Roadside Drug Testing (SA)

[Tender]

Taken from here:

http://www.tenders.sa.gov.au/tender/display/tender-details.do?id=12658&action=display-tender-details

Saliva Drug Testing Equipment

Issued by South Australia Police

Request for Tender
Tender State: Current Tender
Tender Code: SAPOL012658
Contract Number: POL 05/028
Category: Laboratory and Measuring and Observing and Testing Equipment

Enquiries
Moira O'Neil
8204 2754

The South Australia Government is introducing legislation for commencement of random drug testing of drivers within the State. This is a road safety initiative aimed at reducing road deaths, injury, and associated trauma normally connected with vehicle collisions.

Research into driving fatalities has indicated that driving under the influence of drugs has increased substantially over the past decade. Roadside random drug testing will involve screening drivers for illicit substances such as methamphetamine and THC (the active component of cannabis). This will be done by way of oral fluid analysis. Screening procedures will be similar to the current practise for alcohol testing, but will require drivers to provide an initial saliva sample by licking a disposable test cartridge or other collection device. A positive initial sample will require the driver to submit to a secondary oral fluid analysis, which will take place within an on site vehicle (drug van) by way of machine reader or other device.

SAPOL needs to be provided with modern and effective drug testing equipment with a view to reducing deaths on the roads in line with the National Road Safety Strategy.

Tenderers are able to tender for any one or all of the following:

Oral Fluid Screening Test Device;
Oral Fluid Collection Kits;
Oral Fluid Analysis Device.


Tender closes at 2:00 PM Adelaide time 24 January 2006

Some pertinent excerpts from the tender document:

Tenderers must document the cut-off concentration for both methamphetamine and THC of the respective Oral Fluid Screening Test Device. The cut-off concentration should refer to the concentration in neat oral fluid, not the concentration after dilution with buffer if this is the case in the procedure.

Specificity and Cross-reactivity and Interference (W)

Tenderers must also provide documentation on scientific studies demonstrating the specificity, cross reactivity and interference characteristics of their oral fluid screening test devices. Such studies must include all drugs and drug metabolites within the same class of drugs, or with similar molecular structures that may cross-react. For example, for methamphetamine oral fluid screening tests evaluate:

§ d-amphetamine;
§ l-amphetamine;
§ d- methamphetamine;
§ l- methamphetamine;
§ d and l-MDMA (3,4- Methylenedioxymethamphetamine);
§ d and l-MDA (3,4- Methylenedioxyamphetamine);
§ d and l-MDEA (Methylenedioxyethylamphetamine);
§ PMA;
§ Ephedrine;
§ Pseudoephedrine;
§ Phentermine; and
§ Ranitidine.

For each item, the potential for both positive and negative effects should be commented upon. Where possible applicants should also provide documentation on the devices performance in scientific studies involving passive exposure to THC.

It is anticipated that SAPOL will require approximately 10,000 (oral fluid screening test devices) per annum for the life of the contract.

EDIT: (24/09/2006) Thread renamed for consistency with other roadside drug testing threads. hoptis

 

[Splatt]

Cool, so just have cold and flu tabs in the car when coming down off meth and say they're the cause and you are just driving home to get rest.

 

[Fry-d-]

Cheers for posting the Tender tender

Pretty clear SA will be roadside testing sooner than some might hope.

 

[mongman]

Hm, I had originally suspected ephedrine and pseudoephedrine could cause false positives. If this is the case I am surprised that there hasn't been more media attention to the fact.

Could this explain the false positive for methamphetamine widely published in the media throughout Victoria?

I suspect cold and flu tabs will not protect drug drivers, due to the accurate testing after the road side test. This would probably show both ephedrine and amphetamine metabolites.

 

[hoptis]

Drug-driving fines revealed
By ANNA VLACH
02 Mar 2006

SOUTH Australian motorists caught with even a trace of illegal drugs in their systems will face fines of up to $900 and lose demerit points from as early as July.

Revealing the penalties yesterday, police Assistant Commissioner Grant Stevens said the tender process had just commenced for kits to be used in random roadside drug testing. The testing, expected to be in operation by mid-July, will be based on a world-first Victorian trial which was extended on Tuesday.

