Interpretation Response #01-0131 ([Mr. Paul I. Reamy])

Below is the interpretation response detail and a list of regulations sections applicable to this response.

Interpretation Response Details

Response Publish Date: 08/08/2001

Company Name:

Individual Name: Mr. Paul I. Reamy

Location State: FL Country: US

View the Interpretation Document

Response text:

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 CFRParts 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 "COMA T," 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 a~are, 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., classifying the hazardous material). This would be the case when company procedures obligate the mechanic to inform 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.

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,

Edward T. Mazzullo
Director, Office of Hazardous Materials Standards

172.704

Regulation Sections