58796 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Parts 119, 121, 135, and 145 

[Docket No.: FAA–2003–15085; Amendment 

Nos. 119–10, 121–316, 135–101, 145–24] 

RIN 2120–AG75 

Hazardous Materials Training 

Requirements 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Final rule. 

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) is amending its 

hazardous materials (hazmat) training 

requirements for certain air carriers and 

commercial operators. In addition, the 

FAA is requiring that certain repair 

stations provide documentation 

showing that persons handling hazmat 

for transportation have been trained, as 

required by the Department of 

Transportation’s Hazardous Materials 

Regulations (HMRs). The FAA is 

updating its regulations because hazmat 

transportation and the aviation industry 

have changed significantly since the 

FAA promulgated its hazmat regulations 

over 25 years ago. The rule will set clear 

hazmat training standards and ensure 

uniform compliance with hazmat 

training requirements. 

DATES: Effective Date: November 7, 

2005. SFAR Expiration Date: February 

7, 2007. Compliance Date: February 7, 

2007. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Janet McLaughlin, Office of Hazardous 

Materials, ADG–1, Federal Aviation 

Administration, 800 Independence 

Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20591; 

telephone (202) 267–8434. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Availability of Rulemaking Documents 

You can get an electronic copy using 

the Internet by: 

(1) Searching the Department of 

Transportation’s electronic Docket 

Management System (DMS) Web page 

(http://dms.dot.gov/search); 

(2) Visiting the Office of Rulemaking’s 

Web page at http://www.faa.gov/avr/ 

arm/index.cfm; or 

(3) Accessing the Government 

Printing Office’s Web page at http:// 

www.gpoaccess.gov/fr/index.html. 

You can also get a copy by submitting 

a request to the Federal Aviation 

Administration, Office of Rulemaking, 

ARM–1, 800 Independence Avenue 

SW., Washington, DC 20591, or by 

calling (202) 267–9680. Identify the 

amendment number or docket number 

of this rulemaking. 

Anyone is able to search the 

electronic form of all comments 

received into any of our dockets by the 

name of the individual submitting the 

comment (or signing the comment, if 

submitted on behalf of an association, 

business, labor union, etc.). You may 

review DOT’s complete Privacy Act 

statement in the Federal Register of 

April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477–19478), or 

you may visit http://dms.dot.gov. 

Small Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act 

The Small Business Regulatory 

Enforcement Fairness Act (SBREFA) of 

1996 requires the FAA to comply with 

small entity requests for information or 

advice about compliance with statutes 

and regulations within its jurisdiction. If 

you are a small entity and you have a 

question regarding this document, you 

may contact the local FAA official, or 

the person listed under FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT. You can find out 

more about SBREFA on the Internet at 

http://www.faa.gov/ 

regulations_policies/rulemaking/ 

sbre_act/. 

Terms and Abbreviations Frequently 

Used in This Document 

Note: For the purposes of this rulemaking 

the terms ‘‘air carrier,’’ ‘‘operator,’’ ‘‘air 

operator,’’ ‘‘carrier,’’ and ‘‘airline’’ are used 

synonymously to refer to part 121 or part 135 

operators. The term ‘‘hazardous material’’ is 

used synonymously with ‘‘dangerous goods.’’ 

AC—Advisory Circular 

ALPA—Air Line Pilots Association 

ATA—Air Transport Association of America, 

Inc. 

COMAT—Material owned or used by a 

certificate holder, commonly referred to as 

‘‘company material.’’ Material is only 

considered COMAT in transportation if it 

is being transported on the operator’s own 

aircraft. 

Hazmat—Hazardous material 

HMRs—Department of Transportation’s 

Hazardous Materials Regulations found in 

49 CFR parts 171 through 180 

ICAO—International Civil Aviation 

Organization 

ICAO TI—International Civil Aviation 

Organization Technical Instructions for the 

Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods By Air 

IATA—International Air Transport 

Association 

IATA DGR—International Air Transport 

Association Dangerous Goods Regulations 

NATA—National Air Transportation 

Association 

NPRM—Notice of Proposed Rulemaking 

NTSB—National Transportation Safety Board 

PHMSA—Pipeline and Hazardous Materials 

Safety Administration (formerly the 

Research and Special Programs 

Administration) 

RSPA—Research and Special Programs 

Administration (now the Pipeline and 

Hazardous Materials Safety 

Administration) 

SFAR—Special Federal Aviation Regulation 

TRF—Transport-related function, i.e., any 

function performed for the certificate 

holder relating to the acceptance, rejection, 

storage incidental to transport, handling, 

packaging of COMAT, loading, of items for 

transport on board an aircraft 

TSA—Transportation Security 

Administration 

UPS—United Parcel Service 

USPS—United States Postal Service 

Will-carry operator—An operator authorized 

in its operations specifications to carry 

hazmat 

Will-not-carry operator—An operator 

prohibited in its operations specifications 

from carrying hazmat that meets the 

definition of a hazardous material under 

the HMRs 

Table of Contents 

I. The Proposed Rule 

II. Background 

III. Statutory Authority 

IV. Overview of Changes in the Final Rule 

V. Discussion of Public Comments 

V.1. General 

V.2. Transition Period 

V.3. Clarification of Supervisory Training 

Requirements 

V.4. Constructive Knowledge 

V.5. Applicability/Transport-Related 

Function (TRF) 

V.6. New Hire/New Job Function 

V.7. Persons Working for More Than One 

Certificate Holder 

V.8. Recurrent Training 

V.9. Notice to Repair Stations 

V.10. Foreign Locations 

V.11. Recordkeeping Requirements 

V.11.A. Location 

V.11.B. Content 

V.12. Proposed Appendix N (Adopted as 

Appendix O) 

V.13. Training Method 

V.14. Single-Pilot Operations 

V.15. Repair Stations (Part 145)—General 

V.16. Application for Part 145 Certificate 

V.17. Notification of Hazardous Materials 

Authorizations 

VI. Section-by-Section Discussion of the 

Final Rule 

VII. Rulemaking Analysis and Notice 

VII.1. Paperwork Reduction Act 

VII.2. International Compatibility 

VII.3. Economic Evaluation Summary 

VII.4. Regulatory Flexibility Determination 

VII.5. International Trade Impact 

Assessment 

VII.6. Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

VII.7. Executive Order 13132, Federalism 

VII.8. Environmental Analysis 

VII.9. Regulations That Significantly Affect 

Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use 

I. The Proposed Rule 

On May 8, 2003, the FAA published 

a notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM) on hazardous material training 

requirements for certain air carriers, 

commercial operators, and repair 

stations (68 FR 24810). In that NPRM, 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 58797 

the FAA proposed to amend the manual 

and hazmat training regulations in parts 

121 and 135 to incorporate most of the 

guidance that is currently contained in 

Advisory Circulars (ACs). In addition, 

the FAA proposed to add requirements 

for part 145 repair stations so that the 

FAA could increase its oversight of the 

hazmat training that repair stations are 

required to conduct under 49 CFR part 

172. 

The comment period for the NPRM 

originally was scheduled to close July 7, 

2003, but was extended to September 5, 

2003 in response to public requests. See 

notice of extension of comment period 

published in the Federal Register on 

July 7, 2003 (68 FR 40206; July 7, 2003). 

The FAA received approximately 70 

comments on the NPRM, many of which 

raised concerns with some aspects of 

the proposal. 

II. Background 

As discussed in the preamble of the 

NPRM, hazmat transportation 

regulations have changed since 

regulations for hazmat training were 

first adopted over 25 years ago. The 

Department of Transportation (DOT) 

implemented the Hazardous Materials 

Regulations (HMRs), 49 CFR parts 171 

through 180 (41 FR 15972; April 15, 

1976), in part to address changes 

following deregulation of the airline 

industry in the 1970s. DOT regulations 

govern the domestic transportation of 

hazmat by all modes of transport. The 

international aviation community relies 

on the International Civil Aviation 

Organization (ICAO) to set the standards 

for the safe transport of dangerous goods 

by air. These standards are contained in 

the ‘‘Technical Instructions for the Safe 

Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air’’

(ICAO TI). The ICAO TI also establishes 

hazmat training standards for air 

operators. 

In the past, the FAA has used ACs as 

a way of helping air carriers and 

operators comply with the hazmat 

training requirements in the DOT 

HMRs. Information contained in ACs is 

not mandatory; it is advisory. This rule 

will incorporate existing guidance 

documents into regulations that can be 

uniformly enforced. 

The proposed rule identified persons 

working for, or on behalf of the part 121 

or part 135 operator who would need to 

receive hazmat training by the nature of 

the job description they hold or 

supervise. As used in the NPRM, the 

term ‘‘supervise’’ was intended to mean 

more than just being a designated 

supervisor. It was meant to include 

individuals with any degree of direct 

oversight over a function addressed by 

the proposed rule. This final rule 

clarifies that the term ‘‘supervise’’ only 

applies to those persons who have 

direct supervision over the job functions 

performed. 

Consistent with the NPRM, the final 

rule establishes a two-pronged training 

program—one for part 121 and part 135 

operators electing to transport hazmat 

(will-carry certificate holders), and the 

other for part 121 and part 135 operators 

electing not to transport hazmat (willnot-carry certificate holders). Will-carry 

certificate holders will have to conduct 

in-depth training for persons directly 

supervising or performing any of the 

following job functions involving items 

for transport on aircraft—acceptance, 

rejection, handling, storage incidental to 

transport, packaging of company 

materials owned or used by the 

certificate holder (known as COMAT), 

and loading. (Henceforth this list will be 

referred to as a transport-related 

function (TRF).) Will-not-carry 

certificate holders will be required to 

conduct training sufficient to enable the 

persons directly supervising or 

performing a TRF to identify material 

marked or labeled as hazmat, or material 

that is not marked or labeled as hazmat 

but possesses indicators that it might 

contain hazmat. Some possible 

indicators of hazmat include a hazard 

label or caution statement on the 

package with no accompanying 

shipping documentation, a notation 

such as ‘‘flammable paint,’’ without 

proper shipping paper declarations or 

labels or markings. 

The FAA also proposed to add 

requirements for part 145 repair stations 

that would increase oversight of 

compliance with DOT hazmat training 

regulations. The FAA proposed that, at 

the time of application for a part 145 

certificate or rating, a repair station 

would have to certify to the FAA that 

all hazmat employees, as defined in 49 

CFR 171.8, are trained under the HMRs, 

and that it is otherwise in compliance 

with the hazmat training requirements 

of the HMRs. This final rule modifies 

that proposal to require repair stations 

to submit a certification to the FAA that 

all hazmat employees are trained under 

the HMR prior to the FAA issuing a 

certificate, not at the time of 

application. 

In addition, the FAA proposed to 

amend part 145 by adding a requirement 

that repair stations notify each of its 

workers of the will-carry or will-notcarry status of the part 121 or part 135 

operators for which the repair station 

works. In the final rule the FAA adopts 

this requirement with some 

amendments. This notification would 

have to be done as soon as the repair 

station is informed of the part 121 or 

part 135 operator’s status. This 

requirement is intended to be the 

companion requirement to the proposed 

notification requirement for part 121 

and part 135 operators. In the final rule 

the FAA amends the proposed provision 

to require the repair station verify 

receipt of the notification and 

communicate this status to its 

employees, contractors, or 

subcontractors that handle or replace 

aircraft components or other items 

regulated by 49 CFR parts 171 through 

180 prior to performing work for, or on 

behalf of the part 121 or part 135 

operator. 

III. Statutory Authority 

The FAA has broad statutory 

authority to regulate for aviation safety. 

Specifically, the FAA has authority 

under 49 U.S.C. 44701(a)(5) to prescribe 

‘‘regulations and minimum standards 

for other practices, methods, and 

procedures the Administrator finds 

necessary for safety in air commerce and 

national security.’’ Also, 49 U.S.C. 

44701(b)(1) states ‘‘Prescribing 

Minimum Safety Standards.—The 

Administrator may prescribe minimum 

safety standards for—(1) an air carrier to 

whom a certificate is issued under 

section 44705 of this title; * * *.’’ In 

addition, the FAA is required to carry 

out its duties in a way that ‘‘best tends 

to reduce or eliminate the possibility or 

recurrence of accidents in air 

transportation’’ (49 U.S.C. 44701(c)). 

IV. Overview of Changes in the Final 

Rule 

In response to public comments, the 

FAA is making the following changes in 

the final rule (discussed in detail under 

‘‘VI. Section-by-Section Discussion of 

the Final Rule’’)—

• Clarifying that the term ‘‘transportrelated function (TRF)’’ is merely a 

shorthand reference used in the NPRM 

preamble and the final rule preamble to 

refer to the list of covered job functions 

contained in §§ 121.1001 (proposed as 

§§ 121.801) and 135.501. This term, as 

amended in the final rule preamble, is 

used to avoid repeating the list 

‘‘acceptance, rejection, storage 

incidental to transport, handling, 

packaging of COMAT (company 

material) and loading of items for 

transport on board an aircraft.’’ The 

FAA did not intend for the term to 

extend beyond the list of covered job 

functions. The term transport-related 

function is not a separate regulatory 

term so it is not defined in the 

regulations. 

• Removing the terms ‘‘unloading’’

and ‘‘carriage’’ from the list of covered 

job functions proposed in §§ 121.801 

58798 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

(adopted as § 121.1001) and 135.501. 

The term ‘‘unloading’’ is removed 

because it is not a job function that 

needs to be addressed through the 

FAA’s hazmat training program, since 

the item is being removed from the 

aircraft and thus would not pose a 

danger to the aircraft. If an item is 

subsequently loaded onto an aircraft, a 

trained person would have to perform 

the loading function. Based on 

comments from industry, the FAA 

believes it could be confusing to include 

the term ‘‘carriage’’ in the list of covered 

job functions in § 121.1001 and 

§ 135.501. The term ‘‘carriage’’ is 

removed. The FAA does not believe the 

removal of this term to be significant 

because all of the terms covered by 

carriage are already listed as covered 

functions. 