Unlike blood alcohol testing, which allows a legal limit of 0.05, roadside drug testing would detect "the lowest concentration of drugs" the technology would allow, Mr Stevens said.

He said drivers would be asked to provide a screening sample by placing a swab in their mouth. "The swab will be screened, which takes about five minutes," he said.

"If it is positive, the driver will be asked to accompany police to the van, where further saliva samples will be taken. These will undergo scientific analysis on the spot, and then one sample will be sent to Forensic Science Centre for Court and a sample will be supplied to the driver.

"Drivers testing positive will not be able to drive for up to four hours for THC (cannabis) or 24 hours for amphetamine."

While cannabis can stay in a user's system for several weeks, it is understood drivers will not be prosecuted unless they have been using the drug within a day of testing.

Penalties for testing positive include a $300 fine and loss of three demerit points, or, if the matter is brought before court, a $500-900 fine and loss of three demerit points. Drivers who refuse testing will be fined up to $700, lose three demerit points and be disqualified from driving for up to three months for a first offence.

RAA traffic and safety manager Chris Thomson said prosecutions would be based on laboratory testing and not roadside saliva screenings.

Mr Stevens said the saliva testing units had an accuracy greater than 95 per cent, while the laboratory tests were 100 per cent accurate.

From The Advertiser

Seems unlikely that SA will choose any other system/product besides the one that has already been tried and tested in Victoria.

 

[hoptis]

Reposting from another thread & renamed thread, this can be the SA drug testing thread.

Premier vows to hit drug drivers
By GREG KELTON
09 Jun 2006

DRIVERS will face random roadside tests for drugs such as cannabis and amphetamines from July 1.

Premier Mike Rann pledged yesterday: "We are going to hit drug drivers hard.

"We will bring down the full force of the law on those who put their own lives and the lives of others at huge risk by drugging up and driving out," he said.

Specially trained police will be able to use the new powers to pull over any driver anywhere in the state and ask for a drug test.

This will involve the driver providing a sample by placing an absorbent swab in their mouth or touching it with their tongue.

The sample will be screened at the roadside with a result determined in about five minutes. If positive, a second sample will be taken.

Drivers found with drugs in their system face a $300 expiation fee and the loss of three demerit points with greater fines and loss of licence for subsequent offences.

A $700 penalty will apply to those drivers who refuse to co-operate as well as the loss of three demerit points. Subsequent refusals will lead to licence disqualifications of up to 12 months.

From The Advertiser

 

[hoptis]

NO FINES FOR MOTORISTS USING ECSTASY
GREG KELTON
19 Jun 2006

MOTORISTS testing positive to ecstasy will escape penalty when the state's new drug-driving laws come into effect on July 1.

This is despite the fact equipment to be used by South Australian police can detect ecstasy and that Victorian police will begin random testing for the party drug on July 1.

Under the SA testing regime, drivers pulled over for a random test will have their saliva tested but will be charged only for driving under the influence of cannabis (THC) and methamphetamine.

This fact was detailed in a pamphlet circulated to more than 400,000 homes yesterday.

The Opposition yesterday warned the new laws were an incentive for drivers to use ecstasy rather than other illegal drugs.

The outcry comes after a national survey released today by insurance group AAMI found one in four men aged 25 years and under admitted to having driven while under the influence of recreational drugs, including ecstasy.

A recent report from the National Drug and Alcohol Research Centre shows ecstasy is killing more than one person every fortnight across Australia, with almost a third of the deaths caused by car crashes.

Opposition police spokesman Rob Lucas said ecstasy could be detected in the on-the-spot saliva tests with positive results being recorded by police but no penalties involved.

"What this bizarre policy means is that for those people who use illicit drugs there will be a clear incentive to use ecstasy rather than speed or marijuana," he said. Mr Lucas said it would be simple to change the laws to include ecstasy.

Legislation clarifying police powers to prevent drivers continuing to drive after testing positive should pass Parliament this week.

Road Safety Minister Carmel Zollo slammed the Opposition comments as irresponsible for "eagerly promoting the use of an illicit substance to avoid a law designed to save lives".

