[Federal Register Volume 90, Number 188 (Wednesday, October 1, 2025)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 47286-47290]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2025-19119]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary

49 CFR Part 40

[Docket DOT-OST-2021-0093]
RIN 2105-AF28


Procedures for Transportation Workplace Drug and Alcohol Testing 
Programs

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Department of Transportation 
(Department or DOT).

ACTION: Supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This action supplements an earlier notice of proposed 
rulemaking (NPRM) that DOT published on December 9, 2024. This 
supplemental proposal would update terminology in DOT's drug and 
alcohol testing regulations consistent with Executive Order 14168 (E.O. 
14168), Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring 
Biological Truth to the Federal Government. DOT continues to propose a 
provision to require a directly observed urine collection in situations 
where oral fluid tests are currently required, but oral fluid testing 
is not yet available.

DATES: Comments on this notice of proposed rulemaking should be 
submitted by November 15, 2025.

[[Page 47287]]


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bohdan Baczara, Deputy Director, 
Office of Drug and Alcohol Policy and Compliance, 1200 New Jersey 
Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590; telephone number 202-366-3784; 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Purpose

    DOT is issuing this supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking 
(SNPRM) following issuance of a 2024 notice of proposed rulemaking 
(NPRM) to amend its drug testing procedures rule. (See 89 FR 97579.) 
The NPRM proposed an interim provision to require the conduct of 
directly observed urine tests in the limited situations where the rule 
requires oral fluid tests, but oral fluid testing is not yet available. 
DOT continues to propose a directly observed urine collection in 
situations where oral fluid tests are currently required, but oral 
fluid testing is not yet available and supplements that proposal by 
updating language in its drug and alcohol testing regulations 
consistent with E.O. 14168 on Defending Women from Gender Ideology 
Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government.

II. Authority for This Rulemaking

    This rulemaking is promulgated pursuant to the Omnibus 
Transportation Employee Testing Act of 1991 (OTETA) (Pub. L. 102-143, 
Tit. V, 105 Stat. 952). DOT requires urine drug testing and authorizes 
oral fluid drug testing as an alternative methodology for the testing 
of safety-sensitive transportation industry employees subject to drug 
testing under part 40 of Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations 
(part 40). DOT's part 40 regulations are, in turn, incorporated by 
reference in the drug and alcohol testing requirements of each of its 
operating administrations.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Sec.  40.3 (defining ``DOT, The Department, DOT Agency'' 
to include each of the DOT operating administrations).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Background