• Closely aligning the training 

modules in Appendix O (proposed as 

Appendix N) of part 121 with the 

standards in the 2005 edition of the 

ICAO TI and the IATA DGR. This will 

allow for workers to be trained in 

accordance with the job function they 

perform for part 121 or part 135 

operators. The final rule does not 

prescribe exactly how each worker is to 

be trained. To this end, the FAA is 

removing the training ‘‘modules’’ and 

specifying minimum aspects of training 

for different job functions. The part 121 

and part 135 operators will still be 

responsible for assessing the breadth 

and depth of each worker’s training 

needs based on his or her job functions. 

• Modifying proposed §§ 121.801 

(adopted as § 121.1001) and 135.501 

that would have required hazmat 

training to apply to all persons involved 

in supervising a hazmat job function. In 

the final rule, the FAA is limiting 

hazmat training to ‘‘direct’’ supervisors. 

This amendment eliminates the need to 

train persons up the supervisory chain 

who are not actively engaged in job 

functions that require hazmat training. 

• Amending the recurrent hazmat 

training requirement currently 

contained in 121.401 and 135.323 by 

relocating it to §§ 121.1001 and 135.501 

and amending the annual retraining 

cycle to a 24-month cycle. This change 

is consistent with the International Civil 

Aviation Organization’s Technical 

Instructions on the Safe Transport of 

Dangerous Goods (ICAO TI) and the 

International Aviation Transport 

Association’s Dangerous Goods 

Recommendations (IATA DGR) and 

(JAROPS) requirements. 

• Clarifying that computer-based 

training (CBT) and distance-learning 

techniques, such as interactive video 

training, are acceptable means for 

satisfying the training specified in 

Appendix O of part 121, provided there 

is an opportunity for trainees to interact 

with an instructor to answer all 

questions prior to certifying completion 

of the training. Interaction may be in 

person or via telecommunications 

connection (e-mail, telephone, etc). 

• Amending the recordkeeping 

provisions of §§ 121.1007 (proposed as 

§ 121.804) and 135.507 to permit hazmat 

training records to be maintained 

electronically and off-site as long as 

they can be transmitted to a worker’s 

place of work upon request. 

• Harmonizing the requirements for 

the content of hazmat training records 

with the Pipeline and Hazardous 

Materials Safety Administrations’s 

(PHMSA’s) HMR, the ICAO TI, and the 

IATA DGR requirements. The FAA is 

deleting the requirement that the 

training records contain a statement 

signed by a person designated by the 

Director of Training. 

• Removing the specific references to 

‘‘aircraft dispatcher,’’ ‘‘flight instructor,’’

and ‘‘check airman’’ in Tables 1 and 2 

in Appendix O of part 121 (proposed as 

Appendix N). The type of hazmat 

training an employee receives is based 

on the job functions he or she performs 

for, or on behalf of the part 121 or part 

135 operator, not his or her job 

description. 

• Clarifying that part 145 repair 

station personnel are required to be 

trained to a part 121 or part 135 

operator’s hazmat program only when 

they are performing or directly 

supervising a job function listed in 

§ 121.1001 or § 135.501, for or on behalf 

of that part 121 or part 135 operator, 

including the aircraft loading function. 

The repair stations that meet the 

definition of a ‘‘hazmat employer’’ (49 

CFR 171.8) must meet existing training 

requirements under 49 CFR part 172 

subpart H. 

• Requiring that a part 145 certificate 

holder inform employees, contractors, 

or subcontractors that handle or replace 

aircraft components or other items 

regulated by 49 CFR parts 171 through 

180 of the will-carry or will-not-carry 

status of the part 119 certificate holders 

for which it performs work. 

• Amending the final rule to require 

that the repair stations certify to the 

FAA that they comply with 49 CFR 

hazmat training requirements (if 

applicable) prior to the FAA’s issuance 

of a part 145 certificate or rating. This 

requirement will replace the proposed 

requirement that a repair station provide 

this certification upon application for a 

certificate. 

V. Discussion of Public Comments 

V.1. General 

Comments 

Both Ameristar Air Cargo and 

Express.Net Airlines commented that 

the proposed dispatcher training should 

also apply to anyone who performs a 

similar function (i.e., flight following or 

flight locating). Ameristar stated that, 

‘‘flight followers perform the function of 

operational control on behalf of the 

Director of Operations and should be 

required to have some training in regard 

to their duties associated with the 

transport of hazardous materials.’’

FAA Response 

The requirement for hazmat training 

is determined by the employee’s job 

function as specified in §§ 121.1001 and 

135.501, not the job description. If the 

person performing the job description of 

aircraft dispatcher, flight instructor or 

check airman also performs a job 

function identified in § 121.1001 or 

§ 135.501, he or she must complete the 

applicable portion of the part 121 or 

part 135 operator’s approved hazmat 

training program. Crewmembers have 

specific training requirements in 

Appendix O, regardless of the other 

functions they perform relating to cargo 

onboard the aircraft. A person 

performing any job function listed in 

§ 121.1001 or § 135.501 must meet the 

same requirement whether specifically 

listed in the current § 121.401 or 

§ 135.323. The reference to pilots, flight 

engineers, flight attendants and 

dispatchers in proposed Appendix N 

has been amended in the final rule. This 

appendix, adopted as Appendix O, 

identifies training associated with 

applicable job functions and is closely 

aligned with the 2005 edition of the 

ICAO TI and the International Air 

Transport Association Dangerous Goods 

Regulations (IATA DGR). Dispatcher 

training is currently referenced in 

§§ 121.401(a)(1) and 135.323(a)(1). In 

the final rule the FAA is amending these 

sections only to remove the reference to 

hazardous materials training. The 

hazmat training requirements are 

relocated in 14 CFR subpart Z of part 

121 and subpart K of 135. However, the 

other training requirements referenced 

by §§ 121.401 and 135.323 remain 

unchanged. The requirement for each 

crewmember, aircraft dispatcher, flight 

instructor and check airman to be 

adequately trained to perform his or her 

duties other than hazmat job functions 

must be retained in § 121.401(a)(1) and 

§ 135.323(a)(1) to maintain the 

requirements for flight and proficiency 

training identified in Appendixes E and 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 58799 

F. This requirement is not changed in 

this rulemaking. 

Comments 

The Air Transport Association of 

America, Inc. (ATA) stated that the FAA 

should address non-compliance such as 

that brought to light in the ValuJet 

accident, through appropriate 

enforcement. Other commenters noted 

that the NPRM imposes additional 

training requirements on carriers, when 

the FAA could far more effectively 

reduce undeclared and improperly 

declared hazmat by improving public 

education efforts towards shippers who 

offer hazmat for air transportation. 

FAA Response 

The FAA uses the enforcement 

process to address issues of 

noncompliance with FAA and DOT 

regulations and will continue to do so. 

Since 2000, FAA Hazardous Material 

Specialists have inspected over 8,000 

shipping companies and conducted over 

2,000 visits to shipper facilities, trade 

associations and various conferences to 

educate and inform shippers of their 

responsibilities under the HMRs. 

However, even with this public 

education campaign, the FAA has 

initiated 222 investigations for 

accepting hazardous materials 

improperly from January 2000 to 

December 2003. These investigations 

include both instances where hazmats 

were improperly labeled/marked or 

packaged, and instances where material 

was shipped undeclared and later found 

to be hazmat. Taking into account that 

noncompliance with the regulations 

continues despite the FAA’s current 

training requirements and public 

education efforts, the FAA has adopted 

the revised training rules to improve the 

hazmat training program given to those 

individuals performing the job functions 

listed in §§ 121.1001 and 135.501. The 

FAA believes that a hazmat training 

requirement that includes clearly 

enforceable hazmat recognition training 

for both will-carry and will-not-carry 

certificate holders is a critical step 

towards reducing the number of 

improperly prepared or undeclared 

shipments. Recognition training for 

will-not-carry certificate holders is 

currently administered in accordance 

with advisory material; thus there are no 

regulatory standards. Enforceable 

hazmat training standards serve the dual 

purpose of establishing a mandatory 

hazmat training program with uniform 

requirements, and reducing the 

potential that ‘‘discoverable’’ hazmat 

shipments will move undetected. A 

‘‘discoverable’’ hazmat shipment is a 

shipment that is likely to be flagged by 

a trained individual as a potential 

hazmat shipment, even though it is not 

properly prepared for shipment or is 

shipped undeclared. The FAA 

recognizes that not all improperly 

shipped hazmats or undeclared hazmats 

may be discoverable, even by a trained 

individual. 

Additionally, the FAA notes that 

outreach to the aviation industry and 

public education has not been effective 

in eliminating the problem of improper 

shipments of oxygen generators. Since 

the Valujet tragedy in 1996, the FAA has 

investigated both operators and repair 

stations and has documented over 60 

instances of improperly transported 

oxygen generators for which the FAA is 

collecting over $3 million in civil 

penalties. Oxygen generators are a key 

piece of equipment used in the aviation 

industry and are often shipped as 

COMAT without complying with DOT’s 

hazmat regulations. 

The FAA also has been actively 

engaged in enforcing the hazmat 

regulations. It has collected over $6 

million in hazmat civil penalties for 

violations from U.S.-certificated air 

carriers from 2000 to 2003. One part 121 

operator pled guilty in September 2003, 

to willfully not providing required 

hazmat information to its pilots. 

Another part 121 operator entered into 

a plea agreement with the U.S. Attorney 

for the Southern District of Florida in 

December 1999, which included agreedto ‘‘statement of facts’’ describing 

hazmat infractions. One repair station 

was convicted of willfully not providing 

hazmat training in 1999. 

Comment 

ATA commented that the NPRM 

would not improve safety and is broader 

than necessary to address the primary 

safety objective cited—prevention of 

another ValuJet-type accident caused by 

inadequately trained contractors. 

FAA Response 

Valujet was a will-not-carry part 121 

operator, thus the oxygen generators 

should never have been placed on board 

a Valujet aircraft for shipment as cargo. 

The FAA did not have any enforceable 

hazmat training requirements for part 

121 will-not-carry certificate holders. 

This final rule corrects that deficiency. 

The commenter is correct that this rule 

addresses issues and concerns 

discovered through our oversight that 

are broader than the issues raised by the 

ValuJet accident. 

Comment 

United Parcel Service (UPS) 

challenged the FAA’s statutory 

authority to promulgate requirements 

for training non-hazmat employees. UPS 

commented that the FAA has not 

articulated ‘‘a reasonable basis for 

requiring a certificate holder to provide 

hazardous materials training to 

employees who do not perform or 

supervise any functions regulated under 

the HMR or who do not otherwise 

directly affect hazardous materials 

transportation safety.’’

FAA Response 

The FAA has broad statutory 

authority to regulate for aviation safety. 

Specifically, the FAA has authority 

under 49 U.S.C. 44701(a)(5) to prescribe 

‘‘regulations and minimum standards 

for other practices, methods, and 

procedures the Administrator finds 

necessary for safety in air commerce and 

national security.’’ Also, 49 U.S.C. 

44701(b)(1) states ‘‘Prescribing 

Minimum Safety Standards.—The 

Administrator may prescribe minimum 

safety standards for—(1) an air carrier to 

whom a certificate is issued under 

section 44705 of this title; * * *.’’ In 

addition, the FAA is required to carry 

out its duties in a way that ‘‘best tends 

to reduce or eliminate the possibility or 

recurrence of accidents in air 

transportation’’ (49 U.S.C. 44701(c)). 

Consistent with its statutory 

authority, the FAA has previously 

required hazmat training for non-hazmat 

employees working for part 119 

certificate holders operating under part 

135. (See 38 FR 14914; June 7, 1973.) 

The FAA believes that prior and current 

hazmat enforcement actions and 

accidents by will-not-carry operators 

transporting hazmat demonstrate the 

need for will-not-carry training. 

Additionally, the FAA notes that the 

industry’s own International Air 

Transport Association’s (IATA’s) 

Dangerous Goods Regulations paragraph 

1.5.0.1 states that the ICAO TI and IATA 

DGR include training for persons with 

various responsibilities in processing 

cargo (not necessarily involving 

dangerous goods). Thus, given our 

expertise and that the aviation 

industry’s own representatives have 

determined such training is important, 

the FAA is including it in this change. 

Comment 

Several commenters addressed the 

need to regulate or certify the hazmat 

training companies providing training 

under this rule. Express.Net Airlines 

stated that ‘‘regulation should mandate 

a skill level for instructors in the same 

manner the regulation mandates skill 

level for management personnel 

required for operations conducted under 

parts 121 and 135 from Part 119.65.’’

Express.Net believed that the FAA 

58800 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

should have a program that sets forth 

the basic knowledge a person should 

possess before providing hazmat 

instruction. Express.Net noted that the 

European community requires operators 

that load, unload or transport dangerous 

goods to have a person in the position 

of Dangerous Goods Safety Advisor. 

COSTHA commented that the NPRM 

should be amended to assess, monitor 

and certify professional schools that 

would be authorized to provide hazmat 

training. It urged the FAA to amend the 

NPRM to state that in lieu of developing 

an in-house training program, carriers 

(both will-carry and will-not-carry), 

repair stations and any other person 

affected by the regulations would be in 

compliance by completing a training 

program offered by a FAA-certified 

hazmat training company. 

FAA Response 

The comment suggesting that FAA 

establish standards for instructors or 

instructional schools is outside the 

scope of this rulemaking. Additionally, 

the comment suggesting a new required 

position for operators is also outside the 

scope of this rulemaking. 

Comment 

The overwhelming majority of the 

part 121 and part 135 operators 

requested flexibility in designing and 

determining curriculum, determining 

the depth of training required for the 

function the individual employee 

performs, the method of delivery, length 

of training and method of testing. 