"Roadside testing will be carefully monitored over the initial 12-month trial period which targets the two most commonly used illegal drugs THC (found in cannabis) and methamphetamine," she said.

Ms Zollo said methamphetamine was a common ingredient in street-grade ecstasy and police said the detection of pure ecstasy was extremely rare.

A Government source said the aim of the new laws was to target the most common drugs found in the systems of drivers and eventually would be followed by other drugs.

The source said the most common drugs were cannabis and amphetamines and "we want to make sure we get it right with these two first and as technology advances others can be included".

Under the new laws, motorists would be hit with on-the-spot fines of $300 and the loss of three demerit points for a first offence. Refusal to take a drug test would result in a $700 penalty with the loss of three demerit points.

Mr Lucas accused Transport Minister Patrick Conlon of "another stuff-up" for not being aware of what drugs would be detected. He said Mr Conlon had been asked last week if ecstasy would be detected and the minister had answered he was not an expert on recreational drugs and police should be asked about the actual scientific basis of the tests.

Mr Lucas said Mr Conlon needed to explain urgently why drivers detected with ecstasy would not face the same penalties as those detected with marijuana and speed. A spokesman for Mr Conlon referred questions about the drug testing to Ms Zollo as she was responsible for the operation of the new laws.

From The Advertiser

 

[Cosmonaut]

Most pills have meth in them anyway so ur still fukd.
No drug buses in WA till 2008, thank fuk for that.

 

[hoptis]

No drug test for drivers who blow .08
GREG KELTON
20 Jun 2006

DRIVERS found with a blood alcohol level of more than 0.08 will not be tested for drug use under the state's new drug-driving laws.

Police have confirmed only those motorists who "blow" between .05 and .079 per cent will have to undergo saliva drug tests.

This is because under new drink-driving penalties which came into effect from December 1, drivers who blow more than 0.08 will immediately lose their licence.

Police have also revealed each roadside drug test will cost $39 with further testing costs borne by the Administrative Services Department.

Assistant Police Commissioner for operations support Grant Stevens said this would have the effect of "removing a dangerous road user from our roads".

But the Opposition, which raised the issue of drug-driving loopholes including testing for ecstasy, said it could see drivers with a cocktail of drugs in their systems being caught only for drink-driving.

The issue is likely to dominate proceedings in Parliament's Upper House today when Road Safety Minister Carmel Zollo will come under Opposition scrutiny.

Also yesterday:

NO POKIES MLC Nick Xenophon said the Government should "stop agonising over ecstasy and clarify the laws".

PILL-TESTING advocate Dr David Caldicott warned the drug-testing regime could see drug users switch from easily tested and detected drugs to those which were more medically dangerous.

MS Zollo and Mr Stevens said street ecstasy, which had been adulterated with methamphetamine, would be picked up by the testing regime and people would be penalised for using methamphetamine.

Mr Stevens confirmed the tests would not detect unadulterated ecstasy, as revealed yesterday by The Advertiser.

"We are testing for methamphetamine and I am confident that the majority of people using ecstasy will be using a substance which includes a drug we are able to detect and they will be prosecuted for that," he said.

Opposition parliamentary secretary Terry Stephens said he thought the drug-testing laws were about catching people who had a cocktail of drugs in their systems.

"But with this system, people who blow over 0.08 will not be picked up," he said.

"Surely someone is more potentially dangerous if they have a mixture of drugs and alcohol."

From The Advertiser

 

[peaked]

The length of detection is harsh and unfair. People who smoked a joint the previous day are not the problem on our roads. There are plenty of inattentive drivers on the road who use no drugs at all. They should target the careless drivers, not just responsible for crashes, but also the people who cause "near" crashes.

On the plus side, this will probably lead to me finally quitting a regular weed habit. On the downside however it'll almost certainly get replaced by something else that the gets around the saliva test. Like cocaine. Or acid. Shrooms. Even opiates.

Dont get me wrong, I dont condone people driving when they are heavily affected by drugs. However, when one has consumed something and waited untill 99% (or more) of the effects has ceased, I dont believe those people should be charged a massive amount of money.

 

[hoptis]

All drink-drivers will be drug tested, say police
GREG KELTON
21 Jun 2006

CONTROVERSY continues to dog the state's new drug-driving laws, with police declaring that all motorists caught drink-driving will be tested for drugs.