    DOT published a final rule amending the procedures for its drug 
testing program (49 CFR part 40) on May 2, 2023 (88 FR 27596) (May 2023 
Final Rule). The May 2023 Final Rule went into effect on June 1, 2023. 
The May 2023 Final Rule authorized oral fluid drug testing as an 
additional methodology for employers to use as a means of achieving the 
safety goals of the program. Because the Department of Health and Human 
Services (HHS) had determined that oral fluid drug testing, like urine 
drug testing, is both scientifically accurate and forensically 
defensible, DOT saw no reason to eliminate or mandate either 
methodology. As such, in the vast majority of collection scenarios, 
oral fluid testing is available to employers as an alternate 
methodology to choose, and not as a replacement for urine drug testing.
    Importantly, for an employer to implement oral fluid testing, there 
must be at least two HHS-certified laboratories for oral fluid testing. 
There must be one HHS-certified laboratory to conduct the screening and 
confirmation drug testing on the primary specimen. There must be a 
different HHS-certified laboratory to conduct the split specimen drug 
testing on the secondary specimen if the employee requests split 
specimen testing for the Medical Review Officer (MRO) verified 
positive, adulterated, or substituted result. However, as of the date 
of the publication of this rule, there are no HHS-certified 
laboratories to conduct oral fluid testing.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \2\ For a list of HHS-certified laboratories, please see https://www.samhsa.gov/substance-use/drug-free-workplace/drug-testing-resources/lab-list.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    DOT regulations at Sec.  40.67 require that a collection be 
directly observed in certain circumstances, e.g., if the original 
sample was invalid without an adequate medical explanation or the test 
is for a return to duty. In the May 2023 Final Rule, and in response to 
comments received on the notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that 
preceded that rule, we added a provision at Sec.  40.67(g)(3) to 
require a directly observed collection to be an oral fluid test \3\ (as 
opposed to a urine test) in situations where an observer as required by 
the regulations cannot be easily provided and in certain other 
situations. These limited situations are the only ones in which Part 40 
expressly requires an oral fluid test to be conducted as opposed to a 
urine test; in all other situations, an employer has the choice of 
whether a urine test or an oral fluid test will be conducted, including 
those conducted as directly observed collections.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \3\ All oral fluid collections are directly observed because 
they are always conducted in front of the collector. See also the 
definition of ``oral fluid specimen'' in Sec.  40.3: ``A specimen 
that is collected from an employee's oral cavity and is a 
combination of physiological fluids produced primarily by the 
salivary glands. An oral fluid specimen is considered to be a direct 
observation collection for all purposes of this part.'' [Emphasis 
added]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Because there are no HHS-certified oral fluid laboratories, it is 
not yet possible to comply with the requirement in Sec.  40.67(g)(3) 
that requires the directly observed collection to be an oral fluid test 
in the situations specified in that section. In the interim, and to 
preserve transportation safety by deterring illicit drug use, it is 
necessary to ensure that directly observed collections can still be 
conducted when required.
    To correct the inadvertent factual impossibility created by the 
fact there are no HHS certified oral fluid laboratories, DOT published 
an NPRM on December 9, 2024, proposing to amend Part 40, for an interim 
period, to require directly observed urine collections in the 
situations specified in Sec.  40.67(g)(3) if an oral fluid collection 
is not yet available (89 FR 97579). The proposed amendment would simply 
maintain the ``status quo'' wherein all directly observed collections 
are currently conducted as urine tests, because oral fluid testing is 
not yet available.
    The Department stated that the amendment to require directly 
observed urine tests in situations where an oral fluid collection is 
required, but is not yet available, is intended to be a temporary, 
short-term solution, as there are currently no certified oral fluid 
laboratories. DOT proposed that the provision would sunset one year 
after HHS publishes a Federal Register notice that it certified the 
second oral fluid drug testing laboratory. To ensure all are aware of 
the date when this provision will sunset, DOT stated it will publish a 
Federal Register document specifying the date the second oral fluid 
laboratory is certified by HHS and the corresponding sunset date. 
Importantly, DOT was clear that if, during the interim period, a 
collection site is able to conduct an oral fluid collection (HHS has 
certified at least two oral fluid drug testing laboratories, and both a 
qualified oral fluid collector and a conforming oral fluid collection 
device are available at the collection site), an oral fluid collection 
would be required to be conducted as specified in Sec.  40.67(g)(3).

III. Comments on the NPRM

    DOT received 22 comments on the NPRM. Several commenters expressed 
concern and frustration that oral fluid testing is not yet available, 
given that the May 2023 Final Rule that authorized the use of oral 
fluid testing in the DOT drug testing program became effective on June 
1, 2023. DOT made it clear in the May 2023 Final Rule, and we have 
again noted above, there must be at least two HHS-certified 
laboratories for oral fluid testing for an employer to implement oral 
fluid testing under Part 40. HHS is the agency that establishes 
scientific and technical guidelines for Federal workplace drug testing 
programs and standards for certification of laboratories engaged in 
such drug testing. While DOT has discretion

[[Page 47288]]