FAA Response 

The FAA recognizes that part 121 and 

part 135 operators require flexibility to 

accomplish the required hazmat 

training. The FAA notes that it is the 

part 121 and part 135 operators’

responsibility to ensure that the type, 

duration and delivery method of 

training is adequate and appropriate for 

each worker. The approved hazmat 

training program may be provided by 

company training programs, computer 

based programs, self-guided compact 

disk (CD) training programs, outside 

training firms or consultants, or any 

other type of organization offering 

training that meets the objective training 

requirements. Hazmat training may be 

provided by the operator or other public 

or private sources, including training 

classes that are offered by the IATA to 

the extent that the IATA training 

addresses the training specified in the 

FAA-approved hazmat training 

program. This FAA final rule will 

require that, regardless of the teaching 

method used, the operator must provide 

a method to respond to students’

questions prior to certifying completion 

of the training. E-mail is an acceptable 

means of communicating and 

responding to questions. 

Comment 

UPS asked that the FAA confirm in 

any subsequent notice that operators 

only need to submit an outline of their 

proposed training programs rather than 

the actual training curriculum. 

FAA Response 

Section 121.401(a)(1) applies to all 

training as currently written, including 

hazmat. Once the final rule is fully 

effective, § 121.401(a)(1) will only apply 

to training other than hazmat training. 

New §§ 121.1003 (proposed as 

§ 121.802) and 135.503 will contain the 

hazmat training requirement. As part of 

the hazmat training requirement, part 

121 and part 135 operators are required 

to obtain FAA approval of the hazmat 

training program. The current practice 

of submitting an outline sufficient to 

provide an overview of the training 

program will suffice for purposes of 

approval, unless it is necessary to see 

the full hazmat training program to 

understand the curriculum. 

Comment 

The Air Line Pilots Association 

(ALPA) urged the FAA to clarify a 

concept called ‘‘will-not-accept’’ that is 

different than ‘‘will-not-carry.’’ ALPA 

believed that the two concepts are 

different because ‘‘will-not-carry’’

means no hazmat is allowed on the 

aircraft, while ‘‘will-not-accept’’ would 

allow carriers to carry their own hazmat 

as COMAT from point to point on their 

aircraft, but they would not be able to 

accept hazmat shipments from outside 

entities. ALPA believed that clarifying 

the three levels of classification (willnot-carry, will-not-accept, and willcarry) would be useful in allowing a 

carrier to develop a training program 

that would meet the needs of its 

operation. 

FAA Response 

The FAA only proposed will-carry 

and will-not-carry hazmat training. The 

part 119 certificate holder’s operations 

specifications will either include an 

authorization permitting the certificate 

holder to handle and transport hazmat 

(will-carry certificate holder) or a 

prohibition against handling and 

transporting hazmat (will-not-carry 

certificate holder). There are no other 

options. Officially, the FAA has never 

endorsed a concept called ‘‘will-notaccept’’ that would allow carriers 

classified as will-not-carry certificate 

holders to carry hazmat as COMAT. If 

the COMAT is a hazardous material, it 

may be carried only by a will-carry 

certificate holder. A will-carry 

certificate holder may choose to limit its 

acceptance and transport of hazardous 

materials to COMAT only; however, the 

company makes this decision. The 

certificate holder is considered a ‘‘willcarry’’ operator, and the will-carry 

training program applies. 

Comment 

ATA noted that the procedures for 

handling dangerous goods, once the 

Transportation Security Administration 

(TSA) finds them, are currently under 

active discussion between the TSA and 

the carriers. The commenter went on to 

say that it is unclear what role carrier 

employees will have in handling such 

goods, or whether that responsibility 

will be handled completely or partially 

by a third-party contractor. ATA urged 

the FAA to reconsider the need for any 

additional training for carrier personnel 

who check-in passengers and luggage, 

and ensure that the rule takes into 

account ongoing developments in the 

TSA’s role. 

FAA Response 

In drafting the final rule the FAA was 

cognizant of Pipeline and Hazardous 

Materials Safety Administration 

(PHMSA) (formerly Research and 

Special Programs Administration 

(RSPA)) and TSA activities in the area 

of hazmat transport by aircraft. On 

February 28, 2003, RSPA (now PHMSA) 

issued a ‘‘Formal interpretation of 

regulations’’ (68 FR 9735) clarifying that 

hazmat regulations apply to carry-on 

and checked baggage. Additionally, the 

RSPA interpretation specifically 

identified the point at which the carryon baggage has been offered by the 

passenger for transportation and the 

point at which checked baggage has 

been accepted by the airlines for 

transportation. Carry-on baggage 

(including items on his/her person) is 

considered offered for transportation 

when the passenger tenders the baggage 

to screening personnel at an airport 

security screening checkpoint or 

otherwise attempts to proceed through 

the checkpoint with the hazardous 

material on his or her person. A 

passenger offers carry-on baggage for 

transportation, and represents it as fit 

for moving by aircraft, when the baggage 

is placed on the X-ray machine 

conveyer belt, handed to the baggage 

screening personnel, or placed in a bin 

or tray for examination by screening 

personnel, or when the passenger 

physically passes through the security 

checkpoint with the baggage (including 

items on his or her person). Carry-on 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 58801 

baggage is accepted by an air carrier 

when the airline accepts the boarding 

pass of the passenger while boarding the 

flight. The passenger is responsible for 

ensuring compliance for carry-on 

baggage with the HMR from the point of 

offer and at all times until 

transportation is complete. 

Checked baggage is offered to the 

carrier at the point the passenger 

presents the baggage for acceptance by 

the carrier. This can occur at curbside 

check-in, at the ticket counter at the 

airport, or when the passenger presents 

the bag to screening personnel for 

explosive detection screening as a 

prerequisite to presentation to the 

carrier. When the baggage is tendered at 

curbside check-in or the ticket counter 

to the air carrier, the baggage is 

considered to have been accepted when 

the air carrier issues a baggage claim 

ticket for the checked baggage. 

Given the various points at which 

baggage is considered offered for 

transport, and the varied types of 

workers that might accept baggage, it is 

critical that certificate holder’s workers 

receive the proper hazmat training so 

that baggage can be properly screened. 

At the time of this writing, TSA checked 

baggage screeners are instructed to point 

out possible unauthorized hazmat items 

discovered in baggage to airline 

representatives so the airline 

representatives can determine if the 

items can be transported under the 

hazmat regulations. The certificate 

holder must report any unauthorized 

hazmat discovered in checked baggage 

to the FAA under PHMSA’s rules at 49 

CFR 175.31. In order for a worker to be 

capable of performing this job function, 

he or she must have completed hazmat 

training. 

Comments 

The National Transportation Safety 

Board (NTSB) commented that in May 

1996, it issued Safety Recommendation 

A–96–26, which called for the FAA to 

require air carriers to revise as necessary 

their practices and training for accepting 

passenger baggage and freight 

shipments, and for identifying 

undeclared or unauthorized hazardous 

materials that are offered for transport. 

The NTSB voiced concern that the 

proposed training requirements would 

apply only to passenger air carriers. The 

NTSB urged the FAA to apply the 

training requirements to cargo carriers 

and cargo-only operations too. 

FAA Response 

The FAA has contacted the NTSB and 

informed them that the proposed 

training requirements would apply to 

both passenger and cargo air carriers. 

The final rule does not change this fact. 

Comments 

Integrated cargo carriers like UPS and 

FedEx Express were concerned that the 

proposals were drafted so broadly that, 

literally interpreted, they could require 

training of drivers in the carriers’

ground operations. These carriers were 

concerned because their ground 

operations have not been covered under 

the FAA’s training requirements in the 

past, although they are subject to 

PHMSA’s hazmat training requirements. 

UPS and FedEx note that ground 

operations may well be outside the 

jurisdiction of the FAA. The commenter 

added that if the FAA intended the 

proposals to extend to those drivers, the 

costs of the additional training time 

would be enormous, with no 

commensurate safety benefit. Moreover, 

such coverage could conflict with the 

jurisdiction of other Federal agencies, 

and it would be problematic if FAA 

approval were required for a small 

portion of an otherwise extensive 

training process used to qualify drivers 

for their duties on-road. 

FAA Response 

Fed Ex and UPS are part 121 

operators and both accept many types of 

hazmat for air transportation as well as 

transportation by rail and motor vehicle. 

The key to determining whom to train 

is to delineate which party is 

responsible for accepting a package for 

air transportation. This fact is consistent 

with current regulations. If a part 121 or 

part 135 operator’s truck drivers are 

accepting property for air 

transportation, they must be trained in 

accordance with this rule. However, if 

another employee performs that job 

function for the part 121 or part 135 

operator, then the truck driver would 

not have to be trained in accordance 

with this rule. For instance, a truck 

driver who is required to perform the 

function of acceptance of a package for 

air transport would have to be trained 

for performing that function. This is the 

same requirement as for a person at the 

sort facility performing the same 

function. In this case, if the truck driver 

is not responsible for performing the 

acceptance of a package for air 

shipment, and the certificate holder was 

relying on the truck driver to accept the 

package for only motor vehicle 

transport, then the truck driver does not 

need to be trained in the certificate 

holder’s program. It is the function 

being performed or directly supervised 

that mandates the training requirement, 

not the job designation. 

Comment 

The Regional Airline Association 

(RAA) noted that after the Valujet 

accident the FAA invested heavily in 

the Air Transportation Oversight System 

(ATOS), which is an FAA oversight 

process that assesses an airline’s safety 

attributes beyond strict regulatory 

compliance. RAA stated that ATOS was 

intended to raise the level of safety in 

the industry without additional 

regulations. RAA then questioned 

whether this proposal and the Part 60 

proposal to codify extensive advisory 

material are a step back from the FAA’s 

earlier commitment to the ATOS 

concept. RAA asked whether all of the 

FAA’s advisory and field policy 

materials will be codified. 

FAA Response 

The FAA codifies voluntary standards 

when it believes it is in the best interest 

of safety to do so. In this case, 

hazardous materials are of significant 

concern in air transportation because of 

the potentially devastating 

consequences in the event of an 

accident due to an improperly 

transported hazmat. 

V.2. Transition Period 

Comments 

AmAv, Inc., ATA, and UPS voiced 

concern that 15 months may not be 

enough time to develop the training 

program and have it approved by the 

FAA. In particular these commenters 

were concerned about what to do if the 

Principal Operations Inspector (POI) is 

not able to complete a review and 

approval of the program within the 

specified time frame. AmAv, Inc. also 

noted that having the POI approve the 

program would be a substantial increase 

in workload and some Flight Standards 

District Offices (FSDOs) are already 

overburdened and understaffed. UPS 

said that a certificate holder’s current 

training program should remain in effect 

pending the FAA’s approval of the 

revised training program. 

FAA Response 

The commenters raised several 

concerns that demonstrated some 

misunderstanding about the proposed 

rule. First, the POI will not be approving 

Hazardous Material Programs that 

include hazmat training. POIs will 

continue to approve the general 

operator’s training program covered by 

§ 121.401 or § 121.135. With regard to 

hazmat training, the POI will ‘‘receive’’

the training program information from 

part 121 and part 135 operators and 

submit it for review to the appropriate 

Regional Hazardous Material Branch 

58802 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

Manager in the FAA’s Regional Security 

and Hazardous Materials Offices. This is 

consistent with current practice. The 

Hazardous Materials Branch Manager 

currently reviews the carrier’s hazmat 

training program and will continue to be 

responsible for approving it and 

relaying that information back to the 

POI. 

Second, part 121 and part 135 

operators do not have to be concerned 

about having to implement the hazmat 

training program before it is approved 

by the FAA. Certificate holders are 

permitted to continue using their 

existing FAA approved training 

programs during the 15-month 

transition period. As provided in SFAR 

99, ‘‘during the transition period, these 

certificate holders can continue to 

comply with the current requirements 

or comply with the new requirements.’’

The FAA believes that the 15-month 

transition period is a sufficient time 

period. 

Third, incorporating the changes into 

the existing hazmat training program 

should not be difficult. The FAA chose 

15 months as a transition period 

because it believes that the time period 

is sufficient to allow certificate holders 

to include any changes necessary due to 

this final rule into their existing 

mandatory 12-month annual recurrent 

training. Once this rule goes into effect, 

the recurrent training requirement is 

amended from annually to every 24 

months. Since the hazmat training 

provision had been incorporated into 

the certificate holder’s overall training 

provisions in §§ 121.401 and 135.323, 

the recurrent training requirement for 

hazmat had been aligned with the 

certificate holder’s other recurrent 

training requirements for flight and 

proficiency training. The final rule 

amendment aligns the FAA’s hazmat 

recurrent training provision with longstanding international recommendations 

and current industry practice for hazmat 

recurrent training. Thus, hazmat 

training and flight and proficiency 

training are now on different cycles. The 

movement from annual recurrent 

hazmat training to recurrent hazmat 

training every 24 months also aligns 

FAA requirements with the cycle for 

regulatory updates and changes 

followed by ICAO, IATA and the United 

Nations Subcommittee on the Transport 

of Dangerous Goods. The requirement to 

provide recurrent training every 24 

months should provide the certificate 

holder with a streamlined process for 

revising and updating hazmat training 

programs. 

Finally, the FAA does not believe that 

the changes necessitated by this rule 

will be as dramatic as the part 121 and 

part 135 operators foretell. Prior to 

publication of the NPRM, the FAA 

surveyed will-carry and will-not-carry 

operators with FAA-approved hazmat 

training programs to determine if the 

content of their training programs 

would be in compliance with the 

proposals in the NPRM. The FAA also 

randomly reviewed FAA-approved 

hazmat training programs currently in 

operations manuals of both will-carry 

and will-not-carry operators. These 

programs also were all found either to 

be completely adequate in content as 

compared to the proposed rule or would 

require only minor amendments. 

Thus, the FAA anticipates that given 

the changes in the final rule certificate 

holders will not require significant 

changes to the current hazmat training 

program curriculum. In fact, most part 

121 and part 135 operators adhere to the 

ICAO TI and the IATA DGR training 

requirements as an industry standard, 

and this final rule is closely aligned 

with the ICAO TI and IATA DGR 

training requirements that will be 

effective January 1, 2005. Therefore, 

certificate holders adhering to the ICAO 

TI and IATA DGR requirements will 

have programs that currently meet both 

the industry standards and the FAA’s 

regulatory standards. IATA 

(International Air Transport 

Association) represents over 270 airlines 

operating under the flags of almost as 

many nations comprising 95% of the 

international scheduled air traffic. 