There was more confusion yesterday when it was revealed the testing for drugs only could be carried out by specially-trained police.

The Government admitted SA police had finalised the secondment of only 13 sworn officers to the Traffic Support Branch to provide drug-testing services.

Unless a trained drug officer was at a random breath test station or pulled over a motorist, a driver caught over the blood alcohol limit would not be drug tested.

Assistant Commissioner Grant Stevens on Monday said only motorists blowing between 0.05 and 0.079 per cent would have to undergo a saliva test for drugs.

That came on top of revelations that motorists driving after taking pure ecstasy would not be penalised as a result of the laws which come into effect on July 1, with testing aimed at cannabis and methamphetamine use.

In Parliament yesterday, Treasurer Kevin Foley read out a copy of a memorandum from Police Commissioner Mal Hyde saying the policy had been "reviewed and as a result, all drivers subject to testing procedures conducted by the Driver Drug Testing Group will be screened for cannabis and methamphetamine".

The Opposition questioned the Government on whether pressure had been placed on police. Road Safety Minister Carmel Zollo told Parliament: "None that I know of".

A police spokeswoman later said the policy had been reviewed yesterday morning and all motorists caught by drug testing drivers would be tested for cannabis and amphetamines use.

Ms Zollo was questioned intensely in the Upper House, with the Opposition claiming the Government was ignoring what was happening in Victoria, which had altered drug-driving laws to include ecstasy.

Ms Zollo said the SA legislation was "a trial". If police indicated after it had finished ecstasy should be included, the Government would "take that on board".

From The Advertiser

 

[hoptis]

ONE DRUG TEST SITE AT A TIME
By CHRIS SALTER
22 Jun 2006

POLICE will only be able to set up one random roadside drug testing station at any one time, it has been revealed.

In another blow to the troubled legislation, Assistant Commissioner Grant Stevens yesterday said the 13 specialist members of the drug testing unit would work together at each site while conducting testing operations from July 1.

"The drug test team will generally be deployed as a group at one site," he said.

Under the new legislation, only officers who have completed a three-day training course will be eligible to drug-test motorists.

This differs from random breath testing powers, under which every patrol car is equipped to test motorists.

The Government's legislation has already come under fire because it initially would not have allowed police to put drug-affected drivers off the road, and because of revelations officers would not test drivers for drugs if they had already tested positive for excessive alcohol.

Mr Stevens said the allocation of 13 officers was sufficient to police the new laws during the 12-month trial period.

He would not reveal how much it cost to put officers through the training.

In Victoria, where drug testing has been conducted since December, 2004, all officers were provided with drug testing training after graduation from the police academy, although only one unit at a time operated through the trial.

Opposition Leader in the Upper House Rob Lucas yesterday called on the State Government to provide police with sufficient resources to more adequately staff its drug testing team.

"This Government is implementing a half-hearted drug driving regime," he said.

"It has been an absolute stuff-up right from the word go.

"They really have to get serious about drug driving. Ultimately, there may well be road deaths because of a half-hearted, poorly thought-out policy."

In March last year, when the drug driving policy was passed by State Cabinet, then transport minister Trish White said there would be a "zero tolerance approach" to drug-drivers.

On June 8, Premier Mike Rann pledged the Government would "hit drug drivers hard".

Transport Department figures show that between 2003 and 2005, there were 281 drivers or riders killed on SA roads, and that samples were taken from 230 to test for the drugs methamphetamine and THC, the active chemical in cannabis.

More than one in five of these drivers and riders tested positive. When asked if she was satisfied with the resources being diverted to drug testing, Road Safety Minister Carmel Zollo said the allocation of officers "is at the discretion of the Commissioner for Police".

She yesterday rejected calls from the Opposition to include MDMA/ecstasy in the new laws, despite revelations that police in Victoria and Tasmania test drivers for the drug and that plans are under way to test drivers in WA.

Opposition Leader in the Legislative Council Rob Lucas said that in May this year, the Labor State Government in WA indicated it would introduce saliva testing of drivers for drugs including ecstasy. He also said under legislation already operating in Tasmania, a combination of saliva and blood testing, drivers were already tested for drugs including ecstasy and MDMA.

