisions in the departments of motor vehicles, law enforcement, and 
the courts and corrections departments as well as government data 
systems, reported a serious need for more and better data on drug use 
by drivers as well as standardized laboratory practices for drug 
toxicology, including which drugs are tested for, what detection 
thresholds of the drugs are used, confirmation testing results, and 
comprehensive reporting on the tests conducted and the matrices 
used.\xxi\ Recent reports from the Governors Highway Safety Association 
(GHSA) have stressed the urgent need for better, more comprehensive 
toxicology testing and reporting of toxicology test results for motor 
vehicle crashes.xxii xxiii This need was also emphasized in 
NHTSA's reports to Congress on marijuana-impaired driving (2017) \xi\ 
and drug-impaired driving (2009),\xii\ and two National Transportation 
Safety Board (NTSB) reports on impaired driving.xxiv xxv

Recommendations and Request for Comments

    The Center for Forensic Science Research & Education (CFSRE) and 
the National Safety Council Alcohol, Drugs and Impairment Division 
(NSC-ADID) report, Updates for Recommendations for Drug Testing in DUID 
& Traffic Fatality Investigations (2016), summarized a survey it 
conducted of toxicology laboratories from across the country. The 
survey identified ``current practices, capabilities, research needs and 
gathered information regarding the scope and sensitivity of testing.'' 
\xxvi\ Subsequently, the Drugs, Technology, Pharmacology and Toxicology 
Section of the National Safety Council's Alcohol, Drugs and Impairment 
Division reviewed the survey results and updated their 2013 published 
recommendations for the toxicology community,\xxvii\ which were 
published as ``Recommendations for Toxicological Investigation of Drug-
Impaired Driving and Motor Vehicle Fatalities--2017 Update'' in the 
Journal of Analytical Toxicology.\xxviii\ These recommendations are 
referenced in Section 25025 of Public Law 117-58. The CFRSE and NSC-
ADID conducted a follow-up survey of laboratories in 2020, after which 
the recommendations were updated and published as ``Recommendations for 
Toxicological Investigation of Drug-Impaired Driving and Motor Vehicle 
Fatalities--2021 Update'' in the Journal of Analytical 
Toxicology.\xxix\ These recommendations address the identified 
toxicology needs for drug-impaired driving cases. Coupled with 
comprehensive reporting of the toxicology findings, the widespread use 
of these toxicology recommendations could greatly enhance understanding 
of the scope and magnitude of drug-impaired driving and help traffic 
safety professionals better address this vital public health 
issue.\xxx\ The toxicology recommendations in the 2021 Update are 
available, free of charge, online at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34086916/.
    Given the growing national concern over drug-impaired driving and 
the clear need for standardized drug-impaired driving toxicological 
testing and comprehensive reporting on the toxicological results, NHTSA 
is preparing a Report to Congress on Drug-Impaired Driving Data 
Collection that identifies the barriers to States in providing the 
toxicological data to FARS as described in the NSC-ADID document, 
recommends solutions to overcome those barriers, and describes

[[Page 24393]]