IATA’s resolution 618 requires all 

member airlines to adhere to the 

following requirements. 

In scheduled and/or unscheduled 

operations, no dangerous goods are 

permitted to be accepted and carried 

unless they comply fully with the 

international standards and 

recommended practices of Annex 18 to 

the Convention on International Civil 

Aviation—’’The Safe Transport of 

Dangerous Goods by Air’’ and its 

associated Technical Instructions as 

reflected in the ‘‘IATA Dangerous Goods 

Regulations.’’

Through IATA, airlines individual 

networks function as a worldwide 

system. Due to this business practice, 

even smaller non-member airlines that 

interline with IATA carriers must meet 

all of the member requirements or their 

cargo cannot be interlined in the cargo 

system. 

V.3. Clarification of Supervisory 

Training Requirements 

Comments 

UPS, Continental, and ATA were 

concerned that the proposed 

requirement to train the supervisors of 

employees who perform a hazmat 

function was too broad. UPS stated that 

the NPRM would require training for 

‘‘every employee of a certificate holder 

with any supervisory responsibilities 

whatsoever,’’ even a ‘‘certificate holder’s 

chief executive officer, even though that 

person may not perform a single 

function directly affecting hazardous 

materials safety.’’ UPS also commented 

that the FAA has not articulated a 

‘‘reasonable basis for requiring a 

certificate holder to provide hazardous 

materials training to employees who do 

not perform or supervise any functions 

regulated under the HMR or who do not 

otherwise directly affect hazardous 

materials transportation safety.’’

ATA stated that the ‘‘definition of 

supervisor would sweep in hundreds of 

supervisory personnel whose 

responsibilities rarely if ever bring them 

in contact with hazmat.’’ ATA added 

that covered supervisors would include 

‘‘all levels of carrier management at an 

airport, as well as the corporate 

management and officers to whom they 

report * * *. Such broad applicability 

to supervisors without regard to their 

responsibilities regarding hazmat is 

unnecessary to ensure safety and an 

unreasonable burden on the carriers.’’

FAA Response 

The FAA agrees that the definition of 

the term ‘‘supervisor’’ as used in the 

NPRM was too broad. In the final rule, 

the FAA is adding the term ‘‘direct’’ to 

qualify the term ‘‘supervisor’’ in every 

place where it is used in the new 

hazmat training regulations. This 

change is necessary to clarify that only 

the ‘‘direct’’ supervisor of a worker 

performing any of the job functions in 

§ 121.1001 (proposed as § 121.801) or 

§ 135.501 for, or on behalf of the 

certificate holder is required to 

complete the part 121 or part 135 

operator’s FAA-approved training 

program. This amendment should 

address the issues raised in the 

comments. 

V.4. Constructive Knowledge 

Comments 

A number of commenters (Northwest 

Airlines, UPS, Southwest, United 

Airlines, Delta Airlines, and ATA) 

voiced concerns with the proposed 

requirement to train people to identify 

material as hazmat that is not properly 

labeled and marked as a hazmat. These 

commenters asked the FAA to provide 

a trigger list that would help them train 

their employees in this regard. UPS 

commented that the ‘‘development of 

clear and well-conceived indicia of 

constructive knowledge is essential to 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 58803 

enabling air carriers to implement 

effective training with respect to 

undeclared hazardous materials.’’ UPS 

was concerned that the proposed rule 

would leave certificate holders guessing 

at what indicators the FAA will deem 

sufficient to place a carrier on notice 

that a package may contain hazardous 

materials. United Airlines noted that the 

FAA needed to coordinate with the 

DOT’s Office of Intermodalism, which is 

in the process of developing a definition 

of the term ‘‘constructive knowledge.’’

ATA commented that training revisions 

should not be completed until DOT 

guidance on determining the presence 

of undeclared hazmat is publicly 

available and preferably commented 

upon. 

FAA Response 

Many commenters raised the issue of 

what constitutes ‘‘constructive 

knowledge’’ of the presence of 

hazardous materials in a shipment, in 

the context of enabling the trained 

person to recognize items that contain, 

or may contain, hazardous materials 

regulated under the HMRs. In a 1998 

interpretation published in the Federal 

Register (63 FR 30411–30412; June 4, 

1998), RSPA (now PHMSA) used the 

term ‘‘constructive knowledge’’ to 

express the ‘‘knowingly’’ standard in 49 

U.S.C. 5123(a)(1)(B) that a person ‘‘acts 

knowingly’’ when ‘‘a reasonable person 

acting in the circumstances and 

exercising reasonable care’’’’ would 

have ‘‘actual knowledge of the facts 

giving rise to the violation.’’ RSPA also 

stated, ‘‘all relevant facts must be 

considered to determine whether or not 

a reasonable person acting in the 

circumstances and exercising reasonable 

care would realize the presence of 

hazardous materials.’’ In addition, RSPA 

stated, ‘‘Information concerning the 

contents of suspicious packages must be 

pursued to determine whether 

hazardous materials have been 

improperly offered. A carrier’s 

employee who accepts packages for 

transport must be trained to recognize a 

‘suspicious package’ * * *.’’ Id. 

In 2001, Fed Ex asked DOT to develop 

further guidance on what constitutes 

‘‘constructive knowledge’’ that a carrier 

is deemed to have of the presence of 

hazardous materials when the carrier 

accepts a shipment for transportation. 

DOT held a public meeting on June 19, 

2002, and is considering the numerous 

oral and written comments in this 

proceeding (Docket No. OST–01–

10380). 

In the context of this final rule, the 

FAA is not specifying detailed hazmat 

training content. Should DOT or 

PHMSA issue a further interpretation on 

‘‘constructive knowledge,’’ certificate 

holders would be authorized to adjust 

their training content accordingly. 

Hazmat training program content will 

always have to be adjusted as hazmat 

regulatory changes become effective. 

These adjustments are the responsibility 

of the certificate holder. 

The practice that an operator’s staff be 

adequately trained to assist them to 

identify and detect undeclared 

dangerous goods has been an industry 

standard in the IATA DGR for over 10 

years. The IATA DGR information is 

intended to prevent undeclared 

dangerous goods in cargo from being 

loaded on an aircraft and prevent 

passengers from taking on board those 

dangerous goods that they are not 

permitted to have in their baggage. 

V.5. Applicability/Transport-Related 

Function (TRF) 

Comments 

ATA, Northwest, UPS, United, and 

the National Air Transportation 

Association (NATA) were concerned 

that the application of the term 

‘‘transport-related function’’ would end 

up requiring them to train all or a 

substantial number of the employees in 

their operations. UPS recommended 

that the FAA issue guidelines so that a 

carrier can determine when an 

employee could ‘‘reasonably be 

foreseen’’ as performing or supervising 

a transport related function. 

FAA Response 

The FAA recognizes the concerns 

voiced by the commenters. The term 

‘‘transport-related function’’ is a 

shorthand reference used in the 

preamble of the NPRM and final rule to 

refer to the specific listed job functions 

in §§ 121.1001 (proposed as §§ 121.801) 

and 135.501. It is not intended to extend 

beyond those listed job functions. 

In the final rule the FAA is also 

removing the terms ‘‘unloading’’ and 

‘‘carriage’’ from the list of specific 

covered job functions. This decision is 

consistent with movement to closely 

align the regulations with the 2005 

edition of the ICAO TI and the IATA 

DGR. Training conducted by an operator 

to satisfy industry training practices and 

standards (e.g. IATA) that meet or 

exceed the requirements of new part 121 

Appendix O would be sufficient for 

compliance with the final rule 

requirements. The FAA does not believe 

that removing these terms from the list 

of covered functions adversely impacts 

safety. First, the term ‘‘unloading’’

covers a job function that actually 

removes the item from the aircraft 

where it does not pose a danger. 

Second, the FAA’s research indicates 

that the personnel loading the aircraft 

typically are the same as the personnel 

unloading the aircraft. Since loading is 

a covered job function, these persons 

would be trained in accordance with the 

rule. Finally, if the unloaded cargo is 

subsequently loaded onto another 

aircraft, then the person doing the 

subsequent loading would need to be 

trained. 

With regard to the removal of the term 

‘‘carriage,’’ the FAA does not believe 

there is a safety issue since the term 

essentially incorporates all of the listed 

job functions and is not a stand-alone 

term. Consequently, the FAA finds that 

a specific listing of the term is 

unnecessary. 

V.6. New Hire/New Job Function 

Comment 

Atlas Air stated that under the current 

regulations, when a carrier hires an 

employee/contractor who used to work 

for another all-cargo carrier and he or 

she provides a valid Dangerous Goods 

certification from that carrier, the carrier 

simply enters the employee’s name in 

the training records under his or her 

valid certificate and schedules the 

employee for recurrent training when 

the base month comes up. Atlas Air 

urged the FAA to clarify that this 

practice can continue since limiting the 

practice would constitute an 

unnecessary financial burden. 

FAA Response 

The FAA recognizes that part 121 and 

part 135 operators will have many 

similarities in their hazmat training 

programs. However, each carrier has its 

own policies and procedures regarding 

the handling and transport of hazmat. 

Thus, a new employee that will perform 

a job function listed in § 121.1001 or 

§ 135.501 does not have to be fully 

trained in all aspects of the hazmat 

regulations if he or she has been trained 

by another certificate holder with the 

same will-carry or will-not-carry status 

within the 24-month period. However, 

he or she must receive training on the 

certificate holder’s policies and 

procedures prior to performing his or 

her job. It is the responsibility of every 

part 121 and part 135 operator to train 

each employee in the procedures and 

policies the certificate holder has 

implemented to comply with the HMR 

and these regulations. 

Comments 

Ameristar noted that the NPRM did 

not address how to handle a person who 

is not trained at a departure or 

destination point that helps load an 

58804 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

aircraft under the supervision of a flight 

crewmember. An entire initial training 

program is not practical for a person 

that may be loading only one piece of 

freight (i.e., a seat belt pretensioner, 

Class 9 (UN3268)) using a forklift on a 

one-time basis for an operator. 

Ameristar also noted that there were no 

provisions for contract employees in the 

NPRM. 

FAA Response 

Currently, the regulations require that 

the workers (contractor or direct airline 

employee) performing a hazmat job 

function (including unloading) be 

trained. There are no exceptions under 

current FAA training regulations. In this 

final rule, the FAA is adopting a new 

exception that would allow a person 

(either a new hire or someone who is 

performing a new job function) to 

perform a job function involving storage 

incidental to transport or loading of 

items on an aircraft for transport, 

provided the person is under the direct 

visual supervision of another properly 

trained employee authorized to directly 

supervise him or her. The exception is 

only valid for 30 days, and is contingent 

on the certificate holder complying with 

the recordkeeping requirements in 

§§ 121.1007(b) and 135.907(b) (proposed 

as § 121.804(b)) or § 135.504(b), as 

applicable. After that time period, the 

individual must receive the required 

training. 

V.7. Persons Working for More Than 

One Certificate Holder 

Comments 

Several carriers were concerned about 

the application of the training 

requirement for employees or 

contractors who work for more than one 

certificate holder. Atlas Air stated that 

proposed § 121.803(a) would prevent 

Atlas, Polar, and similarly situated 

carriers from relying on another 

certificate holder’s training program to 

satisfy the training obligation. 

Additionally, Atlas Air commented 

that the second exception in proposed 

§ 121.803(c), limiting the retraining 

required of persons working for other 

certificate holders in certain 

circumstances, would permit 

certification only from another 

certificate holder with the same willcarry status. Atlas believed this would 

put it at a distinct disadvantage around 

the world by prohibiting the acceptance 

of foreign carriers’ certifications, which 

represent a large segment of Atlas’

business. 

UPS stated that proposed 

§ 121.803(c)(1) would require a 

certificate holder to receive written 

verification that a repair station 

employee was properly trained from an 

‘‘authorized, knowledgeable person 

representing the other certificate 

holder.’’ The commenter said that the 

FAA provided no standards or 

guidelines for how a certificate holder 

can determine whether a person is 

‘‘knowledgeable.’’

United commented that the process 

for verifying that a contractor has 

provided its employees with the proper 

hazmat training is ‘‘far too cumbersome 

and leaves each certificate holder with 

little option but to provide such service 

personnel with the full scope of hazmat 

training.’’ Aircraft Electronics 

Association and Aviation Suppliers 

Association believed that contractors 

may be unwilling to provide the training 

certifications required by proposed 

§§ 121.803(c) and 135.503(c) for fear of 

legal liability or because they do not 

want to assume training costs that their 

competitors are not assuming. 

Moreover, the commenter stated, several 

of the exceptions are based on the 

worker having received prior training by 

a certificate holder having the same 

operations specifications authorization 

for the carriage of hazmat. 

FAA Response 

The FAA believes that the exception 

provided for in §§ 121.1005(c) and 

135.505(c) (proposed as §§ 121.803(c) 

and 135.503(c)) will actually minimize 

the training burden on part 121 and part 

135 operators. After reviewing the 

concerns voiced by the commenters, it 

appears that many of the commenters 

may have misunderstood what type of 

training is required. The core of each 

part 121 and part 135 operator’s training 

program is substantially the same. 

However, a worker who has been 

trained by one certificate holder but 

used by a second should be aware of 

that certificate holder’s policies and 

procedures for handling hazmat. For 

instance, a worker initially performing 

work for a certificate holder with an 

operations specification prohibiting the 

acceptance of radioactive material may 

not have received in-depth training in 

the transport of radioactive materials. 

However, if that worker performs a job 

function listed in § 121.1001 or 

§ 135.501 for or on behalf of an 

additional certificate holder that does 

accept radioactive material, the worker 

must be trained on the regulations 

pertaining to such materials. Therefore, 

a part 121 or part 135 operator using a 

person trained under another part 121 

or part 135 operator’s approved training 

program (both with the same will-carry 

or will-not-carry status) only has to train 

that person in the way it complies with 

the regulations. 

