Pubdate: Fri, 15 Dec 2000 Source: New York Times (NY) Copyright: 2000 The New York Times Company Contact: 229 West 43rd Street, New York, NY 10036 Fax: (212) 556-3622 Website: http://www.nytimes.com/ Forum: http://forums.nytimes.com/comment/ Author: Laurence Zuckerman WORKERS GET GREATER DRUG TEST PROTECTION The Transportation Department announced new rules yesterday to protect the rights of 8.5 million workers who undergo drug testing that the government makes mandatory as a safety measure. But critics, while welcoming the changes, said they did not go far enough. The new rules were made public on the same day that the Department of Health and Human Services disclosed new evidence of testing laboratories' shortcomings that can mistakenly brand innocent workers drug abusers, ending their careers. The most significant of the rules involve so-called validity testing, a relatively new procedure to determine whether a urine specimen is legitimate. Under current rules, transportation workers whose specimens are found to be invalid are assumed to be cheaters. Many are fired without any opportunity for an appeal. The new rules extend to validity testing two safeguards that already protect a worker who actually tests positive for any of five illegal drugs: cocaine, heroin, amphetamines, marijuana and PCP. A medical review officer, hired by the employer, will have the right to cancel the result of a validity test upon finding a sound medical reason for a specimen's testing illegitimate. And workers will have the right to demand that a second sample of their specimen be tested at a laboratory different from the first. The drug testing of millions of transportation workers--largely bus and truck drivers, airline flight crews and mechanics, and a variety of railroad workers--is required by the government in the name of public safety. But serious questions about validity testing, which is now optional, at the employer's discretion, were raised in September after Delta Air Lines agreed to reinstate four flight attendants and a pilot whom it fired last year for failing validity tests. Delta had maintained that the tests were accurate, and the four flight attendants, though insisting that they had not tampered with their specimens, had been unable to challenge the airline's decision. But after the pilot appealed the Federal Aviation Administration's revocation of his license, it was discovered that the laboratory that had performed the tests had not followed government testing standards and, in a subsequent cover-up of that failure, had falsified evidence. The Health and Human Services Department, which supervises the validity testing laboratories, subsequently inspected all 66 of them to see if they were meeting the standards. The agency said yesterday that as a result of its review, it would instruct laboratories to cancel the results of tests failed by 250 to 300 workers. (It would not say whether the Delta workers were among them.) That number "is telling us how broad the issue is," said Robert Morus, a Delta pilot who has taken the lead on the matter for the Air Line Pilots Association. Most major airlines and railroads say they automatically fire employees who fail validity tests. But exactly how many people have lost their jobs since validity testing guidelines were first introduced by the government two years ago is not known. Federal officials say validity testing is necessary to combat a growing number of people who try to beat drug tests by adulterating their samples, with products that range in nature from simple lemonade to items sold over the Web with a guarantee to mask drug use. "We have to protect the integrity of the program," said Mary Bernstein, director of the Office of Drug and Alcohol Policy and Compliance at the Transportation Department. "We would not be doing what was necessary in terms of safety in the workplace if we did not have ways of addressing the problem" of cheating. The Transportation Department does not have precise data indicating how many workers are cheating. But it cites numbers compiled by Quest Diagnostics, one of the country's biggest testing laboratories, which has said that roughly 2,000 of the 650,000 government-mandated specimens it tested last year showed evidence of tampering. Yesterday unions, as well as lawyers representing fired workers, lauded the Transportation Department's new rules, but said they still did not do enough to protect workers. The Air Line Pilots Association said it would like to see workers gain the right to take the initiative in challenging test results with their employer, rather than depend on an employer-hired medical review officer. The pilots' union and other critics also said the government was applying a faulty standard to determine which specimens are fraudulent. According to that standard, a urine specimen that shows creatinine, a byproduct of muscle metabolism, to be at a level of 20 milligrams or less per deciliter is considered "dilute," while a sample with 5 milligrams or less per deciliter is considered "substituted," meaning it could not possibly have come directly from a human. But some forensic toxicologists say a small but significant number of the 40 million workers subject to random drug tests in transportation and other industries each year could fall below the five-milligram threshold if they simply drink a lot of water before the test or have any of several disorders, including kidney disease, sickle cell anemia and diabetes. Further, women are known to excrete less creatinine than men. There is also evidence that small people who do not eat meat are susceptible of falling below the threshold, particularly if they have consumed a great deal of water. Yasuko Ishikawa, one of the four Delta flight attendants who lost their jobs, weighed 90 pounds, rarely ate meat and, on the day she was tested last year, drank about three quarts of water to avoid dehydration during a nine-hour flight from Japan. A few days later she was told that her sample had been "substituted," and within weeks, Delta had fired her for submitting a false specimen. "I was just in total shock," said Ms. Ishikawa, who immigrated from Japan in 1991 and vehemently denies ever using drugs or altering her specimen. "I couldn't understand what was going on." In February, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, an agency of the Department of Health and Human Services, issued a summary of the research it relied on to set the standard. Critics say that only a handful of the 47 studies cited in the document are relevant to the issue of validity testing specifically rather than just drug testing generally, and they note that this handful involved just 18 subjects, only 3 of whom were women. Robert L. Stephenson II, acting director of the substance abuse agency's division of workplace programs, maintains that the science is sound. Nevertheless, his office has begun a review of the standard, inviting public comment. The Transportation Department said the new safeguards it announced yesterday would go into effect next month. It added that validity testing, which has been optional for transportation companies since 1998, would not become mandatory until the Health and Human Services Department finished the review of the standard next summer. - --- MAP posted-by: Josh Sutcliffe