concerning many aspects of its regulations governing testing in the 
transportation industries' regulated programs, DOT is required, by 
statute (OTETA of 1991), to follow the HHS Mandatory Guidelines for the 
laboratory and specimen testing procedures. While DOT acknowledges the 
comments urging DOT to accelerate/expedite the certification of 
laboratories to conduct oral fluid testing, DOT has no authority or 
jurisdiction to do so because HHS is the agency that certifies 
laboratories that can be used in the DOT drug testing program. 
Similarly, DOT is not permitted to allow single-laboratory testing on a 
temporary basis as recommended by one commenter, as statutory law 
(again, OTETA of 1991) gives employees the right to request a test of 
the split specimen sample, which must be tested independently at a 
second HHS-certified laboratory. Because HHS certifies laboratories, 
comments related to laboratory certification are outside of the scope 
of this rulemaking.
    Several commenters expressed concerns regarding various issues 
related to oral fluid testing, including the qualification of oral 
fluid collectors, the availability and cost of oral fluid collection 
devices, and other associated issues. In addition, some commenters seem 
to believe that the NPRM proposed to delay implementation of oral fluid 
testing in general, which is not the case. The scope of the NPRM was 
very narrow, and proposed to revert to directly observed urine 
collections in situations where a required oral fluid collection could 
not be done until two laboratories are certified for oral fluid testing 
by HHS. As such, these commenters' concerns about oral fluid testing 
are similarly outside of the scope of this rulemaking.
    Several commenters supported the proposal to conduct directly 
observed urine collections in the limited situations where an observer 
as required by the regulations cannot be easily provided or in the 
circumstances identified in Sec.  40.67(g)(3) but objected to the 
manner and timeline in which the provision was proposed to be 
implemented. Specifically, a commenter read the NPRM to ``delay and/or 
make optional 49 CFR section Sec.  40.67(g)(3) for one year from when 
HHS certifies the first two laboratories to conduct Federal testing.'' 
Other commenters stated similar concerns, citing the comments submitted 
by this commenter.
    In response, DOT notes that in situations where an observer as 
required by the regulations cannot be easily provided or in the 
circumstances identified in Sec.  40.67(g)(3), and a directly observed 
collection is required, DOT was clear that an oral fluid collection 
must be conducted, if possible (i.e., HHS has certified at least two 
oral fluid drug testing laboratories, and both a qualified oral fluid 
collector and a conforming oral fluid collection device are available 
at the collection site) during the period until one year after HHS 
publishes a Federal Register notification that a second oral fluid 
laboratory has been certified. Otherwise, if oral fluid testing is not 
available, a directly observed urine test must be conducted in these 
situations during the specified time period. After one year following 
the certification of the second oral fluid laboratory, an oral fluid 
test must be conducted as required in the May 2023 Final Rule. The 
above aligns directly with the commenter's statement that collection 
sites with trained personnel prepared to offer oral fluid testing 
immediately should be allowed to proceed with oral fluid testing.
    Several commenters stated that the proposed changes would have a 
significant economic impact on a number of small entities. These 
commenters stated that many companies have expended time and costs to 
revise their company policies to incorporate changes to facilitate oral 
fluid testing in their drug testing programs, and that these policies 
will need to be revised again to reflect the changes associated with 
the provisions to require the conduct of directly observed urine tests 
in the limited situations where the rule requires oral fluid tests, but 
oral fluid testing is not yet available. As discussed above, this 
regulatory flexibility is very narrow in scope, and affects a very 
small percentage of collections (directly observed collections where an 
observer as required by the regulations cannot easily be provided or in 
the specific circumstances specified in Sec.  40.67(g)(3)). As noted 
below, DOT stated in the May 2023 Final Rule that oral fluid testing is 
optional except in very rare cases. As such, DOT does not believe that 
widespread changes will need to be made to the company policies that 
have been developed to facilitate the implementation of oral fluid 
testing. Further, employers will not be faced with a ``new choice'' 
(i.e., whether to conduct an oral fluid test or a urine test) in these 
limited scenarios because the rule requires that an oral fluid test be 
conducted, if possible, and that a urine test be conducted otherwise.
    Finally, in the May 2023 Final Rule in Sec.  40.67(g)(3), DOT 
included procedures on what to do when the required ``observer'' cannot 
be found but mistakenly used the term ``collector'' instead of 
``observer'' in the regulatory text of that section. We proposed to 
correct the error in the NPRM and received no comments on this issue.