Only operations conducted in 

accordance with parts 121, and 135, and 

part 145 certificate holders are covered 

by this rulemaking. Thus, the part 121 

or part 135 certificate holders must 

ensure that a worker is trained when 

using a worker in a foreign location. 

Since this final rule is closely aligned 

with the 2005 edition of the ICAO TI 

and the IATA DGR requirements, there 

should be minimal differences in 

training. If the actual operations are in 

a foreign location, then the foreign 

location requirements in §§ 121.1005 

and 135.505 (proposed as §§ 121.803 

and 135.503) may be applicable. 

The FAA agrees that the term 

‘‘authorized, knowledgeable person’’

cannot be confirmed. Therefore, in the 

final rule the FAA is removing the 

proposed terminology and replacing it 

with the phrase ‘‘person designated by 

the certificate holder to hold the 

records.’’

Comment 

MidWest Airlines agreed that if a 

contractor is a will-not-carry airline for 

hazardous materials and provides 

services for a will-carry airline, the 

contractor needs to receive hazardous 

materials training from that airline. 

However, MidWest stated that it did not 

‘‘understand the need for training to be 

provided when the status of the airline 

and contractor is reversed.’’

FAA Response 

A worker of a part 121 or part 135 

operator with a status of will-carry 

operator receives hazmat training 

appropriate for the job function being 

performed. If the worker also performs 

or directly supervises job functions for 

a will-not-carry certificate holder, the 

employee will only have to be trained 

in the policies and procedures for the 

will-not-carry certificate holder. For 

instance, the worker needs to know 

what the policies are for a will-not-carry 

certificate holder if the worker identifies 

cargo as potential hazmat. These 

policies and procedures would include 

information such as who does the 

worker notify and where does the 

material get placed until the appropriate 

person investigates, etc. Only the 

policies and procedures specific to the 

will-not-carry certificate holder will 

need to be provided. 

V.8. Recurrent Training 

Comments 

Several commenters raised concerns 

with the FAA’s proposal to require 

annual recurrent training. Atlas Air 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 58805 

requested that the FAA make the 

recurrent training requirement every 

two years, consistent with ICAO and 

United Nations (UN) recommendations. 

Ameristar Air Cargo commented that the 

base-month concept in the proposed 

rule is inconsistent with 14 CFR 

121.401(b). This requires an industry to 

have two standards. Ameristar believed 

that the requirements of 14 CFR 

121.433a currently allow the gracemonth provision. 

NATA urged the FAA to keep its 

recurrent training requirements 

consistent with PHMSA’s recurrent 

training requirements under the HMRs. 

FAA Response 

In response to comments on this 

issue, the FAA is closely aligning the 

final rule with the 2005 edition of the 

ICAO TI and the IATA DGR including 

modifying the proposal by requiring 

recurrent training every 24 months 

instead of annually. The change in 

recurrent training from every twelve 

months to every 24 months should not 

adversely impact safety since recurrent 

training is designed to update workers 

on amendments in the regulations. 

These amendments tend to occur on a 

24-month schedule, keeping aligned 

with ICAO and IATA amendments. 

Under 49 CFR 175.20 ‘‘Compliance and 

Training’’ for air carriers, the FAA’s 14 

CFR 121.135, 121.401, 121.433a, 

135.323, 135.327 and 135.333 are 

incorporated by reference. Under 

PHMSA’s ‘‘hazmat employee’’ concept, 

recurrent training is required every 

three years. Currently, the FAA requires 

that recurrent hazmat training be 

completed by part 121 and part 135 

operators annually along with the flight 

and proficiency training. The FAA’s 

recurrent training requirements were in 

place before PHMSA’s and were not 

superceded by PHMSA’s retraining 

requirements. There are other 

differences between PHMSA’s and the 

FAA’s training requirements. For 

instance, the FAA requires the hazmat 

training program to be reviewed and 

approved by the agency. 

The FAA also is clarifying that 

recurrent hazmat training can be taken 

in the calendar month before or the 

calendar month after it is actually due 

without changing the anniversary date 

for retraining purposes. A person can be 

retrained earlier than one calendar 

month prior to the training anniversary 

date; however, the anniversary date will 

change to the completion date of the 

retraining. The FAA believes that these 

exceptions provide the part 121 and part 

135 operators with maximum flexibility 

in scheduling retraining while ensuring 

that there is not an extensive time 

period between the retraining dates. 

V.9. Notice to Repair Stations 

Comments 

Several commenters opposed the 

FAA’s proposal to require a certificate 

holder to communicate and verify 

awareness of its hazardous materials 

policies and procedures to a repair 

station. UPS noted that ‘‘all repair 

stations likely ‘use’ or ‘handle’ materials 

classified as hazardous materials in the 

course of their operations.’’ Thus, 

proposed § 121.803(e) quite possibly 

could require ‘‘notice and awareness’’

for every repair station utilized by a 

certificate holder. 

NATA was concerned that the 

requirement to verify that the repair 

station is ‘‘aware of’’ its status and 

policies and procedures is ‘‘another 

regulatory trap.’’ In this instance, the 

commenter stated, the FAA is 

establishing a mandate without giving a 

clear means of compliance. Southwest 

believed that while the requirement to 

provide written notification to each 

repair station performing work on the 

certificate holder’s behalf is obtainable 

and objective, ‘‘the requirement to 

ensure that the repair station is ‘‘aware 

of’ the certificate holder’s policies and 

procedures is a subjective requirement 

that cannot be verified by the carrier.’’

ATA stated that ‘‘carriers can and do 

take the objective steps of informing 

repair stations whether they carry 

hazmat and advising them of carrier 

procedures for HMR compliance.’’

FAA Response 

The FAA agrees that the term ‘‘aware 

of’’ is somewhat subjective. The FAA’s 

intent in proposing this standard was to 

ensure that critical information was 

effectively communicated between two 

parties. 

The will or will-not-carry status of a 

certificate holder is critical information 

that must not get drowned out by other 

information. That is why the FAA 

proposed that part 121 and part 135 

operators ensure that each repair station 

be aware of the part 121 and part 135 

operator’s will or will-not-carry status. 

In the final rule, the FAA is replacing 

the requirement for the repair station to 

be ‘‘aware of’’ the operator’s will-or 

will-not-carry status with a requirement 

for the repair station to acknowledge 

receipt of the notification. This change 

is reflected in §§ 121.1005(e), 

135.505(e), and 145.206(a). 

There are many ways to get a written 

verification. One way of complying with 

this requirement would be to have the 

responsible person from the part 121 or 

part 135 operators write a letter to the 

repair station stating its status and 

policies and procedures and then have 

the authorized repair station supervisor 

or manager sign and return a copy of the 

letter. However, to allow for flexibility, 

the FAA is not mandating this method; 

it is simply one method of compliance. 

The FAA’s purpose in adopting this 

requirement is to ensure that the repair 

station receive the required notification 

from the part 121 or part 135 operator. 

This notification then triggers the 

requirement for the part 145 repair 

station to notify its covered employees 

of the part 121 or part 135 operator’s’

status. Based on ATA’s comments, it 

appears that part 121 or part 135 

operators already are taking some level 

of care to ensure that repair stations 

know which certificate holders carry 

hazmat. The only additional step may 

be the written verification. 

V.10. Foreign Locations 

Comment 

NATA and ATA opposed the 

exception for certificate holders 

operating at foreign locations in 

proposed § 121.803(f) (adopted as 

§ 121.1005(f)). NATA believed that this 

exception should be standard operating 

procedures regardless of whether local 

labor laws require the certificate holder 

to use persons working in that country 

to load and unload aircraft, given the 

logistical problems of training and 

recordkeeping for part 135 operators. 

ATA commented that workers in 

foreign locations already receive 

function-specific hazmat training and 

follow the ICAO Technical Instructions. 

Current FAA rules require 

‘‘supervision’’ by a trained person of 

loading, offloading, and handling of 

dangerous goods by persons who have 

not had the FAA-approved training. The 

commenter stated, ‘‘ATA believed that 

the proposal would unreasonably 

narrow the exception for untrained 

employees working under supervision 

by restricting the exception to loading 

and unloading.’’ Thus, ATA argued that 

any other handling of hazmat would 

have to be done by someone who has 

had the extensive training, regardless of 

supervision. For loading and unloading, 

the trained person would have to 

provide ‘‘direct visual supervision.’’ The 

commenter added that, in situations 

where there is more than one flight 

being worked, particularly at hubs, this 

is unworkable. There is no compromise 

of safety in continuing to allow the 

trained person to supervise by giving 

appropriate direction and follow-up, 

enabling him or her to handle more than 

one issue at once. 

58806 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

FAA Response 

The FAA believes that the loading 

with untrained workers should not be 

standard operating procedures at foreign 

locations regardless of local labor laws. 

This is consistent with current FAA 

hazmat training regulations. Since the 

FAA is now closely aligning the final 

rule with the 2005 edition of the ICAO 

TI and IATA DGR requirements, general 

training should be more standardized. 

In the final rule, the FAA is also 

removing the term ‘‘unloading’’ from the 

list of specific covered job functions 

listed in §§ 121.1001 and 135.501. Thus, 

part 121 and part 135 operators should 

find it easier to obtain trained workers 

to use in completing these hazmat job 

functions. Under the exception adopted 

in the final rule, loading with untrained 

workers can be performed only if the 

labor laws of the foreign country require 

that the certificate holder uses persons 

who work in that country, and the 

worker performs the loading function 

under the direct visual supervision of a 

trained worker. The existing rule does 

not require visual supervision of the 

untrained worker. However, in the 

NPRM the FAA proposed such a 

requirement, and this requirement is 

adopted in the final rule. The certificate 

holder can use a non-supervisory person 

trained to load the aircraft, provided 

they are authorized to directly supervise 

the untrained worker in the 

performance of this function. The FAA 

has determined that requiring a trained 

supervisor to visually observe the 

performance of the untrained person’s 

duties is an important step towards 

eliminating the possibility of 

undeclared discoverable hazmat or 

improperly shipped hazmat from being 

loaded onto the aircraft. 

The current exception also includes 

the term ‘‘handling;’’ however, the 

proposal removed that term because it 

was confusing to regulated entities. The 

FAA has understood the term 

‘‘handling,’’ as used in the current CFR, 

to refer to the handling that would be 

required during the loading of the 

aircraft. The industry’s application, 

however, has been inconsistent. 

Although the FAA is eliminating this 

term, the FAA still recognizes that those 

people who load must handle the cargo. 

The removal of the term ‘‘handling,’’

however, eliminates any confusion over 

the breadth of the exception. 

V.11. Recordkeeping Requirements 

V.11.A. Location 

Comments 

A number of commenters raised 

concerns with the proposed 

amendments to the recordkeeping 

requirements. The proposed rule would 

have required the certificate holder to 

maintain signed records of each training 

course for the last three years. ATA 

Airlines noted that this is not in keeping 

with current practices that allow paper 

records to be discarded after 90 days if 

they are entered into an automated 

record keeping system. ATA encouraged 

the FAA to accept a centralized, 

computerized corporate record that is 

accessible by field locations. Many of 

the carriers stated that they have 

electronic files and databases and 

oppose a manual file system as a step 

backwards. 

The proposed rule also would have 

required that the records be maintained 

at the location where the person 

performs or supervises the hazmat 

function. Many commenters opposed 

this proposed requirement. ALPA stated 

that records should be maintained ‘‘at 

the company headquarters or at a 

facility that is charged with keeping 

such records.’’ Columbia Helicopters 

noted that because many certificate 

holders affected by the NPRM operate 

from multiple sites, frequently rotating 

aircrew and maintenance personnel 

‘‘moving records is an unnecessary 

burden and greatly increases the 

likelihood of loss or administrative 

error.’’ All commenters agreed that 

allowing computer records that can be 

accessed from various locations is the 

best option. 

The proposed rule also would require 

the certificate holder to maintain 

records on its independent contractors 

and subcontractors. UPS believed that 

the certificate holder should not have to 

maintain records for its contractors and 

subcontractors. It stated that such a 

requirement may blur the relationship 

and ‘‘give rise to a presumption that 

personnel employed by the contractor 

are employees of the certificate holder.’’

FAA Response 

The FAA agrees with the commenters 

that the worker training records should 

not be required to be kept as a written 

record. In the final rule, the FAA is 

clarifying that the part 121 and part 135 

operators have the responsibility to 

determine the method of recordkeeping 

(electronic, manual, etc). This allows 

the certificate holder to manage its 

recordkeeping program in a manner 

appropriate to its business. The worker 

training records may be maintained by 

any method (including electronic). The 

records may be maintained in a central 

location provided that they can be made 

available upon request at the location of 

the employee. Contractors performing or 

directly supervising a job function listed 

in §§ 121.1001 or 135.501 for, or on 

behalf of a part 121 or part 135 operator 

will be required to comply with the 

training requirements of 14 CFR. A 

certificate holder is responsible for 

ensuring that its workers are properly 

trained. A contractor performing or 

directly supervising a job function listed 

in §§ 121.1001 or 135.501 for, or on 

behalf of the part 121 or part 135 

operator represents the same 

responsibility to the certificate holder as 

a direct employee. Therefore, since the 

part 121 or part 135 operator is 

responsible for maintaining the records 

for all direct employees performing or 

directly supervising a function listed in 

§§ 121.1001 or 135.501 for, or on behalf 

of the part 121 or part 135 operator, it 

should also be responsible for 

maintaining the records of contractors 

performing or directly supervising the 

same job functions. 

