{"operation":"document","citation":"15-0129","title":"Crop Production Services, Inc — Hazardous Materials Safety Interpretation","source_type":"guidance","agency":"Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration","status":"guidance","official":true,"published_on":"2015-08-21","effective_on":null,"summary":"15-0129 response to Crop Production Services, Inc concerning 172.704, 177.816.","machine_formats":{"json":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-15-0129.json","markdown":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-15-0129.md"},"app_url":"https://regulus.evalyn.ai/document/phmsa-interpretation-15-0129","source_url":"https://www.phmsa.dot.gov/sites/phmsa.dot.gov/files/legacy/interpretations/Interpretation%20Files/2015/150129.pdf","body":"<<<PAGE 1>>>\n\nU.S. Department\nof Transportation\nWashington, DC 20590\n1200 New Jersey Avenue SE\nMaterials Safety\nPipeline and Hazardous\nAdministration\nAUG 2 1 2015\nMr. Clayton Droste\nManager, Commercial Motor Vehicle Compliance\nCrop Production Services, Inc.\n3005 Rocky Mountain Ave.\nLoveland, CO 80538\nRef. No. 15-0129\nDear Mr. Droste:\nThis responds to your June 24, 2015 request for clarification on the emergency response\ninformation requirements under the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts\n171-180). Specifically, you request clarification on whether the driver training\nrequirements of § 177.816 require a driver to be familiar with and proficient in the use of\nthe Emergency Response Guidebook (ERG), and based on the use of the ERG, be able to\ndetermine the appropriate course of action to take in the event of an emergency.\nThe HMR do not require a hazmat employee to have proficiency or familiarity with a\nspecific source of emergency response information such as the ERG as part of safety\ntraining. Section 172.704(a)(3) requires each hazmat employee receive safety training\nconcerning the emergency response information required by subpart G of part 172. A\nhazmat employer must determine the most suitable source of training for employees, based\non specific job functions of each employee. Training on the ERG is only required to the\nextent that it satisfies the provisions of § 172.704(a)(3) and does not include proficiency in\nits use or the ability to determine, through its use, the appropriate course of action to take\nin the event of an emergency.\nI trust this information is helpful. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any\nquestions.\nSincerely,\nShame\nDuane Pfund\nInternational Standards Coordinator\nStandards and Rulemaking Division\n\n<<<PAGE 2>>>\n\nheari\n77.811\nGoodall, Shante CTR (PHMSA)\nDriver Training\nFrom:\nGeller, Shelby CTR (PHMSA)\n15 - 0129\nSent:\nWednesday, June 24, 2015 4:21 PM\nTo:\nHazmat Interps\nSubject:\nFW: Interpretation request\nHi Shante and Alice,\nPlease see forwarded request for a formal letter of interpretation.\nThanks,\nShelby\nFrom: Droste, Clay [mailto:Clay.Droste@cpsagu.com]\nTo: INFOCNTR (PHMSA)\nSent: Wednesday, June 24, 2015 3:30 PM\nSubject: Interpretation request\nCc: Weingardt, Mike; Pirkle, Billy; Kjolhede, Justin; Stoltenberg, Jay; PHMSA HM InfoCenter\nGreetings,\nOn April 30th 2015 one of our company's commercial vehicles was stopped in the State of lowa and received a level two\ninspection. The vehicle was loaded with a non-placarded amount of class 9 material. The Officer wrote a violation\nunder 177.816 with a written explanation of \"Driver unfamiliar with how to use ERG manual\". I used the DataQ system\nand challenged the violation as written with the following argument:\n\"After reading the regulations in 177.816 and referencing 390 through 397 in the FMCS's, the regulations fail to state\nhow proficient a driver must be at using the ERG guide book. Therefore, being \"unfamiliar\" with the book as the Officer\nhas written is not a violation of any federal regulation. How familiar does a driver have to be with the ERG guide to pass\ninspection? Mr. Johnson has received and is current on all regulatory required training as required and although\nunfamiliar with the guide, is not in violation. I kindly ask that this violation be removed from the inspection report.\"\nD. Evans with the IA DOT Motor Vehicle Enforcement team choose to not overturn the violation and provided the\nfollowing explanation: \"All of my Haz Mat Specialist ask the same thing of every driver, what ERG page would should you\nhow to handle and emergency dealing with the product you are hauling. If a violation is written for this it's because they\ncouldn't perform that task...\".\nI would argue that the Officer had the answer on the shipping paper our driver provided at the time of inspection. After\nthe proper shipping description of all our hazardous material is the appropriate ERG guide book number. This shipping\npaper is no different.\nMr. Evans and his team of haz-mat specialist are applying their opinion of the regulation subjectively. I would like a\nproper interpretation of the regulation.\nThanks,\nClayton Droste\nCrop Production Services, Inc.\n3005 Rocky Mountain Ave.\nManager, Commercial Motor Vehicle Compliance\n1\n\n<<<PAGE 3>>>\n\nLoveiand, CO 80538\nMobile: 970-397-7016\nPhone: 970-685-3857\nFax: 303-222-2825\nclay.droste@cpsagu.com\nFor more information on Agrium's E-Mail Policy or to unsubscribe, click here: http://www.agrium.com/email footer en.jsp\nPour plus de renseignements sur la politique de courrier électronique d'Agrium ou pour vous désabonnez, cliquez ici : http://www.agrium.com/email footer fr.jsp\n2","truncated":false,"body_characters":4683}