IV. Proposed Supplement to the NPRM

    In Sec.  40.65 there are two scenarios, (b)(5) and (c)(1), that 
direct the collector to perform either a directly observed urine 
collection or an oral fluid collection. However, nothing in those 
sections tells the collector how or who makes that decision. We think 
it is important to remind the collector to check if the employer has 
standing orders or contact the Designated Employer Representative (DER) 
to receive instructions on how to proceed in each of those scenarios. 
We would do so in the proposed new paragraph (d).
    On January 20, 2025, the President issued E.O. 14168 on Defending 
Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to 
the Federal Government. E.O. 14168 stated, among other things, that it 
was the policy of the United States to recognize two sexes, male and 
female, that each Federal agency shall use the term ``sex'' and not 
``gender'' in its policies and documents, that ``sex'' shall refer to 
an individual's immutable biological classification as either male or 
female and give meaning to the term ``sex'' as set forth in the E.O. 
when applying regulations, statutes or guidance. The Department has 
identified several instances in its regulation 49 CFR part 40 (i.e., 
Sec. Sec.  40.67, 40.69, and 40.147) where the word ``gender'' is used. 
In these sections, we propose to replace the word ``gender'' with the 
word ``sex''. E.O. 14168 also states ``sex'' is not a synonym for and 
does not include the concept of ``gender identity''.
    The Department is proposing to amend Sec.  40.67(g)(3) by retaining 
only the original instructions that require an oral fluid collection 
when a same sex observer cannot be found with a slight modification to 
the text in (g)(3)(ii) to say that the DER is to instruct the collector 
to perform an oral fluid test. The Department is retaining the 
originally proposed language that requires a directly observed urine 
collection when an oral fluid collection cannot be done for up to one 
year after two laboratories are HHS certified for oral fluid testing. 
This language was proposed to ensure that a urine collection would be 
done in the event the collection site was not ready to conduct oral 
fluid collections even after two laboratories were HHS-certified for 
oral fluid testing. To summarize the supplemental proposal to (g)(3), 
if a directly observed urine collection is required and a same sex 
observer cannot

[[Page 47289]]

be provided, then an oral fluid test is to be performed. However, 
because oral fluid testing cannot be performed (because there are no 
two HHS-certified oral fluid laboratories), we have retained the 
originally proposed language that a directly observed urine collection 
be performed. This provision applies for one year after HHS certifies 
at least two oral fluid laboratories. In the interest of safety, if the 
employee initially provided a suspect urine specimen, we would want to 
ensure that a second urine collection is performed rather than not 
performing a second collection because oral fluid testing is not yet 
available.

V. Regulatory Notices and Analyses

Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094

    This rule is a non-significant rule for purposes of E.O. 12886, as 
supplemented by E.O. 13563 and amended by E.O. 14094 and will not 
impose any significant costs or have any significant impacts. Given the 
uncertainty of testing costs and lack of data on other aspects of 
testing, DOT did not estimate cost savings or other benefits for the 
May 2023 Final Rule which permitted oral fluid testing as an 
alternative to urine testing in most scenarios. In the regulatory 
analyses for the May 2023 Final Rule, DOT stated that oral fluid 
testing is optional except in very rare cases. This proposal amends the 
transportation industry drug testing program procedures regulation to 
comply with E.O. 14168 and proposes to require a directly observed 
urine collection be conducted when an oral fluid test is required but 
cannot because there are no two HHS-certified oral fluid drug testing 
laboratories. This proposal will not impose any significant costs or 
have any significant impacts on the DOT testing program, because the 
requirement of a directly observed urine collection existed before 
issuance of the May 2023 Final Rule, and oral fluid testing has not yet 
been able to be conducted since the May 2023 Final Rule in the absence 
of at least two HHS-certified oral fluid laboratories.

