Mr. Cary Morgen
Manager, Human Resources Policy and Programs
Chicago Transit Authority
Merchandise Mart Plaza
Post Office Box 3555
Chicago, Illinois 60654

Dear Mr. Morgen:

Thank you for your April 15, 1999, letter, in which you seek clarification of the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) drug and alcohol testing regulations. Specifically, you ask if a person who even incidentally controls the movement of a vehicle is, in effect, performing a safety-sensitive function as defined by FTA rules, and thus subject to testing. You also ask for FTA’s opinion as to whether an employee’s potential exposure to a rail system’s high-voltage third rail is sufficient, in and of itself, to constitute a safety-sensitive function.

In the situation you present, neither a car servicer nor a rail janitor (who, presumably, do not perform safety-sensitive functions) would be considered to be controlling movement when a vehicle operator stops the vehicle to allow them to pass. An employee, who otherwise does not perform a safety-sensitive function, should not be subject to the rules when, in the performance of his or her job, he or she incidentally controls the movement of a revenue service vehicle.

Regarding your second question, mere potential exposure to the third rail is not, in and of itself, tantamount to performing a safety-sensitive function. For the rules to apply, an employee must actually be performing some function.

If you have additional questions, please contact Michael Connelly of my staff at (202) 366-4011. Very truly yours, (Signed)

Patrick W. Reilly
Chief Counsel