49 C.F.R. § 219.701

Standards for drug and alcohol testing

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Drug testing required or authorized by subparts B, D, E, F, G, and K (but only for co-worker or non-peer referrals that involve a violation of the prohibitions of this subpart) of this part must be conducted in compliance with all applicable provisions of the Department of Transportation Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs (part 40 of this title).

(b) Alcohol testing required or authorized by subparts B, D, E, F, G, and K (but only for co-worker or non-peer referrals that involve a violation of the prohibitions of this subpart) of this part must be conducted in compliance with all applicable provisions of the Department of Transportation Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing Programs (part 40 of this title).

[66 FR 41973, Aug. 9, 2001, as amended at 81 FR 37942, June 10, 2016]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 2003–2012 · leading case: Phillips v. Quality Terminal Servs., LLC, 855 F. Supp. 2d 764 (N.D. Ill. 2012).
Phillips v. Quality Terminal Servs., LLC, 855 F. Supp. 2d 764 (N.D. Ill. 2012). “Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that QTS had a duty under 49 C.F.R. § 219.701 to ensure that the testing standards utilized satisfy the standards prescribed by 49 C.”
Michael Chapman v. Lab One, 390 F.3d 620 (8th Cir. 2004). · cites it 3× “at 53,273; see also 49 C.F.R. § 219.701 (c) (1989). The FRA anti-waiver provision is still in effect.”
Chapman v. Labone, 252 F. Supp. 2d 814 (S.D. Iowa 2003). · cites it 2× “See 49 C.F.R. § 219.701 (1999). The FRSA also contains an express pre-emption clause which provides: Laws, rules, regulations, and orders related to railroad safety shall be nationally uniform to the extent practicable.”
Fifie v. Cooksey, 403 F. Supp. 2d 1131 (M.D. Fla. 2005). · cites it 2× “at 53,273; see also 49 C.F.R. § 219.701 (c) (1989). The FRA anti-waiver provision is still in effect.”
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.