He called on Ms Zollo to include MDMA on the list of drugs SA drivers would be tested for from July 1.

Mr Lucas later directed his attack at Mr Rann, saying the Government's refusal to include ecstasy under its drug-driving legislation left it "out of step with other Labor governments".

From The Advertiser

 

[hoptis]

OPINION

Back up your boast, Mr Rann

ON June 8, Premier Mike Rann announced to Parliament that drivers would face random roadside drug tests from the start of next month.

"We are going to hit drug drivers hard," he pledged. "We will bring down the full force of the law on those who put their own lives and the lives of others at huge risk by drugging up and driving out."

Since then, South Australia's drug-drive laws have turned into a fiasco which has left politicians, police and the public confused.

Mr Rann has four ministers whose portfolios could arguably lay claim to what is becoming a legislative farce - Police Minister Paul Holloway, Road Safety Minister Carmel Zollo, Transport Minister Patrick Conlon and Attorney-General Michael Atkinson. Perhaps this is the problem.

Now, given his earlier boast, it is up to Mr Rann to sort this mess out.

Police, motorists and even people who use illegal drugs have a right to know precisely what the drug testing operations will be able to detect and how widespread the tests will be.

The Advertiser supports the orderly introduction of drug testing for motorists. Any reasonable step which can lower death and injury on our roads deserves community backing.

But the premature introduction of the tests, without proper resources, all of which could lead to cases being challenged in the courts, would be futile.

Today, police admit that they only have the resources for a single drug testing unit to operate at any one time.

While this may be a deterrent to some, the network among drug users is sophisticated. Once the location of the unit was known, the word would quickly spread by mobile phone.

If, for example, a unit was deployed to Whyalla it would be immediately apparent that city drug users were relatively safe.

There is a strong argument, during the 12 month trial period, to commit increased police resources to the system to make sure it operates effectively. Victoria, which began testing last year, has already done the hard work for us.

In the longer term, the drug testing units will certainly give police an additional weapon in the battle to contain the road toll.

Hopefully, every police patrol will eventually carry the drug detection equipment and officers will be trained to use it in the same way as they now do for alcohol detection.

In the meantime, the Government must reassure motorists about the credibility of the system it will introduce on July 1 - and ensure it is a genuine deterrent, not a PR exercise.

From The Advertiser

 

[hoptis]

Positive start to drug tests
SAM RICHES
03 Jul 2006

AN HOUR after the Winter Enchanted rave recovery party began in Adelaide, police had set up South Australia's first random roadside drug testing station on the city's outskirts.

But in three-hour blitzes at two city sites, no one randomly pulled over recorded a positive reading to either THC, the active ingredient in cannabis, or methamphetamine.

Testing for alcohol and drugs went smoothly, with most motorists tested on Anzac Hwy positive about the latest police road safety measure, despite the process being time-consuming.

"It takes up to five minutes for the roadside screening test and we always suspected that would be the case," said Assistant Commissioner Grant Stevens.

Motorists with an initial positive reading must undergo another screening taking up to 30 minutes.

"There is a delay associated with this . . . and that's just one of those issues we have to deal with," he said. The delays did not, however, appear to be of concern to those tested yesterday.

"It's about time something like this came in," said Sarah, of Glenelg. "It's seen as the easy way out, people have thought instead of drinking, take drugs, and you can still drive, so I think a lot of people are going to be caught out."

Motorists who spoke to The Advertiser yesterday were concerned not about being caught, but that there were not enough police able to catch those who were driving under the influence of drugs.

Since the legislation became active on Saturday, police will use the first 12 months to monitor and evaluate results from the 13-person team conducting the testing.

Police expect 9000 drivers to be tested during the 12-month trial of the legislation.

From The Advertiser

 

[hoptis]

After one day, a drug-driver tests positive
By SAM RICHES
04 Jul 2006

THE first South Australian driver to test positive for illicit drugs was yesterday put off the road for 24 hours.

The Adelaide man, 34, tested on Eastern Pde at Ottoway about 10.40am, returned positive results for cannabis and methamphetamine.

