As  implemented by DOT, testing covers five drug categories: marijuana,  cocaine, amphetamines (including methamphetamines), opiates (including  heroin), and phencyclidine (PCP). FMCSA has responsibility for ensuring compliance by trucking and motor  coach companies with drug testing requirements. FMCSA Faces Two Key Challenges in Ensuring Drug Testing Programs Are in Place

FMCSA’s efforts to ensure that commercial motor carriers have drug  testing programs in place face two key challenges: limited compliance by  carriers and others involved in the process, and limitations in the  mechanisms FMCSA uses to ensure that drug testing programs are in  place. Compliance by Carriers and Others Is in Question

Our reviews of FMCSA data, visits to individual carriers, and discussions  with industry associations indicate that carriers, particularly small carriers  and owner-operators, are often not in compliance with the drug testing  regulations, resulting in the possibility that many drivers are not being  tested, which increases the potential for drivers who use illegal substances  to continue operating in safety-sensitive positions. According to FMCSA  data, more than 70 percent of compliance reviews conducted since 2001  and more than 40 percent of safety audits conducted since 2003 found  violations of drug testing regulations. 2). Posing as commercial truck drivers needing DOT drug tests, our  investigators determined that there is also a lack of compliance with  protocols among entities that collect specimens for testing, resulting in the  ability for drivers to subvert a drug test. Safety audits began in 2003, and since  these audits are targeted at new entrants, they do not affect companies in  business earlier than 2003. FMCSA compliance reviews only reach  approximately 2 percent of carriers each year. Except in the case of specific  allegations or complaints, FMCSA investigators do not visit or audit  collection sites or any other service agents employed by the carrier to  observe procedures and enforce compliance with drug testing  requirements. The carrier must seek out  information on the regulations and other responsibilities. Options that we have identified to address these limitations include    providing more information to carriers, service agents, and drivers when  they enter the industry, and publicizing the materials available on the  FMCSA Web site;    encouraging carriers to do more to test and verify that the service agents  they use are in compliance with the requirements; and  increasing or expanding FMCSA’s oversight activities and enforcement  authority. Our ongoing work will examine the advantages and  disadvantages of the various options in more detail. Additional Challenges Threaten Integrity of the Drug Testing Process

Even in situations in which FMCSA is able to ensure that a carrier has a  sound framework in place for drug testing, there are additional challenges  that can affect the integrity of results for individual tests. Subversion of Drug Tests Is Still Possible

Adulterating or diluting the urine sample or substituting synthetic urine or  drug-free urine is possible, even if carriers and service agents are in  perfect compliance with requirements. For example, our investigators  were able to successfully substitute synthetic urine at a collection site that  appeared to follow all DOT protocols. The sheer number of  these products, and the ease with which they are marketed and distributed  through the Internet, present formidable obstacles to the integrity of the  drug testing process. The extent to which subversion is occurring is unknown—and is  impossible to determine. SAMHSA officials with whom we met noted that  when adulterants work well and destroy the evidence of their presence,  they are undetectable by laboratories. In addition, the use, and misuse, of  prescription drugs may also be a problem. The urine test  detects drugs used by the driver within the past several days (range of 1 to  5 days). Representatives from several motor  carriers with whom we met told us that drivers’ applications are often  incomplete. Such drivers can remain drug-free for a period of time  leading up to their next preemployment test, get a negative result, and get  hired—without their new employer knowing about any past positive drug  tests and without having gone through the required return-to-duty process. Various options have been suggested for dealing with this issue, and in  particular, many in the industry have proposed developing a national  reporting requirement for past positive drug tests. Our Future Work Will Focus on Options to Address Challenges

Our future work, which we expect to complete in May 2008, will provide  more definitive information about many of the matters covered in my  statement today.
Why GAO Did This Study

Crashes involving commercial motor carriers, including trucks and buses, account for 13 percent of all highway deaths each year. While illegal drug use is not among the most frequently cited factors associated with large truck crashes; studies show that the use of illegal drugs, such as marijuana, heroin, or cocaine, can severely impair driving ability. Since 1988, federal regulations have required commercial drivers to submit urine samples to be tested for drugs. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) is responsible for ensuring compliance with these regulations. News reports and other investigations have raised concerns that drivers may be escaping detection by avoiding the test or somehow altering the results. This testimony provides preliminary information on the challenges confronting FMCSA in (1) overseeing and enforcing compliance with drug testing regulations and (2) ensuring the integrity of the drug tests and the processes for keeping drivers with identified drug problems off the roads. It is based on work currently in process, which includes examining options to address these challenges. GAO's work thus far has included interviews with officials from the Department of Transportation (DOT) and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), along with a wide variety of stakeholders, including motor carriers, unions, and industry associations. GAO discussed this testimony with DOT officials and incorporated their comments as appropriate.

What GAO Found

FMCSA faces two key challenges in ensuring that commercial motor carriers have drug testing programs in place. First, there appears to be a significant lack of compliance among motor carriers, particularly small carriers and self-employed drivers. Violations of drug testing protocols are noted in more than 40 percent of FMCSA's safety audits conducted since 2003 of carriers that have recently started operations and more than 70 percent of the compliance reviews conducted on carriers already in the industry since 2001. These problems also extend to service agents, which are entities that collect urine samples or administer other aspects of the program. For example, GAO investigators working under cover tested 24 collection sites and determined that 22 did not fully comply with applicable protocols. The second challenge is that FMCSA's oversight activities are limited, both in quantity and scope. Safety audits, which are targeted at new entrants, began in 2003 and, as a result, do not affect carriers in business earlier than 2003. Such companies can be covered in compliance reviews, but these reviews occur at only about 2 percent of carriers a year, according to FMCSA data. In addition, FMCSA oversight does not specifically address compliance by service agents, such as collection sites, unless there are particular allegations or complaints. Even when FMCSA is able to ensure that carriers and others are in compliance with drug testing requirements, there are additional challenges in ensuring the integrity of drug testing programs. The urine test itself can be subverted in various ways, such as adulterating or diluting the urine sample or substituting synthetic urine or a drug-free sample. Products designed to ''beat'' the test are brazenly marketed on the Internet. The extent to which subversion is occurring is unknown------and is impossible to determine. SAMHSA officials with whom we met told us when adulterants work well and destroy the evidence of their presence, they are undetectable. Furthermore, the required urine test has certain limitations. For example, it covers only five drug categories (marijuana; cocaine; amphetamines; opiates, such as heroin; and phencyclidine (PCP)), and it may provide a clean result if a person has not used any of these drugs within the past several days. Finally, drivers may not disclose instances in which they failed previous drug tests. If they are able to remain drug-free for enough time to pass a preemployment test, their new employer may not know about their past history of drug use. GAO identified various options to address these challenges, some of which were proposed by carriers, industry associations, DOT, and others. These options include publicizing educational information about the regulations for carriers, service agents, and drivers; encouraging carriers to do more to ensure service agent compliance; improving and expanding FMCSA oversight and enforcement authority; adopting federal legislation to prohibit products designed to tamper with a drug test; and developing a national reporting requirement for past positive drug test results. GAO's ongoing work will examine the advantages and disadvantages of the various options in more detail; we expect to issue the report in May 2008.