the steps the Department of Transportation and NHTSA will take to 
assist States in improving toxicology testing in cases of motor vehicle 
crashes and reporting of alcohol and drug toxicology results in cases 
of motor vehicle crashes provided to FARS. Our first step in producing 
this report is the collection of information from the public on 
barriers and possible solutions. NHTSA therefore seeks public comment 
on any barriers that States may have to adopting these recommendations, 
and any comments on what is needed to overcome these barriers.
    As previously noted, the Recommendations for Toxicological 
Investigation of Drug-Impaired Driving and Motor Vehicle Fatalities--
2021 Update were developed by an expert panel of toxicologists based on 
the results of a national survey of toxicology laboratories. These 
voluntary recommendations are for forensic toxicological drug testing 
and reporting for all drivers, motorcycle and moped operators, 
bicyclists and pedestrians involved in fatal motor vehicle crashes, and 
all drivers who are arrested or convicted for impaired operation of 
motor vehicles, regardless of their tested Blood Alcohol Concentration 
(BAC) or Breath Alcohol Concentration (BrAC). The recommendations 
provide standardized lists of drugs, matrices (blood, oral fluid, 
urine, etc.), and detection threshold levels for testing. The 
guidelines include two tiers of drugs for testing: Tier 1 drugs (Table 
II in the document) are drugs that are found throughout the country and 
that should be tested for in all jurisdictions; Tier 2 drugs (Table III 
in the document) are less common or predominantly found in specific 
areas of the country, so they may only need to be routinely tested for 
in those localities or on a case-by-case basis. NHTSA believes that the 
voluntary adoption of these toxicology guidelines would greatly improve 
data collection, and support future initiatives by a wide variety of 
traffic safety stakeholders using this toxicological data to help 
reduce drug-impaired driving. It is critical that comprehensive and 
consistent data on this vital public health issue are available for use 
in all parts of the impaired-driving system, from law enforcement to 
adjudication and treatment to public policy.
    Drug impaired driving is a growing concern; however, the 
information currently available on the scope and magnitude of drug 
impaired driving is unclear. Today, there is great variation across the 
country regarding which drivers are tested for drug use, what specimens 
are collected for testing, what drugs are tested for, and what 
threshold detection levels are used for drug tests. Comprehensive and 
consistent toxicological data is needed to better inform the public and 
public policy on this growing public health problem. This testing and 
data are also essential to increasing the effectiveness of law 
enforcement and adjudication efforts in drug-impaired driving cases and 
to making America's roads safer for the driving public.
    In support of our efforts to improve the toxicological data 
provided to FARS and the States, reduce the problem of drug-impaired 
driving, and ``assist States in their efforts to increase public 
awareness of the dangers of drug-impaired driving,'' \xxxi\ NHTSA 
hereby requests public comment on the following:
    (1) Identification of any barriers or challenges that States 
currently encounter in submitting alcohol and drug toxicology results 
to the Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS).
    (2) Suggestions for overcoming those current barriers and 
challenges identified to improve the delivery of data to the FARS.
    (3) Identification of any barriers or challenges that States may 
encounter in collecting the toxicology data as described in 
Recommendations for Toxicological Investigation of Drug-Impaired 
Driving and Motor Vehicle Fatalities--2021 Update (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34086916/) and submitting those alcohol and 
drug toxicology results to the Fatality Analysis Reporting System 
(FARS).
    (4) Suggestions for overcoming those barriers and challenges 
identified for collecting the toxicological data as described in the 
Recommendations for Toxicological Investigation of Drug-Impaired 
Driving and Motor Vehicle Fatalities--2021 Update to improve the 
delivery of the data to the FARS.