Regulatory Flexibility Act and Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 
Fairness Act (SBREFA)

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) 
requires Federal agencies to consider the effects of their regulatory 
actions on small businesses and other small entities and minimize any 
significant economic impact. The term ``small entities'' comprises 
small businesses and not-for-profit organizations that are 
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields, 
and governmental jurisdictions with a population of less than 50,000. 
For this rulemaking, potentially affected small entities include drug 
testing companies (U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) North 
American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Sector 54 
(Professional, Scientific and Technical Services), Code 541380 (Testing 
Laboratories and Services)) as well as DOT-regulated entities (SBA 
NAICS Sectors 48-49 (Transportation and Warehousing)).
    The Department does not expect that the rule will have a 
significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. 
This proposal amends the transportation industry drug testing program 
procedures regulation to revise language consistent with E.O. 14168 and 
proposes a requirement to conduct directly observed urine collections 
in situations when an oral fluid collection is required but not yet 
available. The requirement for directly observed urine collections was 
in existence before issuance of the May 2023 Final Rule, and regulated 
entities are therefore familiar with the procedure for directly 
observed urine tests. In addition, because oral fluid testing is not 
yet available, regulated entities are also likely to still have the 
collection devices and personnel to conduct urine testing. As a result, 
the proposed amendments will not impose significant costs. For these 
reasons, I certify that the rule does not have a significant economic 
impact on a substantial number of small entities within the meaning of 
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

Unfunded Mandates

    DOT has examined the impact of this rule under the Unfunded 
Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4). This rule does not 
trigger the requirement for a written statement under sec. 202(a) of 
the UMRA because this rulemaking does not impose a mandate that results 
in an expenditure of $206 million or more by either State, local, and 
Tribal governments in the aggregate or by the private sector in any one 
year.

Environmental Impact

    DOT has analyzed the environmental impacts of this action pursuant 
to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) (42 U.S.C. 4321 
et seq.) and has determined that it is categorically excluded pursuant 
to DOT Order 5610.1D, ``DOT's Procedures for Considering Environmental 
Impacts'' (July 1, 2025) (available at https://www.transportation.gov/mission/dots-procedures-considering-environmental-impacts). Categorical 
exclusions are actions identified in an agency's NEPA implementing 
procedures that do not normally have a significant impact on the 
environment and therefore do not require either an environmental 
assessment (EA) or environmental impact statement (EIS). This proposal 
amends the transportation industry drug testing program procedures 
regulation to comply with E.O. 14168 and requires a directly observed 
urine collection when required by part 40 because oral fluid testing is 
not yet available. This action is covered by the categorical exclusion 
listed at 23 CFR 771.118(c)(4), ``[p]lanning and administrative 
activities that do not involve or lead directly to construction, such 
as: . . . promulgation of rules, regulations, directives. . .'' The 
Department does not anticipate any environmental impacts, and there are 
no extraordinary circumstances present in connection with this 
rulemaking.

Executive Order 13132: Federalism

    DOT has analyzed the rule in accordance with Executive Order 13132: 
Federalism. Executive Order 13132 requires Federal agencies carefully 
to examine actions to determine if they contain policies that have 
federalism implications or that preempt State law. As defined in the 
order, ``policies that have federalism implications'' refer to 
regulations, legislative comments or proposed legislation, and other 
policy statements or actions that have substantial direct effects on 
the States, on the relationship between the National Government and the 
States, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities among the 
various levels of government.
    Most of the regulated parties under the Department's drug testing 
program are private entities. Some regulated entities are public 
entities (e.g., transit authorities and public works departments); 
however, DOT has determined that this proposed rule, which would amend 
the transportation industry drug testing program procedures regulation 
to comply with E.O. 14168 and require the conduct of directly observed 
urine testing where employers are required to conduct an oral fluid 
test but such testing is not available, does not contain policies that 
have federalism implications.

Executive Order 13175: Consultation and Coordination With Indian Tribal 
Governments

    Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 6, 2000) requires 
Federal

[[Page 47290]]

agencies to develop an accountable process to ensure ``meaningful and 
timely input by tribal officials in the development of regulatory 
policies that have tribal implications.'' ``Policies that have tribal 
implications'' as defined in the Executive Order, include regulations 
that have ``substantial direct effects on one or more Indian tribes, on 
the relationship between the Federal government and the Indian tribes, 
or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between the 
Federal government and Indian tribes.'' This rule does not have Tribal 
implications. The proposal does not have substantial direct effects on 
Tribal governments, on the relationship between the Federal Government 
and Indian Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities 
between the Federal Government and Indian Tribes, as specified in 
Executive Order 13175.

