Mr. Paul I. Reamy — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation

Page 1i . - of Transportation U.S. Department Washington, D.G. 20590 400 Seventh St., S.W. Research and Special Programs Administration AUG = 8 2001 Mr. Paul I. Reamy Reference No.: 01-0131 504 Misty Lane N. Fort Myers, FL 33903 Dear Mr. Reamy: This is in response to your May 16, 2001 letter regarding the definition of a "hazmat employee" in the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180). Specifically, you ask whether a mechanic who removes a mechanical part containing a hazardous material from an aircraft and gives it to a stock clerk, who in turn prepares the part for transportation as "COMAT," is considered a "hazmat employee" and, therefore, subject to the training requirements. You also ask about the applicability of the training requirements under 14 CFR 121.433a. As you are aware, the term "hazmat employee," as defined in 49 CFR 171.8, includes all persons who in the course of employment perform functions that directly affect hazardous materials transportation safety. Conversely, this term does not apply to every employed person who works at or around an area, where, for example, hazardous materials are loaded, unloaded, handled or stored. The employee's functional relationship to hazardous materials transportation safety, rather than incidental contact with hazardous materials in the work place, is the primary factor in determining whether an individual is a "hazmat employee." An employee's designation as a "hazmat employee" is the result of the "hazmat employer's" assignment (explicit or implicit) of job functions to individual employees. The training requirements specified in 49 CFR 172.700 through 172.704 apply to an employee, such as an aircraft mechanic, only if that employee performs a function subject to the HMR (e.g., classitying the hazardous material). This would be the case when company procedures obligate the mechanic to intorm the stock clerk that the mechanical part contains a hazardous material. If, on the other hand, the mechanic performs no function subject to the HMR, the mechanic is not a 'hazmat employee" and is not subject to the HMR training requirements. In addition to the general awareness/familiarization training required for all "hazmat employees," the "hazmat employer" must provide training for each "hazmat employee" appropriate to the specific function that the person is required to perform.#

Page 2...- For a response to your question concerning the applicability of the training requirements under 14 CFR 121.433a, please contact the Federal Aviation Administration. Direct your correspondence to: Mr. William Wilkening Dangerous Goods and Cargo Security Division, ACO-800 Federal Aviation Administration • 800 Independence Avenue, S. W. Washington, DC 20591 I hope this satisfies your request. Sincerely, Director, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards#

Page 3• TRAINING May 16, 2001 Mr. Edward T. Mazzullo, Director 01-0131 Research and Special Programs Administration Office of Hazardous Materials Standard, DHM 10 Washington, DC 20590 Dear Ed, I have a training question that relates to a mechanic who in the course of performing daily duties, material: -The mechanic performs no-other task related to the removed part containing the hazardous material. - Question: In accordance with 49 CFR 171.8 and the definition of a Hazmat Employee: 1. Does the mechanic meet the definition of a Hazmat employee and therefore subject to part 172, subpart H Training (172.700 - 172.704)? In accordance with 14 CFR 121.433a: 2. Must the mechanic be trained each 12 months? An early written response to these two questions would be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, Paul I. Reamy 504 Misty Lane N. Fort Myers, FL 33903 (941) 656-7005 Fax (941) 545-0731 E-mail: TheReamys@cs.com#