Notes

    \i\ Couper, F. and Logan, B. 2004. Drugs and Human Performance. 
DOT HS 809 725. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 
Washington, DC. https://www.wsp.wa.gov/breathtest/docs/webdms/DRE_Forms/Publications/drug/Human_Performance_Drug_Fact_Sheets-NHTSA.pdf.
    \ii\ Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality. 2019. 
Results from the 2018 National Survey on Drug Use and Health. 
SAMHSA, Rockville, MD. https://www.samhsa.gov/data/report/2018-nsduh-detailed-tables.
    \iii\ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. 
(2021). Key substance use and mental health indicators in the United 
States: Results from the 2020 National Survey on Drug Use and Health 
(HHS Publication No. PEP21-07-01-003, NSDUH Series H-56). Rockville, 
MD: Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality, Substance 
Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Retrieved from 
https://www.samhsa.gov/data/.
    \iv\ Kelley-Baker, T., Berning, A., Ramirez, A., Lacey, J., 
Carr, K., Waeher, G., Moore, C. Pell, K., Yao, J., and Compton, R. 
2017. 2013-2014 National Roadside Survey of Alcohol and Drug Use by 
Drivers: Drug Results. DOT HS 812 411. National Highway Traffic 
Safety Administration. Washington, DC. https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/13013-nrs_drug_092917_v6_tag.pdf.
    \v\ Thomas, F.D., Berning, A., Darrah, J., Graham, L., Blomberg, 
R., Griggs, C., Crandall, M., Schulman, C., Kozar, R., Neavyn, M., 
Cunningham, K., Ehsani, J., Fell, J., Whitehill, J., Babu, K., Lai, 
J., and Rayner, M. (2020, October). Drug and alcohol prevalence in 
seriously and fatally injured road users before and during the 
COVID-19 public health emergency (Report No. DOT HS 813 018). 
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
    \vi\ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2019. National 
Center for Health Statistics. Therapeutic Drug Use. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/drug-use-therapeutic.htm.
    \vii\ Smith, R., Turturici, M. and Camden, M. 2018. 
Countermeasures Against Prescription and Over-the-Counter-Impaired 
Driving. AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety. Washington, DC. http://aaafoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/VTTI_Rx_OTC_FinalReport_VTTI-FINAL-complete-9.20.pdf.
    \viii\ Alda, A., Pharm, D., and Morse, M. 2008. Multiple 
Medications and vehicle Crashes: Analysis of Databases. DOT HS 810 
858. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Washington, DC.
    \ix\ Current legislation (Section 25025, Pub. L. 17-58) 
references the definition of marijuana in the F.A.S.T. Act, Section 
4008 (d). https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/PLAW-114publ94/html/PLAW-114publ94.htm.
    \x\ National Institutes of Health. 2015. Prevalence of Marijuana 
Use Among U.S. Adults Doubles Over Past Decade. https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/prevalence-marijuana-use-among-us-adults-doubles-over-past-decade.
    \xi\ National Institutes of Health. 2022. https://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/research-reports/marijuana/what-scope-marijuana-use-in-united-states.
    \xii\ Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. Alcohol and drugs: 
Marijuana laws. https://www.iihs.org/topics/alcohol-and-drugs.
    \xiii\ Grondel, D., Hoff, S., and Doane, D. Marijuana Use, 
Alcohol Use and Driving in Washington State. 2018.Washington Traffic 
Safety Commission. http://wtsc.wa.gov/wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2018/05/Marijuana-and-Alcohol-Involvement-in-Fatal-Crashes-in-WA_FINAL.pdf.
    \xiv\ Ramirez, A., Berning, A., Carr, K., Schere, M., Lacey, J., 
Kelley-Baker, T., and Fisher, D. 2016. Marijuana, Other Drugs, and 
Alcohol Use by Drivers in Washington State. DOT HS 812 299. National 
Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Washington, DC. https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/812299-washingtonstatedrugstudy.pdf.

[[Page 24394]]

