Specifically, the Executive Order allows agencies to require testing when there is a reasonable suspicion of drug use. Mandatory random or uniform testing applies only to sensitive positions. Also covered are notification procedures, documentation of legitimate drug use, physical privacy during specimen collection, and appeal and adjudication procedures. With respect to right to privacy issues, virtually every judicial decision has held that acquiring a urine specimen constitutes a search for fourth amendment purposes. Consequently such testing must meet a reasonableness standard. In general, testing with reasonable suspicion, when it is voluntary or required for safety or security, or to monitor employee rehabilitation would not be considered unreasonable, intrusive, or arbitrary. Courts have been split about the constitutionality of random mandatory testing of persons in 'sensitive' positions. An examination of additional provisions suggests that the Executive Order provides sufficient procedures and safeguards to satisfy rudimentary due process standards and ensure the protection of individual substantive rights. The Executive Order will probably continue to come under judicial scrutiny, particularly in the area of mandatory random testing. 184 footnotes.