Question:
Knowledge is power, no one knows it all; however, knowing a little about a lot and be willing to do some research does wonders.
In the last couple of days I spoke with people that perform services for trucking companies and drivers. In their own right some of these people are considered experts in their field. However, there were some things that required the conversation to be drawn out as the person did not understand the federal rules.
Case 1: Annual drug test performed on school bus drivers IAW state law (NOTE: This would apply to ANY drug or alcohol tests not required by the US DOT.):

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration requires drug or alcohol tests to be performed under the following circumstances:

Any other tests are not mandated by the DOT therefore, the collector may not use the federal collection form.
In the case of the annual bus driver drug tests required by state law carriers must explain in the drug & alcohol policy the difference between the two tests and what the consequences are for failing any drug or alcohol tests.

Carriers often expand their D & A policy and fail to notify drivers of where federal regulation ends and expanded company begins, i.e. post accident drug and alcohol tests, many carriers test drivers following any accident. Provided the company explains the expanded provision to drivers and does not use a federal collection form that is acceptable. However, if the carrier used a federal collection form and failed to inform the driver of the difference then a driver could seek civil action against the carrier if the driver refused the test or the test came back positive. The carrier cannot report non-DOT test that were positive as positive.

IOW, if the drug or alcohol test was not required by the US DOT then the carrier cannot report the tests to subsequent employers as positive in the guise of complying with the FMCSR.
To further protect drivers the FMCSA has training requirements for ALL supervisors to tests for reasonable suspicion:

It is imperative for drivers to know their rights and when drug testing is mandated and when carriers have expanded drug and alcohol testing requirements. Test performed outside of the FMCSR cannot be reported as positive to subsequent employers. The same should apply to DAC Services. D & A test results are confidential; any release to an unauthorized party could result in civil action against the offender.
Case 2: Conviction of offenses that mandate a driver’s CDL be revoked:
§383.51 Disqualification of drivers has a table of offenses that when a driver is CONVICTED the driver’s CDL must be suspended or revoked. If an attorney can have a violation listed in §383.51 reduced to a lesser charge, then the driver maybe able to keep their CDL.
Know your rights; chances are no one else will be there to help who knows all of the answers.
Be safe."If men were angels...No government would be necessary."
51st Federalist Papers
"Nichols' Fourth Law says, "Avoid any action with an unacceptable outcome"

Answer:
OK, related to this topic:
1) Let's say a driver, in a team operation, is involved in an accident and s/he is at fault. And the accident results in a manditory tow or abulatory injury or fatality. The driver of the truck is under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol.
The police want to test the other driver who was not driving at the same time and, in fact, was in the sleeper berth or passenger's seat and the time of the accident. What should the other, non-driving at the time of the accident, team member do?
What are your feelings on this?
2) If a driver participates in a "sleep study experiment" as conducted by, perhaps, a hospital for example and the driver is getting paid for this, then must the driver log this as on duty not driving? Keep in mind the driver is sleeping while getting compensation.

Answer:

Test as asked, refusal to test when asked by the police is an automatic suspension of your license.
The posts pertains to company order D & A tests.
Be safe."If men were angels...No government would be necessary."
51st Federalist Papers
"Nichols' Fourth Law says, "Avoid any action with an unacceptable outcome"

Answer:

That's easy - the other driver should submit to the test. A refusal is the same as a positive.

Yes - any activity that you are compensated for outside of trucking should be considered ON DUTY (not driving).
The only time it matters whether or not you are sleeping is when you are in a DOT approved sleeper. A hospital room is not a DOT approved sleeper.

Answer:
Right, right, but i'm saying the driver who wasn't driving at the time----this is a team operation, was either in the sleeper berth or sitting in the passenger seat when the accident occured.
The police suspect that the driver of the trk is under the influence of some narcotic substance and they want to test the "other person/driver in the truck" so they can possibly build up a case or something.
In this case, what shoud the other driver do?

Answer:

Submit to the pee test. ANY refusal, even if you aren't driving, is an automatic positive.

Answer:
Chances are an officer will have a driver do a field sobriety test or blow into a non-evidential machine. If the driver in the sleeper refuses to tests, it is a positive and the driver is done:

Since the driver cannot gain access to the sleeper berth without being on the truck in the process then there is no defense the driver was in the SB.
As stated, if asked to test then do so, if not hire a damn good lawyer. You'll need the lawyer's services.
As the Rev says, if you're paid to sleep in a hospital bed, then it's on-duty not driving.
Be safe."If men were angels...No government would be necessary."
51st Federalist Papers
"Nichols' Fourth Law says, "Avoid any action with an unacceptable outcome"

Answer:
i guess what i'm trying to ask is i know that if you're employed by a company you are subject to pre-employment, random, reasonable suspicion or post accident drug testing. That's fine and understood that if you refuse, it's the same as a fail.
If, however, another agency requests you to be tested even though you were not driving, then i have a possible problem with this.
The reasons why an agency might want to test a driver that was not involved but merely riding along would be to possibly strengthen their case that the team was "a bunch of druggies" or something.
Let's also assume both vehicles need to be towed, so that there is no possibility that the other team driver will drive away.
BTW, the log is the proof that the other driver was in the sleeper. No?

Answer:

Every person who has a driver's license has signed a statement to submit to a sobriety test administered by any law enforcement person. Refuse to test, you loose your license.

The law enforcement officer would follow protocal and justify why the tests was administered. You cannot be IN a CMV if you are under the influance of drugs or alcohol.

If the co-driver was under the influance while in the vehicle the driver is in violation of Part 392.

No, team drivers frequently log SB while seated in the jumper seat.
As mentioned, if the driver in the sleeper berth possess drugs or is under the influance of alcohol the driver violated Part 392.
Be safe."If men were angels...No government would be necessary."
51st Federalist Papers
"Nichols' Fourth Law says, "Avoid any action with an unacceptable outcome"

Answer:
Can you show me the reg# that states a person must submit to test at any time(especially when off duty) etc. etc.
Not saying your're wrong, i just have a problem with say i'm just walking down the street not even driving and "oh yeah, we want to drug test you."
b) You know when you get "randomly" choosen for a drug test? They always give you a certain amount of time to actually do the test. I think one time i got "randomly" choosen for an alcohol breath test and they gave me like a week to get the testing facility---enough time for me to get sober. What does this have to do with my original question? The fact that there is leeway with the requirments/regulations.
2) Logs as legal proof.
The prosecution may say, "Oh, s/he might have been in the passenger's seat there's no way to really know."
In my opinion, the official D.O.T. logs outweigh "Oh, she might have been in the passenger's seat because the sleeper is connected to the cab."
Yeah, just like saddam had WMD.
Official documents outweigh heresay in the court of law in my opinion.
You're right that in 99% cases it is imposible to enter the sleeper without entering the cab first but, remember, it's innocent until proven guilty; You have to prove i wasn't in the sleeper. I don't have to prove i wasn't in the passenger's seat.

Answer:
Truckstop Lawyers.