of errors, or the errors are discovered by the BAT him/herself. During this 30-day period, the BAT can continue DOT breath testing. Once the 30-day time-period has passed, however, the BAT will be deemed to be out of compliance and can no longer act as a Breath Alcohol Technician until the error correction training has been successfully completed. Error correction training is only required to
The DOT puts the onus on the trainee to ensure their BAT training meets or exceeds DOT requirements.
Tese common errors are considered
“correctable” by the DOT—even if they go unnoticed by the BAT until aſter the ATF copies have been distributed. “Correctable” means the errors can be remedied by send- ing the Designated Employee Representa- tive (DER) a signed affidavit or memo- randum addressing the mistake. However, because the BAT who made the errors may be unlikely to notice them, it is best to get it right the first time. If the extra time and effort to correct these errors isn’t sufficient motivation, remember that errors like these are quickly noticed in an audit and likely to result in questioning by the auditors. It is very important that the DER has a
copy that mirrors the subject’s copy. Even if you realize an error has occurred before sending or transmiting the DER’s copy, you must create a memorandum/affidavit for the DER rather than merely adding a remark to their copy.
7
Error Correction Training
If a BAT makes an error in the alcohol testing process, causing a test to be cancelled (i.e. a fatal or uncorrected error), the BAT must undergo error correction training. Te most common mistakes leading to correction train- ing are those mentioned above: not waiting the 15 minutes and using the same mouth- piece on the screening and confirmation test. Error correction training must occur within 30 days from the date the BAT is notified
12 datia focus
cover the subject mater area(s) in which the error(s) that caused the test to be cancelled occurred. Error training is not required if an alcohol test is cancelled due to equipment malfunction, unless the failure was due to failure of the BAT to properly maintain the equipment. However, error training is required if the BAT does not atempt to accomplish the test following the equipment failure using another EBT—provided that an additional unit was reasonably available.
8 Residual Mouth Alcohol
Some common products use alcohol as an ingredient and this alcohol will register on an EBT for a short period of time aſter being consumed. Tis effect is known as “residual mouth alcohol.” Examples include mouthwash, cough syrup, liquid cold medi- cine, breath sprays, some chewing tobacco and inhalers. Certain foods we consume have very low levels of alcohol. Although not required under DOT guidelines, it is a good practice for the BAT to ask the subject to remove any product from their mouth prior to a breath test to reduce the risk of residual mouth alcohol. Unknown to the BAT, a positive screen-
ing test may occur because the subject used an alcohol-infused product such as a breath spray, cough syrup and even some types of chewing tobacco, immediately prior to an alcohol screening test. Tis could have been done innocently or as an atempt to mask the smell of drinking. Fiſteen minutes later the confirmation test may show no alcohol or a much lower BAC than found in the screening test. In this situation the BAT should immediately be on the alert that “residual mouth alcohol” may be present.
In situations like this, where the confir-
matory test registers none or much lower BAC than expected, the BAT should refrain from remarks suggesting that perhaps a “false” positive was received or otherwise question the EBT results in front of the subject, as this will only serve to cast doubt about the validity of the test results. If the subject has used the above-men-
tioned products correctly and is not using them to mask the smell of alcohol from drinking, they will dissipate during the 15-minute wait time between the screen- ing and confirmation test. If the subject has truly consumed alcohol, they will have a positive confirmation test result demon- strating their accurate BAC.
Conclusion It is almost impossible to identify every possible error or unique situation that may arise in DOT Evidential Breath Testing. Te errors highlighted in this article are relatively common. Prospective BATs will benefit from reviewing these errors and the testing experiences of seasoned BATs and BAT trainers. We hope that you will freely share this DATIA article. ❚
Amy Evans is the Workplace and Training Busi- ness Manager at Lifeloc Technologies (www.
lifeloc.com), a leading manufacturer of Evidential Breath Alcohol Testers and provider of Breath Alcohol Technician training. Amy has been in the drug and alcohol testing industry since 2004. She has created breath alcohol training materials and courses for DOT mandated and non-mandated testing in use by private business and govern- ment agencies in North America and internation- ally. She regularly conducts training in person and via webcast. Amy has been a member of DATIA for more than nine years and has provided expert testimony for the U.S. Coast Guard.
Barry Knott is president and CEO of Lifeloc Technologies (
www.lifeloc.com), a trusted U.S. manufacturer of DOT approved Evidential Breath Alcohol Testing instruments for mandated and non-mandated workplace alcohol testing. He also serves on the Board of Directors of DATIA.
fall 2013
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54