    \xv\ Compton, R. 2017. Marijuana-Impaired Driving: A Report to 
Congress. DOT HS 812 440. National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration. Washington, DC. https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/812440-marijuana-impaired-driving-report-to-congress.pdf.
    \xvi\ Compton, R., Vegega, M., and Smither, D. 2009. Drug-
Impaired Driving: Understanding the Problem and Ways to Reduce It--A 
Report to Congress. DOT HS 811 268. National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration. Washington, DC. https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/1949.
    \xvii\ Blincoe, L.J., Miller, T.R., Zaloshnja, E., & Lawrence, 
B.A. (2015, May). The economic and societal impact of motor vehicle 
crashes, 2010 (Revised) (Report No. DOT HS 812 013). Washington, DC: 
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.
    \xviii\ Berning, A. and Smither, D. 2014. Understanding the 
Limitations of Drug Test Information, Reporting, and Testing 
Practices in Fatal Crashes. Traffic Safety Facts Research Note DOT 
HS 812 072. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. 
Washington, DC. https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/812072-understandlimitsdrugtest-researchnote.pdf.
    \xix\ Limoges, J., Tandy, A., and Brown, H. 2009. A 
Retrospective Study of Drug Prevalence in Alcohol Related Driving 
Arrests. Presented at the annual meeting of the American Academy of 
Forensic Sciences.
    \xx\ Berning, A., Smith, R.C., Drexler, M., & Wochinger, K. 
(2022, March). Drug testing and traffic safety: What you need to 
know (Report No. DOT HS 813 264). National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration.
    \xxi\ National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Governors 
Highway Safety Association, and Volpe National Transportation 
Systems Center. 2017. Impact of the Legalization and 
Decriminalization of Marijuana on the DWI System: Highlights from 
the Expert Panel Meeting. National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration. Washington, DC. https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.dot.gov/files/documents/expert_dwi_panel.pdf.
    \xxii\ Hedlund, J. 2017. Drug-Impaired Driving: A Guide for the 
States. Governors Highway Safety Association and Foundation for 
Advancing Alcohol Responsibility. https://www.ghsa.org/resources/drugged-driving-2017.
    \xxiii\ Hedlund, J. 2018. Drug-Impaired Driving: Marijuana and 
Opioids Raise Critical Issues for States. Governors Highway Safety 
Association and Foundation for Advancing Alcohol Responsibility. 
https://www.ghsa.org/resources/DUID18.
    \xxiv\ 2013 NTSB Report, Reaching Zero: Actions to Eliminate 
Alcohol-Impaired Driving (https://www.ntsb.gov/safety/safety-studies/Documents/SR1301.pdf).
    \xxv\ 2018 NTSB Report, Pickup Truck Centerline Crossover 
Collision With Medium Size Bus on US Highway 83, Concan, Texas, 
March 29, 2017 (https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/HAR1802.pdf).
    \xxvi\ D'Orazio, A., Scott, K., Mohr, A. and Logan, B. 2016. 
Updates for Recommendations for Drug testing in DUID & Traffic 
Fatality Investigations. The Center for Forensic Science Research & 
Education at the Frederic Rieders Family Foundation, 2300 Stratford 
Avenue, Willow Grove, PA 19090. https://www.forensicscienceeducation.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Full-Survey-Report.pdf.
    \xxvii\ Logan, B., Lowrie, K., Turri, J., Yeakel, Limoges, J., 
Miles, A., Scarneo, C., Kerrigan, S., and Farrell, L. 2013. 
Recommendations for Toxicological Investigation of Drug-Impaired 
Driving and Motor Vehicle Fatalities. Journal of Analytical 
Toxicology. Volume 37. August 2013, Pages 552-558.
    \xxviii\ Logan, B., D'Orazio, A., Mohr, A., Limoges, J., Miles, 
A., Scarneo, C., Kerrigan, S., Liddicoat, L., Scott, K., and 
Huestis, M. 2018. Recommendations for Toxicological Investigation of 
Drug-Impaired Driving and Motor Vehicle Fatalities--2017 Update. 
Journal of Analytical Toxicology. Volume 42. Issue 2. March 2018, 
Pages 63-68. https://academic.oup.com/jat/article/42/2/63/4653729.
    \xxix\ D'Orazio, A., Mohr, A., Chan-Hosokawa, A., Harper, C., 
Huestis, M., Limoges, J., Miles, A., Scarno, C., Kerrigan, S., 
Liddicoat, L., Scott, K., Logan, B. Recommendations for 
Toxicological Investigation of Drug-Impaired Driving and Motor 
Vehicle Fatalities--2021 Update. Journal of Analytical Toxicology. 
July, 2021. 45(6):529-536. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34086916/.
    \xxx\ Watson, M.W. and Mann, R.E. 2018. Harm reduction and drug-
impaired driving: sharing the road?. Drugs: Education Prevention and 
Policy. 25:2, 105-108. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687637.2017.1344620.
    \xxxi\ Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act, Public Law 
114-94, 4009 (2015).

    Authority: 44 U.S.C. Section 3506(c)(2)(A).

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Nanda Narayanan Srinivasan,
Associate Administrator, Research and Program Development.
[FR Doc. 2022-08776 Filed 4-22-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-59-P