V.11.B. Content 

Comment 

A number of carriers commented on 

the signature requirement in the 

proposed recordkeeping rule. Proposed 

§§ 121.804(c)(3) and 135.504(c)(3) 

(adopted as §§ 121.1007 and 135.507) 

would have required training records to 

be signed by a person designated by the 

Director of Training. ASTAR Air Cargo 

pointed out that § 121.401(c) states: 

‘‘When the certification required by this 

paragraph is made by an entry in a 

computerized recordkeeping system, the 

certifying instructor, supervisor, or 

check airman must be identified with 

that entry. However, the signature of the 

certifying instructor, supervisor, or 

check airman is not required for 

computerized entries.’’ ASTAR along 

with ATA Airlines, Southwest, 

Chautauqua Airlines, Ameristar, FedEx, 

AMR Corporation, and the Air 

Transport Association all supported 

eliminating the signature requirement. 

Ameristar, Fed Ex, ATA and AMR 

Corporation also pointed out that there 

is no Director of Training, so requiring 

that individual’s signature implies a 

requirement that is not possible. 

ASTAR also believed that the 

description of the training course 

required by proposed §§ 121.804(c)(4) 

and 135.504(c)(4) (adopted as 

§§ 121.1007 and 135.507) is redundant 

and not required since a full description 

of the training program is contained in 

the FAA-approved Training Manual. 

FAA Response 

The FAA agrees with the commenters’

suggestions, and in the final rule, the 

FAA is eliminating the requirement for 

the signature. The FAA also did not 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 58807 

intend to require that certificate holders 

employ a Director of Training. The FAA 

is instead requiring that the individual 

who is providing the hazmat training be 

identified on the training record. The 

contents of the training records will be 

the same as 49 CFR 172.704(d), ICAO TI 

1;4.2.4, and IATA DGR 1;1.5.4.1. The 

FAA is harmonizing the contents to 

eliminate duplication of recordkeeping. 

The same records required under this 

rulemaking can be used for compliance 

with all hazmat regulations having the 

same requirements (49 CFR 172.704(d), 

ICAO TI 1;4.2.4, and IATA DGR 

1;1.5.4.1). 

V.12. Curriculum—Proposed Appendix 

N (Adopted as Appendix O) 

Comments 

Many commenters stated that the 

training curriculum set forth in 

proposed Appendix N (adopted as 

Appendix O) goes beyond the 

knowledge needed to fulfill the given 

job function. ATA and Southwest 

Airlines called the training ‘‘excessive.’’

ATA went on to argue that ‘‘excessive 

training inundates employees with 

needless information and requirements 

that are extraneous to their specific 

responsibilities and—at best—distracts 

from the central purpose of job specific 

training, diluting the effect of training 

on material relevant to their function. At 

worst, it confuses employees about their 

assigned roles and responsibilities.’’

United and Midwest Airlines urged 

the FAA to abandon the idea of a onesize-fits-all training program and allow 

the certificate holder to tailor the 

training subject matter to the employee’s 

job functions. Chautauqua Airlines 

stated that its current program has been 

approved by the FAA, but would not be 

acceptable under the proposed rule 

since the programs are not divided into 

specific modules. Chautauqua argued 

that to prepare a hazmat program that 

follows the prescribed curriculum 

‘‘would require significant efforts by 

various business unit training 

organizations internal to CHQ, costing 

both time and money.’’

AMR Corporation explains that a 

flight attendant will greet a customer 

and/or help a customer with luggage 

after the customer has interfaced with at 

least one of its agents trained in 

dangerous goods acceptance, and after 

passing through TSA-controlled 

checkpoint where security screeners are 

tasked with looking for threatening 

objects. Flight attendants are trained in 

the safety of the passenger. They are 

trained to handle a situation in flight 

where a substance may be leaking or 

found to be inappropriate in the cabin. 

Training in documentation checks and 

acceptance guidelines would not 

increase the awareness or effectiveness 

of these employees in identifying 

hidden dangerous goods. 

Furthermore, AMR Corporation noted 

that its dispatchers do not supervise the 

loading, nor do they perform other load 

planning functions. The commenter 

added that a dispatcher may be tasked 

with contacting Air Traffic Control, 

Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting, or the 

Federal Aviation Administration; 

however, dangerous goods acceptance 

training would not improve his or her 

ability to assist the flight crew. 

NATA stated that persons required to 

be trained on Module 6 but not 5, 

should not be required to be trained on 

Module 8. In order to do their jobs 

properly, NATA said that these persons 

do not need to know the ‘‘use of 

hazardous materials tables, proper 

shipping names, hazard class 

definitions, UN/ID numbers, or packing 

groups’’ as described in Module 8. ATA 

believed that the FAA could greatly 

alleviate the unnecessary burden by 

aligning them with the ICAO Technical 

Instructions. The ICAO TI allows the 

carrier to tailor the training content for 

each employee group, making it 

commensurate with job duties of the 

specific employees in question. 

ASTAR Air Cargo made a similar 

request and urged the FAA to include 

the statement ‘‘Each Hazmat employee 

must be provided only that function 

specific training concerning each of the 

areas of training which are specifically 

applicable to the operation the 

employee performs.’’ ASTAR pointed 

out that this suggested language is 

nearly identical to that of CFR title 49 

and would allow operators to tailor the 

training as necessary. 

ATA Airlines, Delta, and UPS 

believed that proposed Table 1, which 

defined training requirements based on 

Job Function defined by Categories of 

Personnel, is confusing and will require 

interpretation. ATA also stated that 

there is no differentiation between 

levels of knowledge required based on 

actual involvement in the dangerous 

materials transport process. UPS wanted 

the rule to clarify that the level of 

training should be commensurate with 

the employee’s responsibilities. UPS 

urged the FAA to place proposed 

Appendix N into an advisory circular so 

that certificate holders would have 

greater flexibility in structuring their 

own training programs. 

As stated in the comments submitted 

by ATA, ‘‘ATA’s will-not-carry 

members also have FAA-approved 

training programs that provide for HMR 

instruction. Indeed, even though they 

do not transport hazmat, they provide 

recognition training to acceptance 

employees to enable them to recognize 

and refuse hazmat if it is offered to their 

carrier.’’ Furthermore ATA stated that 

carriers provide ‘‘persons engaged in 

passenger and baggage check-in services 

(e.g., skycaps, ticket counter agents, 

flight attendants, etc.) with recognition 

training and function-specific training 

on relevant hazmat topics.’’ ATA also 

stated ‘‘the FAA could greatly alleviate 

the unnecessary burden on carriers by 

specifically authorizing them, as the 

ICAO Technical Instructions provide, to 

tailor training content for each 

employee group, making it 

commensurate with job duties of the 

specific employees in question. The 

ICAO Technical Instructions are a 

reasonable starting point for that 

assessment. This allows carriers to plan 

in accordance with their own business 

structures.’’

Express.Net Airlines was concerned 

that no standard exists for the length of 

time necessary to conduct training and 

points to the FAA’s publication ‘‘FAA 

National Operations and Training 

Manual for the Acceptance and 

Transport of Dangerous Goods in Air 

Transportation.’’ In that document, the 

FAA recommends an 8-hour initial 

training program and a 2-hour recurrent 

training program for operators that elect 

to carry hazmat. 

ALPA believed that the proposed 

modules listed for pilot crewmembers 

are adequate provided that the training 

is ‘‘specifically tailored for the duties 

and responsibilities of the flight crew 

member.’’ ALPA requested that the FAA 

add a note to Tables 1 and 2 stating that 

‘‘Awareness-level training of 

components within a module may be 

appropriate if the person (employee) 

does not actually perform those 

functions.’’

Atlas Air asked the FAA to clarify 

whether all-cargo carriers and passenger 

carriers would be required to follow the 

same curriculum. 

Jet Arizona, Aviation Services 

Unlimited, and Southwest Airlines 

commented on recognition training for 

will-not-carry operators. Jet Arizona 

believed that will-not-carry certificate 

holders should only be required to train 

to the level required for their crews to 

recognize hazmat for the purposes of 

preventing it from being loaded on that 

company’s aircraft. It believed that 

additional training creates an 

unnecessary burden that the FAA has 

not justified adequately with data. 

Aviation Services Unlimited also 

commented that to require operators to 

change their already-successful 

58808 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

programs only unnecessarily increases 

the burden. 

Ameristar Air Cargo suggested that in 

Module 13 the FAA delete the words 

‘‘Policies and procedures regarding 

handling, packaging, and transport of 

hazardous materials moving by means 

other than air.’’ The commenter said 

that this element leaves too much 

interpretation to the FAA inspector 

approving a hazardous materials 

program. The commenter suggested the 

following language: ‘‘Applicable 

policies and procedures regarding 

handling, packaging, and transport of 

hazardous materials moving by means 

other than air.’’

Express.Net Airlines noted that Table 

1 of proposed Appendix N was 

incomplete because Module 10 ‘Notice 

to Pilot-in-Command’ training would 

not have been required for category 3 

workers; ‘‘persons who handle, store, 

and load or unload packages, passenger 

baggage or cargo’’ on the aircraft. 

Menlo Worldwide Forwarding 

recommended that an additional 

exception be included in the rule to 

allow the establishment of a stand-alone 

training and supervision program 

administered by an integrated freight 

forwarder that contracts multiple 

certificate holders to transport 

dangerous goods and is subject to 

review and approval of the FAA. The 

commenter added that air carriers 

would incorporate the training regimen 

into their approved programs by 

referring to the integrated freight 

forwarder’s training program and 

services in their Operations Manuals. 

Direct Flight stated that simply 

because requirements may be suitable 

for a part 135 scheduled commuter 

airline does not mean those 

requirements are appropriate for a small 

on-demand carrier simply because the 

way each operates is very different. 

Continental believed that the NPRM 

inappropriately combined part 121 and 

part 135 duties together. Continental 

stated that ‘‘there are many specific 

duties for Part 135 carriers that do not 

apply to a Part 121 carrier. For example, 

there are many Part 135 carriers that 

will have their flight crews assigned to 

tasks that are not performed by the flight 

crew of Part 121 carriers (i.e., loading 

baggage and cargo into the airplane).’’

FAA Response 

Many commenters disagreed with the 

proposal to mandate curriculum for a 

part 121 or part 135 operator’s hazmat 

training program. The FAA agrees, and 

in the final rule the FAA is closely 

aligning the training requirements in 14 

CFR parts 121 and 135 with those in the 

2005 edition of the ICAO TI and the 

IATA DGR. The certificate holders 

believed that the ICAO TI standards are 

the best common reference point to 

facilitate the uniform, seamless 

handling of hazmat in international air 

transportation. By accepting the 

operator’s comments indicating that 

only part 121 and part 135 operators 

themselves can develop specific 

detailed hazmat training curricula, the 

FAA believes that the need to provide 

model hazardous material training 

programs has been reduced. The 

direction taken by the ICAO Dangerous 

Goods Panel in 2002 (published in the 

2005–2006 edition of the ICAO TI and 

IATA DGR) was a departure from the 

traditional ‘‘categories of staff’’ to a taskoriented (function-specific) approach, 

which is the same approach the FAA is 

adopting. Additionally, in the final rule, 

the FAA closely aligns the required 

training for persons performing or 

directly supervising job functions listed 

in § 121.1001 or § 135.501 for, or on 

behalf of a will-not-carry certificate 

holder with the requirements for 

handling only non-dangerous goods in 

the 2005 edition of the ICAO TI. The 

training standards will apply to both allcargo and passenger carriers. 

The part 121 or part 135 operators 

will also be required to provide training 

on any operator specific policies and 

procedures not specifically mentioned 

in new Appendix O. The FAA believes 

that each certificate holder currently 

trains all employees in their individual 

policies and procedures, so this should 

not be an additional burden. This allows 

part 121 or part 135 operators to train 

in accordance with their own business 

structures. If a certificate holder’s 

training program differs from the ICAO 

TI format, it should discuss this with 

the FAA during the approval process. 

Therefore, in the final rule the FAA is 

clarifying that the part 121 or part 135 

operator has the responsibility to 

determine which employees meet the 

job function requirement to train, the 

level of training required, the delivery 

method of administering the training, 

including a test to verify 

comprehension, and the method of 

recordkeeping (electronic, certificate, 

etc). The FAA is not specifying 

requirements for these processes. The 

FAA believes these amendments will 

allow the certificate holder to manage 

their FAA approved hazmat training 

programs as appropriate. The final rule 

will not contain the training modules. 

Instead, Table 1—Operators That 

Transport Hazardous Materials—WillCarry Certificate Holders, and Table 2—

Operators That Do Not Transport 

Hazardous Materials—Will-Not-Carry 

Certificate Holders, will provide the 

minimum aspects to be covered in the 

part 121 and part 135 operator’s hazmat 

training program for each job function 

performed. These minimum 

requirements will apply to persons 

performing or directly supervising the 

job function. 

Given the changes that the FAA is 

making to the final rule, the FAA 

anticipates that most part 121 or part 

135 operators should not have to 

substantially change their training 

programs if their current FAA-approved 

hazmat training program contains the 

minimum requirements required by 

2005 edition of the ICAO TI and IATA 

DGR. Standards for will-not-carry 

training will require that both part 121 

and part 135 will-not-carry certificate 

holders conduct recognition training to 

assist persons directly supervising or 

performing a job function covered in 

Appendix O, Table 2, identifying 

possible undeclared, as well as 

declared, hazmat. 

The specific job function specified in 

Appendix O will determine the training 

required. In-depth training is intended 

to give detailed knowledge of the 

requirements pertaining to the specific 

job function that the person performs. 

General-awareness training is intended 

to provide a general overview of the 

regulatory scheme. 

V.13. Training Method 

Comments 

Atlas Air, Northwest Airlines, AMR 

Corporation, Express.Net Airlines and 

ALPA were concerned that the proposed 

requirement would eliminate computerbased training. In addition, the 

proposed rule would require an 

interactive instructor to be available to 

address any questions or concerns. 

ALPA believed that recent changes in 

computer-based training have made that 

possible. The Dangerous Goods Council 

urged the FAA to allow an electronic 

instructor to be used who could be 

immediately available by instant 

message, e-mail or phone. 

FAA Response 

Part 121 or part 135 operators have 

the responsibility for ensuring that the 

specific level and duration of hazmat 

training is adequate and appropriate for 

each worker. While the responsibility 

for providing the hazmat training 

remains with the certificate holder, the 

FAA has the responsibility for 

approving the hazmat training program. 

