USA Banner

Official US Government Icon

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure Site Icon

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

U.S. Department of Transportation U.S. Department of Transportation Icon United States Department of Transportation United States Department of Transportation

Interpretation Response #22-0109

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

Interpretation Response Details

Response Publish Date:

Company Name: Pacific Gas & Electric

Individual Name: Timothy Hewitt

Location State: CA Country: US

View the Interpretation Document

Response text:

April 3, 2023

Mr. Timothy Hewitt
Senior Radiation Protection Engineer
Pacific Gas & Electric
9 Miles NW
Avila Beach, CA  93424

Reference No. 22-0109

Dear Mr. Hewitt:

This letter is in response to your September 12, 2022, email requesting clarification of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR; 49 CFR Parts 171-180) applicable to security plans. In your email, you state that your company is required to have a security plan as specified in § 172.800(b) of the HMR. You also state that § 172.704(c)(2) requires that a hazardous materials (hazmat) employee shall receive recurrent training at least once every three years. Lastly, you state that a hazmat employee must receive the in-depth security training required under § 172.704(a)(5) at least once every three years or—if the security plan for which training is required is revised during the three-year recurrent training cycle—within 90 days of implementation of the revised plan. Based on these statements, we have paraphrased your questions and answered them in the order you provided:

Q1. You ask whether revisions to a security plan—such as correcting misspellings—would require the retraining of a hazmat employee within 90 days of such a revision in order for a hazmat employer to comply with § 172.704(a)(5) and (c)(2).

A1. The answer is no. Editorial revisions to a security plan—including correcting misspellings—would not necessitate a hazmat employer to retrain a hazmat employee in order to comply with the recurrent training requirements specified in § 172.704(c)(2).

Q2. You ask whether clarifications that do not change the intent or actions within a security plan would necessitate a hazmat employer to retrain a hazmat employee in order to comply with the recurrent training requirements specified in § 172.704(c)(2).

A2. The answer is no. See answer A1.

I hope this information is helpful. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.

Sincerely,

T. Glenn Foster
Chief, Regulatory Review and Reinvention Branch
Standards and Rulemaking Division

172.704(a)(5), 172.704(c)(2), 172.800(b)

Regulation Sections

Section Subject
172.704 Training requirements
172.800 Purpose and applicability