In an effort to make drug testing more accurate for federal government employees, it has been suggested that alternative testing methods be used to discourage false positives and false negatives. The Associated Press reported a move by the federal government to "overhaul its employee drug testing program." (TAP, page 1) Currently, the government tests its employees during pre-employment screening and when workplace accidents occur. Both cases use urine testing and there is no 99.99% guarantee that this particular test will show true results; when the drug was consumed or how much is currently in the employee's system. The federal government is trying to reduce costs and also prevent people being tested from being able to use the "cheat" method (TAP, page 1). Dilution of the obtained sample, test refusal, and other methods are commonly used by employees to discourage true test results. They explained that “although employees can be tested at any time, testing cases are generated by the severity of the position held by the employee.” (TAP, page 2) Federal employees might work at a site that requires hard hats and operate heavy machinery or be behind a desk crunching numbers; the decision to test the individual comes from senior management. The federal government's main goal is to revamp drug screening to better determine the length of time drugs have been used and the accuracy of the test. Furthermore, the idea of ​​the new test is to dissuade workers from finding ways to circumvent the positive test and also to stop workers from falsely discrediting inaccuracies. As they explain, "by testing workers' hair, saliva and sweat, testers are able to draw more accurate conclusions that will reduce false positives" (TAP, p. 2), this will allow the employer to decide whether the The use of the drug influenced or caused the outcome of the negative actions. The federal government's hesitation in instituting these tests also stems from the idea that alternative tests would provide employers with unnecessary information on consumption times (TAP, page 1) thus giving them the advantage of taking and "cheating" the test. At this point, it's examining how far a company can go with drug testing without violating workers' privacy. Because testing urine for illegal substances, for example, cannot distinguish between marijuana use on the same day or five days before an accident occurs.