His sample is now being laboratory checked before any fine is issued.

If that test is positive, the man could either face a $300 on-the-spot fine or a court fine of $500-$900, and three demerit points.

If the man is caught for a second offence, he could face a court fine of $700-$1200, as well as three demerit points.

The court could also impose a licence disqualification of at least six months.

Drug tests do not show how much of a drug is in a driver's system, but it is understood the man's readings indicated he had used cannabis about five hours before the test and methamphetamine within 24 hours. Assistant Commissioner Grant Stevens said the new system was working as expected. "We'll continue with this process and it's our expectation we will see further positive tests as we go along," he said.

No drug-affected drivers were detected on the first day of the new laws on Sunday, when rain limited the number of motorists tested to 99 on Anzac Highway and Morphett St in the city.

Police Minister Paul Holloway yesterday said he was pleased to see the program return results so early.

"The message to South Australian motorists is loud and clear," he said. "Drive under the influence of alcohol or drugs, and you will be caught and penalised."

From The Advertiser

Incidentally, also in the Advertiser...
Motorist blows .316

 

[Iconoclast]

Lemon juice

[EDIT: Threads merged. hoptis]

A friend says that he has been through the new drug busses twice now here in adelaide, and both times he swished some lemon juice in his mouth and returned a negative reading even though he had been smoking marijuana..... would this possible work with ampthetamines aswell or is he full of shit??

opinions?

 

[hoptis]

Vinegar, mouthwash and a hundred other urban myths have been discussed before, I don't think any of them are proven to work.

There's some discussion about it in here...

Roadside Drug Testing....

 

[Iconoclast]

So there must be a way of getting around this?? I was thinking today... what if you pashed your missus / fella just before the test and they had been using?? and your saliva was mixed with theirs, a positive result returned even though you handnt had anything?? or something that nuetralises saliva or taints the sample enough for them not to proceed with the test?? there must be some way around it surely.?

 

[hoptis]

Early driver drug test success
August 04, 2006 12:15am

DRIVER drug testing has returned a higher strike rate of positive results than drink driving in its first month of operation.

The police drug testing team has tested 748 drivers in 67.5 hours with 10 drivers' samples reacting positively to methamphetamine and cannabis. With a one in 74 strike rate, the nine men and one woman, aged 22 to 38, will be issued with $300 expiation notices for exceeding the Prescribed Concentration of Alcohol (PCA).

No false positive results have been recorded and of the eight tests confirmed positive by the Forensic Science Centre, no ecstasy has been detected in the oral samples.

From The Advertiser

 

[hoptis]

Ecstasy added to roadside test list
KARA PHILLIPS, POLITICAL REPORTER
August 31, 2006 11:30pm

SOUTH Australian drivers will be tested for the party drug ecstasy in a State Government turnaround on its new road safety laws.

The Government had been criticised for not including ecstasy in roadside tests for cannabis and amphetamines, which began on July 1. Premier Mike Rann has previously defended its absence on the grounds that detection was "extremely rare".

He said the pure form of the drug, MDMA, was found in the system of just one driver killed on our roads last year.

Yesterday, however, he abandoned this stance days after Victoria announced it would test drivers for the drug. "The Government now feels it is prudent to make its intent quite clear. We will not excuse drug driving," he said.

Mr Rann said South Australia was only the third state in the country and among the first places in the world to put such laws into place.

"We are serious about reducing the carnage on our roads," he said.

Those who test positive to pure ecstasy will face the same penalties as those who test positive for the other drugs, with a $300 fine and loss of three demerit points in the first instance.

Subsequent offences will incur bigger fines.

Drivers who refuse the test face fines of between $500 and $900 for a first offence, loss of their licence for six months and a penalty of six demerit points. Last year, a quarter of all drivers killed on South Australian roads were found to be affected by cannabis or amphetamines. Opposition police spokesman Rob Lucas labelled Mr Rann's change of policy an "extraordinary backflip" and a "major embarrassment".

So far, 1000 drivers have been tested under the new drug driving laws, with 25 positive results. While 17 samples are still be analysed, five tested positive to amphetamines, one for THC, and two for both illicit drugs.

From The Advertiser