Short Answer

49 CFR § 40.297 states that no one, not the employer, not the employee, not a managed care provider, and not a service agent, may change a Substance Abuse Professional's (SAP) evaluation or recommendations, or seek another SAP evaluation to make the recommendation more or less strict. The one exception is the SAP who conducted the original evaluation, who may modify it based on new or additional information. The section also limits a SAP to evaluations within the geographic jurisdiction of the SAP's professional credential.

Detailed Explanation

Paragraph (a): No One May Alter the SAP's Evaluation

Paragraph (a) protects the integrity of the SAP's clinical judgment. Once a SAP has issued an evaluation and recommendation, the employer cannot soften it, the employee cannot push back and get it changed, and a managed care provider or service agent cannot substitute its own judgment. Nor can any of these parties go around the SAP by seeking a different evaluation intended to shift the outcome in either direction, stricter or more lenient.

Paragraph (b): Only the Original SAP May Revise the Evaluation

Paragraph (b) creates a narrow exception. The SAP who performed the initial evaluation may modify it, but only based on new or additional information, such as findings that come from the employee's education or treatment program. This keeps the authority to revise the evaluation with the clinician who made the original clinical judgment, rather than opening the door to outside pressure.

Paragraph (c): Geographic Jurisdiction of the SAP's Credential

Paragraph (c) addresses what happens if a SAP performs an evaluation outside the geographic area covered by the SAP's professional license or certification. If that happens, the employee is not required to obtain a second evaluation solely because the SAP acted outside that jurisdiction. This provision protects the employee from having to redo an otherwise valid evaluation over a credentialing technicality involving the SAP's own licensure.

Applicable Regulations

49 CFR § 40.297 prohibits altering a SAP's evaluation except by the original SAP based on new information, and addresses the consequences of a SAP acting outside the geographic jurisdiction of the SAP's credential.

Professional Observation

In my experience, this section works together closely with the second opinion prohibition in 40.295. Both provisions exist to keep one SAP's individualized clinical judgment in place throughout the process, rather than allowing the recommendation to be negotiated after the fact.

Common Misconceptions

Misconception

An employer can ask the SAP to reconsider a lenient recommendation if the employer thinks it should be stricter.

Reality

Section 40.297 does not permit an employer to push a SAP toward a stricter or more lenient recommendation. Only the original SAP may revise the evaluation, and only based on new or additional information, not based on employer or employee preference.

Why the Confusion Occurs

Employers naturally have a strong interest in getting the recommendation right, and it can feel reasonable to ask a SAP to take another look. The regulation draws a firm line here to protect the SAP's clinical independence.

Frequently Asked Questions

What counts as "new information" that would let a SAP revise an evaluation?

The research brief for this section points to information such as findings that emerge during the employee's education or treatment program. The specific facts that qualify in a given case are best evaluated by the SAP directly.

If a SAP evaluated an employee outside the SAP's licensed jurisdiction, does the evaluation still count?

Under paragraph (c), the employee is not required to get a second evaluation simply because of that jurisdictional issue. Any broader questions about the validity of a specific evaluation are best directed to the applicable licensing body or a DOT qualified SAP.

Related Articles

• What Does 49 CFR 40.295 Require?
• Can I Change DOT SAPs?
• What Qualifications Must a DOT SAP Have?
• What Is a DOT SAP Not Allowed to Do?
• What Ethical Responsibilities Does a DOT SAP Have?

Primary Authorities

• 49 CFR § 40.297, Does anyone have the authority to change a SAP's initial evaluation?

Questions About a SAP's Evaluation or Credential?

A DOT qualified SAP can help clarify how these protections apply to your specific case.

Schedule an Initial SAP Assessment