(a) Chemical testing of personnel must be conducted as required by this subpart and in accordance with the procedures detailed in 49 CFR part 40.
(b) If an individual fails a chemical test for dangerous drugs under this part, the individual will be presumed to be a user of dangerous drugs.
(c) If an individual holding a credential fails a chemical test for dangerous drugs, the individual's employer, prospective employer, or sponsoring organization must report the test results in writing to the nearest Coast Guard Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMI). The individual must be denied employment as a crewmember or must be removed from duties which directly affect the safe operation of the vessel as soon as practicable and is subject to suspension and revocation proceedings against their credential under part 5 of this chapter.
(d) If an individual who does not hold a credential fails a chemical test for dangerous drugs, the individual will be denied employment as a crewmember or removed from duties that directly affect the safe operation of the vessel, as soon as possible.
(e) An individual who has failed a required chemical test for dangerous drugs may not be re-employed aboard a vessel until the requirements of paragraph (f) of this section and part 5 of this chapter, if applicable, have been satisfied.
(f) Before an individual who has failed a required chemical test for dangerous drugs may return to work aboard a vessel, the MRO must determine that the individual is drug-free and the risk of subsequent use of dangerous drugs by that person is sufficiently low to justify their return to work. In addition, the individual must agree to be subject to increased unannounced testing—
(1) For a minimum of six (6) tests in the first year after the individual returns to work as required in 49 CFR part 40; and
(2) For any additional period as determined by the MRO up to a total of 60 months.
[CGD 86-607, 53 FR 47049, Nov. 11, 1988, as amended by CGD 90-014, 56 FR 31034, July 8, 1991; USCG-2000-7759, 66 FR 42968, Aug. 16, 2001; USCG-2006-24371, 74 FR 11264, Mar. 16, 2009]
Notes of Decisions
Exxon Shipping Co. v. Exxon Seamen's Union, 993 F.2d 357 (3rd Cir. 1993).
· cites it 4× “” 46 C.F.R. § 16.201 (c). The individual may not then return to work aboard a vessel unless the medical review officer determines that “the individual is drug-free and the risk of subsequent use of dangerous drugs by that person is sufficiently low to justify his or her return…”
Exxon Shipping Co. v. Exxon Seamen's Union, 73 F.3d 1287 (3rd Cir. 1996).
“or removed from duties which directly affect the safety of the vessel’s navigation or operations,” 46 C.F.R. § 16.201 (c) (1990), and another prohibiting those individuals from returning to work aboard a vessel unless rehabilitation is shown, id.”
Kinneary v. City of New York, 536 F. Supp. 2d 326 (S.D.N.Y. 2008).
“46 C.F.R. § 16.201 (a) provides that drug testing is to be conducted “in accordance with the procedures detailed in 49 C.”
Kinneary v. City of New York, 358 F. Supp. 2d 356 (S.D.N.Y. 2005).
“46 C.F.R. § 16.201 (a) provides that drug testing is to be conducted “in accordance with the procedures detailed in 49 C.”
Freedom Found. v. Dep't of Transp., 276 P.3d 341 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012).
“” 46 C.F.R. § 16.201 (a) (emphasis added). Thus, the USDOT workplace testing procedures in 49 C.”
Seiu Healthcare Pennsylvania, CTW, CLC v. Reg'l Hosp., 106 F. Supp. 3d 523 (M.D. Penn. 2015).
· cites it 2× “The Court cited 46 C.F.R. § 16.201 (c), which provided that an individual who tests positive for drugs “shall be denied employment as a crewmember or removed from duties which directly affect the safety of the vessel’s navigation or operations as soon as practicable and shall be…”
Exxon Shipping Co. v. Exxon Seaman's Union (3rd Cir. 1996).
“or removed from duties which directly affect the safety of the vessel's navigation or operations," 46 C.F.R. §16.201 (c) (1990), and another prohibiting those individuals from returning to work aboard a vessel unless rehabilitation is shown, id.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.