Paperwork Reduction Act

    The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520) (PRA) 
requires that DOT consider the impact of paperwork and other 
information collection burdens imposed on the public. The information 
collection for DOT's drug and alcohol testing program is approved under 
OMB control number 2105-0529. This rule does not require any new 
collection of information under the PRA. Notwithstanding any other 
provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing 
to comply with a collection of information subject to the PRA that does 
not display a currently valid Office of Management and Budget (OMB) 
control number.

Privacy Act

    Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all comments 
received in any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting 
the comment (or signing the comment, if submitted on behalf of an 
association, business, labor union, etc.). For information on DOT's 
compliance with the Privacy Act, please visit https://www.transportation.gov/privacy.

Rule Summary

    As required by 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(4), a summary of this rule can be 
found at regulations.gov, Docket DOT-OST-2021-0093, in the SUMMARY 
section of this document.

Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2023

    In accordance with Compliance with Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2023 
(Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, Pub. L. 118-5, div. B, title III) 
and OMB Memorandum (M-23-21) dated September 1, 2023, the Department 
has determined that this rule is not subject to the Pay-As-You-Go Act 
of 2023 because it will not increase direct spending beyond specified 
thresholds.

List of Subjects in 49 CFR Part 40

    Administrative practice and procedure, Alcohol abuse, Alcohol 
testing, Drug abuse, Drug testing, Laboratories, Reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements, Safety, Transportation.
    For the reasons stated in the preamble, DOT amends 49 CFR part 40 
as follows:

PART 40--PROCEDURES FOR TRANSPORTATION WORKPLACE DRUG AND ALCOHOL 
TESTING PROGRAMS

0
1. The authority for 49 CFR part 40 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 102, 301, 322, 5331, 20140, 31306, 45101 
and 60102 et seq.

0
2. In Sec.  40.65, add a new paragraph (d) to read:


Sec.  40.65  What does the collector check for when the employee 
presents a urine specimen?

* * * * *
    (d) Direct observations. If a new urine collection using direct 
observation procedures or an oral fluid collection is required under 
Sec.  40.65(b)(5) or (c)(1), you must check if the employer has a 
standing order on which specimen collection to perform. If there is no 
standing order, you must contact the DER on whether to continue with a 
directly observed urine collection or an oral fluid collection.
0
3. In Sec.  40.67 revise paragraph g and in paragraph (h) remove the 
word ``gender' and add in its place ``sex'' to read as follows:


Sec.  40.67  When and how is a directly observed urine collection 
conducted?

* * * * *
    (g) As the collector, you must ensure that the observer is the same 
sex (male or female) as the employee.
    (1) You must never permit a person of the opposite sex to act as 
the observer.
    (2) The observer can be a different person from the collector and 
need not be a qualified collector.
    (3) If a same sex observer cannot be found:
    (i) If the employer has a standing order to allow oral fluid 
testing in such situations, the collector will follow that order.
    (ii) If there is no standing order from the employer, the collector 
must contact the DER and the DER will direct the collector to either 
conduct an oral fluid test if the collection site is able to do so or 
send the employee to a collection site acceptable to the employer for 
the oral fluid test.
    (4) Notwithstanding paragraphs (g)(3)(i) and (ii) of this section, 
until otherwise specified (one year after HHS publishes a Federal 
Register notification of the second certified oral fluid drug testing 
laboratory), you must conduct an oral fluid collection if possible 
(i.e., HHS has certified at least two oral fluid drug testing 
laboratories, and both a qualified oral fluid collector and a 
conforming oral fluid collection device are available at the collection 
site). Otherwise, you must conduct a directly observed urine collection 
as required in this section.
* * * * *
0
4. In Sec.  40.69 in paragraph (c), remove the word ``gender'' and add 
in its place ``sex (male or female)''; in paragraph (d), remove the 
word ``same-gender'' and add in its place ``same-sex''.
0
5. In Sec.  40.145 in paragraph (h)(1)(ii), remove the word ``gender'' 
and add in its place ``sex (male or female)''.

    Issued in Washington, DC.
Sean P. Duffy,
Secretary of Transportation.
[FR Doc. 2025-19119 Filed 9-30-25; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P