Hazmat training may be provided by 

company training programs, computerbased programs, self-guided CD training 

programs, outside training firms or 

consultants, educational institutions, or 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 58809 

any other type of organization offering 

training. Electronic instruction is 

permitted and an on-site instructor is 

not required. Hazmat training may be 

provided by the part 121 or part 135 

operator or other public or private 

sources, including training classes that 

are offered by the IATA to the extent 

that the IATA training satisfies the FAAapproved hazmat training program. The 

part 121 or part 135 operator must 

ensure that the hazmat training program 

provides a method to respond to 

students’ questions prior to certifying 

completion of the training and that all 

persons are tested to verify 

understanding of the regulations and 

requirements. 

V.14. Single-Pilot Operations 

Comments 

Several commenters were concerned 

that the FAA did not adequately address 

the issue of the single-pilot operation in 

the proposed rule. NATA provided an 

example of a part 135 on-demand carrier 

using Cessna Caravans (which require 

only one pilot) in a cargo configuration 

to regularly transport newspapers for 

delivery. On occasion, the newspaper 

employee delivering or picking up the 

newspapers may assist the pilot in the 

loading or unloading of these papers. 

NATA believed that proposed 

§ 135.503(a) would require the 

certificate holder to provide hazmat 

training of this helpful person. NATA 

saw no justification for this restrictive 

requirement. The pilot instead could be 

trained as a supervisor and then permit 

the newspaper employee to assist in 

performance of the transport-related 

function under direct supervision 

similar to the requirements of the 

foreign locations exception (see 

proposed § 135.503(f)). NATA believed 

that, given the nature of part 135 ondemand operations, which use any and 

all airports on short notice, the principle 

of direct supervision is reasonable as a 

general rule rather than the exception. 

Direct Flight Inc. also urged the FAA 

to— (1) clarify the notation ‘‘would 

remain subject to the hazmat training 

requirements in § 135.333,’’ since the 

proposal removes § 135.333; and (2) 

drop that portion of the NPRM which 

applies to small, will-not-carry, ondemand part 135 operators and instead 

retain the language contained in 

§ 135.333(c). 

FAA Response 

In the final rule, the FAA is deleting 

the language ‘‘would remain subject to 

the hazmat training requirements in 

§ 135.333,’’ since that language is only 

applicable to the current hazmat 

training requirements. Hazmat training 

requirements are being relocated in 

subpart K. 

The part 135 operator has the 

responsibility for ensuring that the level 

of training is adequate and appropriate 

for each employee. In the situation 

described by NATA, the FAA agrees 

that the pilot could be trained in 

accordance with the FAA’s hazmat 

regulations and supervise the loading 

function pursuant to § 135.505. The ondemand operator or an operator using 

one person for loading has the 

responsibility for determining the 

adequacy of training. This is consistent 

with current requirements under 

§ 135.333(d). In fact, the requirements 

under § 135.333(d) have been expanded 

because under the final rule, single-pilot 

operators can use the new-hire 

exception. Single-pilot operators also 

will only be required to conduct 

recurrent training every 24 months once 

the FAA harmonizes the recurrent 

training with international and industry 

standards. 

V.15. Repair Stations (Part 145)—

General 

Comment 

One commenter noted that it does not 

appear that the repair stations have any 

transitional period. ATA noted that 

carriers already notify repair stations of 

their will-carry or will-not-carry status 

and their procedures for HMR 

compliance. 

FAA Response 

The final rule does not contain a 

transitional period to allow part 145 

repair stations to train their workers 

because part 145 repair station workers 

are already required to be trained if they 

are hazmat employees, as defined in 49 

CFR 171.8. Repair stations that perform 

or directly supervise a job function 

listed in §§ 121.1001 or 135.501 for, or 

on behalf of a part 121 or part 135 

operator would need to be trained in 

accordance with the FAA’s 

requirements as well. This is the same 

requirement for any contractor or 

subcontractor performing or directly 

supervising a job function listed in 

§§ 121.1001 or 135.501 for, or on behalf 

of a part 121 or part 135 operator. For 

instance, part 145 repair stations 

performing work for, or on behalf of 

will-not-carry certificate holders who 

perform loading functions for the part 

121 or part 135 operators will need to 

be hazmat trained during the 15-month 

transition period. Additionally, most 

part 121 and part 135 operators have 

indicated that they currently notify the 

repair stations of their status (will-carry 

or will-not-carry). Consequently, the 

notification requirement adopted by the 

FAA in the final rule should not pose 

an additional burden. In the final rule, 

the FAA is simply making notification 

mandatory and enforceable. 

The requirement to certify to the FAA 

that all hazmat employees have been 

trained as required by 49 CFR 

172.704(d) is satisfied by providing 

copies of the records required by 49 CFR 

172.704(d), or by submitting a letter 

from an authorized representative of the 

repair station indicating that all hazmat 

employees are trained in accordance 

with 49 CFR. The only additional 

hazmat training requirement would be 

for the repair station employees who 

directly supervise or perform a job 

function listed in § 121.1001 or 

§ 135.501 for, or on behalf of the part 

121 or part 135 operators, such as 

loading the certificate holder’s aircraft 

for transport. The FAA believes that 

only a very small percentage, if any, of 

part 145 repair station employees 

actually load the part 121 or part 135 

operator’s aircraft for transport unless 

the repair station also is certified under 

part 121 or part 135 which would 

impose the requirements of part 121 or 

part 135 of 14 CFR currently. 

Comment 

ALPA agreed with the FAA’s decision 

to include part 145 Aircraft Repair 

Stations in the NPRM. The commenter 

said that a significant potential exists 

that materials or components being 

shipped to, shipped from, or returned to 

service could contain hazardous 

materials. Northwest Airlines, AMR 

Corporation, Midwest Airlines, and 

NATA were concerned that the training 

program for repair stations would be 

burdensome because repair stations 

would have to be trained and current in 

every carrier’s hazmat program. AMR 

Corporation noted that repair stations 

will simply pass the cost of training 

down to the certificate holder. AMR 

Corporation stated that ‘‘if the FAA 

established repair stations as ‘‘shippers’’

and regulated the shipping community, 

the FAA could go further in promoting 

safety in this area. 

NATA did not object, in concept, to 

the FAA’s desire to reference 49 CFR 

172 within the part 145 regulations. 

NATA was concerned with the 

increased training burdens on the 

certificate holder. NATA contended that 

it is redundant for a repair station 

employee, already trained under their 

employer’s program, to then be trained 

by the certificate holder if performing a 

TRF. NATA also believed that the real 

problem in the industry is lack of 

education. 

58810 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

The NTSB supported the repair 

station proposal and believed that it will 

enhance the likelihood that repair 

stations will provide appropriate 

hazardous materials training for their 

employees. Safety recommendation A–

97–73 called for the FAA to require air 

carriers to ensure that maintenance 

facility personnel, including mechanics 

and shipping, receiving, and stores 

personnel, at air carrier-operated or 

subcontracted facilities are provided 

initial and recurrent training in 

hazardous materials handling. The 

NTSB also supported the notification 

requirement. 

Chromally Gas Turbine Corporation 

stated that the proposed requirement 

would require training and 

documentation for everyone in a ‘‘repair 

station who even handles hazardous 

waste and/or labels hazardous waste 

containers which will never be involved 

in air transport.’’

The Aircraft Electronics Association 

(AEA) believed that hazmat training, 

where needed, can be incorporated into 

training programs already required 

under 14 CFR 145.163. AEA also 

requested that the FAA adopt a 

narrowly tailored exemption for repair 

stations that hold only radio and/or 

instrument ratings (plus an associated 

airframe rating) for purposes of avionics 

installations. AEA stated that most 

repair stations holding these ratings do 

not handle hazmat, and those that do 

already are required to have appropriate 

training programs by the hazmat 

training requirements of title 49. 

Boeing urged the FAA to adopt a new 

§ 145.5(c) that would allow the repair 

station to receive acknowledgement 

from the air carrier that its training 

program is adequate. Boeing believed 

that such a provision would be adequate 

if a certificate holder verifies the 

adequacy of the repair station’s controls 

over the processes, procedures, and 

training of persons performing 

transport-related functions for a repair 

station. The option to require specific 

training, if deemed necessary, provides 

flexibility to both the certificate holders 

and repair stations while maintaining 

adequate controls to ensure the proper 

handling and shipping of hazardous 

materials, and the continued safety of 

aircraft and personnel. 

FAA Response 

In the final rule, the FAA is removing 

the words ‘‘and use in repair operations 

aircraft components, consumable 

materials on behalf of the operator 

regulated under 49 CFR parts 171 

through 180’’ from § 145.165. By making 

this amendment, the FAA seeks to 

clarify that the repair stations intended 

to be covered under this proposal are 

the part 145 repair stations that perform 

work for, or on the part 121 or part 135 

operator’s behalf and are regulated by 49 

CFR parts 171 through 180. This, by 

definition in 49 CFR, would include 

only the repair stations that offer or 

accept hazardous material for 

transportation. The remainder of the 

requirement is retained. All part 145 

repair stations that are regulated under 

49 CFR currently are required to have 

hazmat training in place. 

The FAA is not adopting the 

recommendation suggested by Boeing 

that carriers approve a repair station’s 

training program. Repair stations may 

perform duties as hazmat shippers, and 

when they do, they are regulated under 

49 CFR. However, if they perform or 

directly supervise a job function listed 

in §§ 121.1001 or 135.501 for, or on 

behalf of a part 121 or part 135 

operators, such as loading of the 

certificate holder’s aircraft, they are 

required to be trained under the FAA’s 

hazmat training requirements. 

V.16. Application for Part 145 

Certificate 

Comments 

Ameristar Air Cargo believed that 

employees should not have to be trained 

by the time the application is filed, but 

instead should be required to be trained 

prior to the repair station being issued 

a certificate. Ameristar also believed 

that proposed § 145.5 is very clear in 

regards to required training, making the 

proposed language of § 145.11(a)(5) 

redundant. 

FAA Response 

The FAA agrees with Ameristar that 

the repair station employees should 

have to be trained prior to FAA issuing 

a part 145 certificate or change in rating, 

not at the time of application. The final 

rule requires that the repair station 

certify that all hazmat employees have 

been trained as required by 49 CFR part 

172 subpart H prior to issuing the repair 

station certificate or rating. For a change 

in rating, a repair station is not required 

to submit another certification if 

previously provided. 

V.17. Notification of Hazardous 

Materials Authorizations 

Comments 

Ameristar and AEA believed that the 

requirement to notify all workers is very 

broad in scope. AEA believed that the 

proposed requirement would needlessly 

encompass personnel such as 

administrative employees who may 

have no involvement with the work 

being performed for the part 121 or part 

135 carriers. This notification 

requirement should be limited to—(1) 

repair station employees who actually 

perform maintenance services on parts, 

components, or appliances belonging to 

part 121 or part 135 carriers; (2) 

personnel responsible for receiving and 

shipping those items; and (3) the 

supervisory personnel overseeing these 

two categories of workers. 

AEA also believed that the reference 

to ‘‘each certificate holder’’ is vague and 

should be limited to ‘‘each certificate 

holder for which the repair station 

provides maintenance services.’’

FAA Response 

The FAA believes that the notification 

requirement is essential and a very 

minimal requirement for hazardous 

material communication information. 

The FAA has determined that it is 

essential for a repair station to know 

whether its customers are will-carry or 

will-not-carry operators. In the final 

rule, the FAA is clarifying that the 

notification requirement applies only to 

the repair station employees, its 

contractors, or subcontractors that 

handle or replace aircraft components or 

other items regulated by 49 CFR parts 

171 through 180. This will eliminate the 

possibility of the notification process 

applying to personnel such as 

administrative or others who do not 

come into contact with any aircraft 

components. 

Comment 

Both Northwest Airlines (NWA) and 

Aircraft Electronics Association 

questioned the need for the certificate 

holder to train repair station employees 

as referenced in proposed § 121.803(a). 

NWA stated that this requirement could 

easily double or triple the amount of 

training that it would be required to 

administer. Aircraft Electronics believed 

that this requirement conflicts with the 

existing training requirements in 49 

CFR, which imposes the requirement on 

the hazmat employer. 

FAA Response 

In the final rule, § 145.165(b) states 

that repair station workers must not 

perform or directly supervise any job 

function listed in § 121.1001 or 

§ 135.501 for or on behalf of the part 121 

or part 135 operator unless that person 

has completed training under the part 

121 or part 135 operator’s hazmat 

training program. When performing or 

directly supervising any job function 

listed in § 121.1005 or § 135.501 for or 

on behalf of a part 121 or part 135 

operator, a repair station worker is not 

any different than any other contractor 

or subcontractor performing or directly 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 58811 

supervising a covered job function 

including loading the certificate 

holder’s aircraft. Any contractor loading 

the aircraft for transportation must be 

trained under the FAA’s Approved 

Hazardous Materials Training Program 

for that part 121 or part 135 operator. 

There is not a requirement for the part 

121 or part 135 operators to train all 

repair station employees, only those 

who perform a covered function for or 

on behalf of the certificate holder. For 

instance, a repair station worker that 

loads COMAT onto an aircraft, or 

otherwise prepares the cargo for air 

shipment, for or on behalf of the 

certificate holder, must be trained in the 

certificate holder’s hazmat training 

program. 

Training conducted to comply with 

14 CFR may meet the requirements in 

49 CFR depending on the content of the 

training program. 

VI. Section-by-Section Discussion of 

Final Rule 

Part 119—Special Federal Aviation 

Regulation (SFAR) No. 99 

The NPRM proposed to establish an 

SFAR that would contain all current 

part 121 and part 135 hazmat training 

regulations that would be replaced by 

the proposed changes. The SFAR is 

adopted without changes. The SFAR 

will expire 15 months after the effective 

date of the rule. 

