# Mr. Joseph Cleveland — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation **Citation:** 01-0317 **Type / status:** guidance / guidance **Agency:** Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration **Effective:** Not stated **Published:** 2002-01-10 01-0317 concerning 172.704. ## Document text <<>> .S. Departmen f Transportatio 400 Seventh St., S.W. Washington, D.C. 20590 pecial Progran esearch an Administration JAN 1 0 2002 Mr. Joseph Cleveland Ref. No. 01-0317 Hazardous Materials Advisory Council 203 Towne Centre Drive Hillsborough, NJ 08844 Dear Mr. Cleveland: This is in response to your November 13, 2001 letter concerning the training requirements in the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HRM;49 CFR Parts 171-180). Specifically, you ask that we clarify the responsibility of the hazmat employer with regards to function-specific training required in § 172.704 (a)(2) if part, but not all, of this requirement is met through a third party training program. It is the responsibility of the hazmat employer to ensure and certify that each hazmat employee receives function-specific training concerning requirements of this subchapter, which are specifically applicable to the functions the employee performs, in accordance with § 172.704 (a)(2). This may be accomplished by any number of training methods, including the use of third-party training facilities. Please note that this office neither reviews nor certifies training programs. Each hazmat employer has its own unique operational requirements. A hazmat employer must determine training needs of its hazmat employees based on the employer's requirements and cach employee's specific job functions. I hope this satisfies your request. Sincerely, Delon FilS Delmer F. Billings Chief, Regulations Development Office of Hazardous Materials Standards 172.704 <<>> COUNTY HMAC AZARDOUS M ATERIALS ADVISORY GOUNOIL ТО КІЛОВА Union/Middlesex Johnsen $172.704 To: U.S. Department of Transportation Research & Special Programs Administration (RSPA) TRAINING Office of Hazardous Materials Standards DHM-10 Mr. Edward Mazzullo, Director 01-0317 Washington, DC cc: Shere & Blackwell Mr. Jeffrey Lawrence Attorney at Law cc: HMAC (Union-Middlesex Counties) Advisory Committee c/o Drinker, Biddle & Reath Mr. Joseph Schmidt cc: Dock Resins Corporation Mr. Joseph Barbanel, President, HMAC Ms. Joy Romeo, Co-chair, Transportation Committee From: Joseph Cleveland, Co-Chair Transportation Committee; President, Cleveland Packaging Services Date: November 13, 2001 Subject: Function-Specific Training Mr. Mazzulo: The Union/Middlesex County Hazardous Materials Advisory Council is a non-profit corporation and Middlesex Counties. HMAC works through 7 volunteer advisory committees that execute dedicated to serving the emergency management, industrial and government communities in Union projects, seminars and training programs in support of HMAC objectives. HMAC is entirely supported through membership fees. An analysis of DOT HAZMAT violations for 1999 and 2000 identifies many examples of training citations: • Failure to provide employee training Failure to provide employees training or create and retain records of training testing Failure to provide employees function - specific training • Failure to provide recurrent function - specific and awareness training 203 Tone Contre Drive a Hilaborouga, a deg -Mal it ntophmac-90.0r59-1184 = Fax (908) 359-7619 <<>> Failure to provide recurrent employee training or create and retain records of training testing • Maintained incomplete records of employee training testing - no certification that training and testing was performed, no trainee name and address; and no description, copy, or location of the training materials The front page of the Home News Tribune, dated Sept. 26, 2001, contains an article wherein the FBI warns of more terrorist attacks and truck firms are alerted to the dangers of transporting hazardous materials. Enclosed is a brochure about an HMAC(Union/Middlesex) HAZMAT training program scheduled for Oct. 25, 2001. Your attention is directed to the agenda; especially, the NJ State Police program as it relates to safety. Our instructors bring over 100 years of experience to this program, but we believe the program would be more effective if we could include a function-specific training effort presented in a seminar format i.e. bracing/blocking, bulk loading/unloading, documentation, regulation interpretation. and as a consequence our HMAC efforts are restricted to general awareness safety training. Our instructors have expressed their liability concerns as they relate to function-specific training We request that the DOT supply us with a written statement that a HAZMAT employer may ccept a Certificate of Attendance at a HAZMAT Function Specific Training program which i pecifically applicable to the functions the employee performs, also if the said training effort doe not cover all of the functions the employee performs-it shall be the responsibility of the HAZMAT employee to provide additional function specific training. HMAC liability exposure as it relates to a "Certificate of Attendance" and the liability of By copy of this letter to Jett Lawrence, Attorney at Law, we request his comments regarding presenters who would be encouraged to demonstrate current commercial technology, but may not be HAZMAT experts. ## Provenance - Official: Yes - Source: - Source ID: `phmsa` - SHA-256: `f102dc5922f62020f28dd8daf164b7f37d96dd8aefd4614ff4443d5ff9301a9f` - Retrieved: 2026-08-20T00:59:31.977Z - Exported: 2026-08-23T00:43:39.538Z - Document slug: `phmsa-interpretation-01-0317` ### Source metadata ```json { "materialSubtype": "interpretation", "interpretationArea": "hazardous_materials", "representation": "full_text_from_official_pdf", "companies": [], "individuals": [ "Mr. Joseph Cleveland" ], "refIds": [ "01-0317" ], "catalogDates": [ "2002-01-10" ], "catalogParts": [ 172 ], "catalogRowCount": 1, "sourceRecordUrls": [ "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/node/47041" ], "linkedAttachmentUrls": [], "unavailableResponseUrls": [], "duplicateRepresentationUrls": [], "citedSections": [ "172.704" ], "catalogPageUrls": [ "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/regulations/title49/section/172704" ], "pdfUrls": [ "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2001/010317.pdf" ], "representations": [ { "viewUrl": "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2001/010317.pdf", "detailUrl": null, "detailHtmlPath": null, "pdfUrl": "https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2001/010317.pdf", "pdfArtifactPath": "data/sources/phmsa-interpretations/01-0317-8fc0c4c3ba.pdf", "pdfArtifactSha256": "8efad6c699a4afefd1509042892052fbc9ffc0a6c7ec726bf6eb16f0c683e80d", "extractedTextPath": "data/sources/phmsa-interpretations/01-0317-8fc0c4c3ba.v2.txt", "extractedTextSha256": "3d53529c38d8e650a69511a49595c0253c2d3d69db9121ce558852ab30dc1b05", "pageCount": 3, "extractionVersion": 2 } ], "caveat": "Interpretations apply regulations to the facts presented and do not create independently enforceable requirements.", "jurisdiction": "US" } ```