C.F.R. » Title 49 » PART 40—PROCEDURES FOR TRANSPORTATION WORKPLACE DRUG AND ALCOHOL TESTING PROGRAMS › Subpart O—Substance Abuse Professionals and the Return-to-Duty Process

49 C.F.R. § 40.285

When is a SAP evaluation required?

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

(a) As an employee, when you have violated DOT drug and alcohol regulations, you cannot again perform any DOT safety-sensitive duties for any employer until and unless you complete the SAP evaluation, referral, and education/treatment process set forth in this subpart and in applicable DOT agency regulations. The first step in this process is a SAP evaluation.

(b) For purposes of this subpart, a verified positive DOT drug test result, a DOT alcohol test with a result indicating an alcohol concentration of 0.04 or greater, a refusal to test (including by adulterating or substituting a specimen) or any other violation of the prohibition on the use of alcohol or drugs under a DOT agency regulation constitutes a DOT drug and alcohol regulation violation.

[65 FR 79526, Dec. 19, 2000, as amended at 88 FR 27650, May 2, 2023]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2008–2026 · leading case: BNSF Ry. Co. v. United States Dep't of Transp., 566 F.3d 200 (D.C. Cir. 2009).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
BNSF Ry. Co. v. United States Dep't of Transp., 566 F.3d 200 (D.C. Cir. 2009). · cites it 2× “49 C.F.R. § 40.285 . Employees who successfully complete the program must then pass a “return-to-duty” urine test before resuming safety-sensitive duties.”
George Larson v. United Nat. Foods West Inc., 518 F. App'x 589 (9th Cir. 2013). “040 BAC), is the relevant metric for what constitutes a DOT alcohol violation, see 49 C.F.R. § 40.285 (b) (“For purposes of this subpart .”
Amalgamated Transit Union Div. Local 757 v. Tri-Cnty. Metro. Transp. Dist., 195 P.3d 389 (Or. Ct. App. 2008). “5 49 CFR section 40.285(1)(a) (2002) explains when a SAP evaluation is required: “As an employee, when you have violated DOT drug and alcohol regulations, you cannot again perform any DOT safety-sensitive duties for any employer until and unless you complete the SAP evaluation,…”
Ryan Paul v. FAA (D.C. Cir. 2026). · cites it 5× “” 49 C.F.R. § 40.285 ; see also id. § 40.191(c); 14 C.”
Robert Graham v. Faa (9th Cir. 2022). “” Under 49 C.F.R. § 40.285 , after “a refusal to test (including by adulterating or substituting a urine specimen),” employees “cannot again perform any [Department of Transportation] safety-sensitive duties for any employer until and unless [they] complete the SAP evaluation,…”
Unified Sys. Div., Bhd. of Maint. of Way Employes Div. of the Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters v. Union Pac. R.R. Co. (D. Neb. 2024). “” 49 C.F.R. § 40.285 (b). Likewise, a regulated employee violates the alcohol regulations and risks removal from railroad service by “report[ing] for regulated service .”
— 49 C.F.R. § 40.285(1)(a) — 1 case
Amalgamated Transit Union Div. Local 757 v. Tri-Cnty. Metro. Transp. Dist., 195 P.3d 389 (Or. Ct. App. 2008). “5 49 CFR section 40.285(1)(a) (2002) explains when a SAP evaluation is required: “As an employee, when you have violated DOT drug and alcohol regulations, you cannot again perform any DOT safety-sensitive duties for any employer until and unless you complete the SAP evaluation,…”
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.