As proposed, all existing hazmat 

training requirements in 

§§ 121.401(a)(1), 121.433a, 

135.323(a)(1), and 135.333 are moved 

into Special Federal Aviation 

Regulation (SFAR) No. 99. This is 

designed to make it easier for certificate 

holders to identify existing 

requirements and distinguish them from 

new requirements. The remaining parts 

of these regulations that are not hazmatrelated will remain in their respective 

sections. New §§ 121.1003 and 135.503 

(proposed as §§ 121.802 and 135.502) 

will require hazmat training for part 119 

certificate holders conducting 

operations in accordance with part 121 

and/or part 135 of 14 CFR. 

The SFAR will exist for 15 months 

after the effective date of the final rule, 

during which time certificate holders 

certificated on or before November 7, 

2005 will be responsible for bringing 

their hazmat training programs into full 

compliance with the new regulations. 

During the 15-month transition period, 

current part 121 and part 135 operators 

may continue to comply with the 

current requirements or elect to comply 

with the new requirements. As of 

February 7, 2007, all part 121 and part 

135 operators are required to comply 

with the new training requirements. 

Section 119.49 Contents of Operations 

Specifications 

The FAA proposed to redesignate the 

current language of § 119.49(a)(13) as 

(a)(14) and add a new (a)(13) to provide 

that a certificate holder’s operations 

specifications must include either an 

authorization permitting the part 121 or 

part 135 operator to handle and 

transport hazmat (will-carry certificate 

holder) or a prohibition against 

handling and transporting hazmat (willnot-carry certificate holder). The FAA 

did not receive any comments on this 

section. The references to paragraph (b) 

and (c) were inadvertently left out of the 

NPRM. The NPRM preamble discussed 

amending § 119.49 to show that all part 

121 and 135 operators’ operations 

specifications will be required to show 

the appropriate authorization. 

Sections 121.135 and 135.23 Manual 

Contents 

The FAA proposed that the current 

manual requirements in 14 CFR 

121.135(b)(23) and 135.23 (p) be 

amended to require that both will-carry 

and will-not-carry certificate holders 

include procedures and information to 

assist each person directly supervising 

or performing a job function listed in 

§ 121.1001 or § 135.501 for, or on behalf 

of a part 121 or part 135 operator in 

recognizing hazmat. The FAA is 

adopting the proposed provisions with 

some modifications, which are 

discussed below. The FAA believes that 

the proposed changes are necessary to 

clarify who is covered by the 

requirements and to more clearly 

specify the types of procedures and 

policies that must be provided. Some 

procedures are common to both willcarry and will-not-carry certificate 

holders. Other procedures vary, 

depending upon whether the carrier is 

a will-carry or will-not-carry certificate 

holder. 

A. Both will-carry and will-not-carry 

certificate holders: In the final rule, the 

FAA is maintaining current manual 

requirements for both will-carry and 

will-not-carry certificate holders, with 

some amendments. The final rule 

requires that manuals for both will-carry 

and will-not-carry certificate holders 

contain procedures for rejecting 

packages not properly prepared and 

offered for shipment under 49 CFR parts 

171 through 180, or that appear to 

contain hazmat. This is a change from 

the current requirements and was 

proposed because the current language 

only refers to identifying or recognizing 

packages marked and labeled as hazmat. 

The FAA wants certificate holder 

personnel to be better trained so that 

they are more likely to stop either 

packages improperly offered for 

shipment as hazmat, or packages that 

contain undeclared hazmat shipments 

which provide indicia of hazmat to a 

trained individual (discoverable hazmat 

shipment). 

Thus in the final rule, the FAA is 

requiring part 121 and part 135 

operators to have procedures for 

rejecting materials that appear to be 

improperly prepared or possible 

undeclared hazmat. The FAA has found 

that in many cases packages not marked 

and labeled as hazmat still display 

indicators that would lead a trained 

person to suspect the presence of 

hazmat. For example, terms such as 

‘‘chemicals,’’ ‘‘lighters,’’ ‘‘paint,’’ or 

‘‘solvents’’ on packages or 

accompanying documents not prepared 

as a hazmat indicate the possible 

presence of an undeclared hazmat. 

Additionally, trigger lists (such as the 

ones found in the ICAO TI Part 7, 

Chapter 6, or in IATA DGR Part 2 

Chapter 2) may be used to alert 

personnel to the possible presence of 

hazmat in items not properly identified 

as hazmat. 

In the final rule, the FAA adopts the 

requirement for both will-carry and 

will-not-carry certificate holders to 

communicate to crewmembers and 

persons, including contractors and 

subcontractors performing or directly 

supervising job functions listed in 

§§ 121.1001 and 135.501 for, on behalf 

of, the part 121 or part 135 operator of 

the operator’s procedures for notifying 

DOT of hazmat incidents and 

discrepancies. (See 

§§ 121.135(b)(23)(ii)(B) and 

135.23(p)(2)(ii)). Again, this is a change 

from the current requirements, which 

require a certificate holder to include 

this information in its manual only if 

the certificate holder has will-carry 

status. 

The manual also must communicate 

the terms under which a certificate 

holder, including a will-not-carry 

certificate holder, may carry hazmat in 

accordance with the passenger and crew 

exceptions listed in 49 CFR 175.10. 

Currently, training for these hazmat 

exceptions are included in the willcarry and will-not-carry training 

programs based on long-standing 

advisory circular guidance. This 

amendment will make the training 

enforceable. 

In the final rule, the FAA also 

requires part 121 and part 135 operators 

to indicate in their manuals whether 

they are will-carry or will-not-carry 

operators, as specified in the operations 

58812 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

specifications. (See 

§§ 121.135(b)(23)(ii)(C) and 

135.23(p)(2)(iii)). This information 

currently does not have to be in the 

certificate holder’s manual. 

B. Will-carry certificate holders only: 

A part 121 or part 135 operator 

authorized as a will-carry operator will 

be required to provide to crewmembers 

and persons, including contractors and 

subcontractors performing or directly 

supervising job functions listed in 

§§ 121.1001 and 135.501 for, or on 

behalf of, the part 121 or part 135 

operator with additional procedures and 

information regarding the transport of 

hazmat in its manual. The covered 

persons include any other person who 

directly supervises or performs a job 

function listed in § 121.1001 or 

§ 135.501 for, or on behalf of a part 121 

or part 135 operator under any other 

arrangement. 

Additionally, part 121 or part 135 

operators electing will-carry status are 

required to provide procedures and 

information to ensure that—

• The packages containing hazmat are 

properly offered, accepted, handled, 

stored, packaged and loaded on the 

aircraft in compliance with 49 CFR; 

• Requirements for notice to the pilot 

in command (49 CFR 175.33) are met; 

and 

• Aircraft replacement parts shipped 

as COMAT, consumable materials, and 

any other item regulated under the 

HMRs, are properly handled, packaged, 

and carried on board the aircraft. 

C. Will not carry operators: There are 

no manual requirements specific only to 

will-not-carry certificate holders. The 

manual requirements are shared with 

the will-carry certificate holders. 

Transfer of Hazmat Provisions to SFAR 

No. 99 

All existing hazmat training 

requirements in §§ 121.401(a)(1), 

121.433a, 135.323(a)(1), and 135.333 are 

moved into Special Federal Aviation 

Regulation (SFAR) No. 99 to make it 

easier for certificate holders to identify 

existing requirements and distinguish 

them from new requirements. New 

§§ 121.1003 and 135.503 (proposed as 

§§ 121.802 and 135.502) will require 

hazmat training for part 119 certificate 

holders conducting operations in 

accordance with part 121 and/or part 

135. Section 121.401 is shown in the 

regulatory text only to show how the 

section reads once the hazmat training 

requirements are removed. The SFAR 

will expire on February 7, 2007. 

Part 121—Subpart Z and Part 135 

Subpart K—Hazardous Materials 

Training Program 

The FAA notes that the numbering of 

new sections in part 121 has changed 

due to the adoption of new rules since 

the NPRM was published. In the final 

rule, therefore, the new subpart and 

sections are renumbered accordingly. In 

addition, the FAA is skipping numbers 

in between sections to allow room for 

the addition of new sections in the 

future. Therefore, regulations proposed 

as subpart Y §§ 121.801 through 121.804 

are renumbered as subpart Z 

§§ 121.1001 through 121.1007 in the 

final rule. The FAA is renumbering 

sections in part 135 subpart K for the 

same reason. Sections in subpart K that 

were proposed as §§ 135.501 through 

135.504 are renumbered as §§ 135.501 

through 135.507 in the final rule. 

Hazmat training rules in part 121, 

subpart Z, and part 135, subpart K, 

require all air carriers and commercial 

operators to train each crewmember and 

person who directly supervises or 

performs a job function listed in 

§ 121.1001 or § 135.501. The FAA 

believes that adequate training of each 

person involved in a job function listed 

in § 121.1001 or § 135.501 will greatly 

enhance safety in air transportation and 

help avoid life-threatening incidents. 

Also, due to the frequency of 

undeclared shipments, the FAA believes 

that a broader training program, which 

includes hazmat recognition training, 

must be mandated for all part 121 and 

part 135 operators. However, as 

discussed below, the FAA is removing 

the term ‘‘curriculum’’ and the modules 

previously included in proposed 

Appendix N (adopted as Appendix O) of 

part 121 in this final rule. 

1. Applicability and definitions 

(§§ 121.1001 and 135.501)—The final 

rule includes new subparts that 

prescribe requirements for certificate 

holders to train crewmembers and 

persons directly supervising or 

performing a job function listed in 

§ 121.1001 or § 135.501, whether the 

part 121 or part 135 operator is a willcarry or will-not-carry operator. The 

will-carry or will-not-carry status is 

relevant only to the content of the 

training, not to the requirement to train. 

The FAA is removing the term 

‘‘curriculum’’ because the FAA has 

decided against mandating a 

curriculum. Instead, it will be the 

certificate holder’s responsibility to 

determine which workers require 

certain training based on the job 

functions they perform. The certificate 

holder will need to determine the level, 

content and duration of training. 

The current requirements in 

§§ 121.433a and 135.333 apply only to 

persons handling or carrying hazardous 

material, even though the approved 

hazmat training programs contained in 

the certificate holder’s manuals indicate 

the training is currently applied on a 

broader basis. The hazmat training 

requirements contained in the final rule 

apply to a broader group of individuals 

than covered in the current regulations. 

1.A. Paragraph (a): Paragraph (a) 

identifies who is required to receive 

hazmat training. The training 

requirements cover crewmembers and 

persons who directly supervise or 

perform a job function listed in 

§ 121.1001 or § 135.501 for, or on behalf 

of a certificate holder in the transport of 

an item on board an aircraft. Part of the 

training includes teaching individuals 

how to recognize materials that may be 

hazmat but are improperly prepared for 

shipment. The NPRM included a list of 

specific job positions and the type of 

training they needed. The final rule 

establishes training based on the job 

function performed by the employee. 

Currently, §§ 121.433a and 135.333 

forbid operators from using a person to 

perform, and forbids a person from 

performing, ‘‘any assigned duties and 

responsibilities for the handling or 

carriage of dangerous articles and 

magnetized materials governed by Title 

49 CFR’’ unless the person has been 

trained. The NPRM proposed 

applicability provisions in §§ 121.801 

(adopted as § 121.1001) and 135.501 

that were broad enough to cover not 

only those persons performing a job 

function listed in § 121.1001 or 

§ 135.501, but also those persons 

supervising the performance of that job 

function. This ensured that the 

certificate holder identified and trained 

each person who could reasonably be 

foreseen as supervising or performing a 

TRF, whether or not it was part of his 

or her day-to-day job duties (functionspecific training). In the final rule, the 

FAA is clarifying that the training 

requirement does not apply to every 

supervisor, but rather to the ‘‘direct’’

supervisor who oversees the 

performance of a job function listed in 

§ 121.1001 or § 135.501. 

In this final rule, the FAA also 

clarifies the portion of the NPRM 

preamble that discussed when an 

individual’s job function would 

necessitate training. The NPRM 

language that generated confusion is as 

follows: ‘‘Whether a person were 

officially assigned to perform a job 

function would be irrelevant [to the 

need to train]. This would ensure that 

the certificate holder identifies and 

trains each person who could 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 58813 

reasonably be foreseen as performing or 

supervising a TRF, whether or not it is 

part of his or her job description.’’

It was not the FAA’s intent to require 

a part 121 or part 135 operator’s entire 

work force to receive hazmat training. 

As an example, a person can be 

reasonably foreseen as performing or 

directly supervising a job function listed 

in § 121.1001 or § 135.501 when he or 

she may be asked to fill in for a sick or 

absent worker or supervisor. The 

certificate holder has the responsibility 

to determine which employees meet the 

‘‘function specific’’ or ‘‘assigned’’

requirements to mandate training. The 

training requirements attach to the 

actual job function performed or 

directly supervised. 

The FAA has also removed the job 

functions of ‘‘unloading’’ and ‘‘carriage’’

from the list of covered job functions in 

the final rule. This amendment brings 

the job functions covered in the training 

rule closely aligned with the 2005 

edition of the ICAO TI and the IATA 

DGR hazmat training requirements. The 

FAA does not believe that removing 

these terms from the list of covered 

functions adversely impacts safety. 

First, the term ‘‘unloading’’ covers a job 

function that actually removes the item 

from the aircraft where it does not pose 

a danger. Second, FAA’s research 

indicates that the personnel loading the 

aircraft are the same as the personnel 

unloading the aircraft. Since loading is 

a covered job function, these persons 

would be trained in accordance with the 

rule. Finally, if the unloaded cargo is 

subsequently loaded onto another 

aircraft, then the person would need to 

be trained. With regard to removing 

‘‘carriage,’’ the FAA does not believe 

there is a safety issue since the term 

essentially incorporates all of the listed 

job functions and is not a stand-alone 

term. 

1.B. Paragraph (b): Sections 121.1001 

(b) (proposed as § 121.801(b)) and 

135.501(b) set forth relevant definitions. 

Paragraph (b)(1) defines ‘‘Company 

material (COMAT)’’ as material owned 

or used by the certificate holder.’’

COMAT is a term of art used in the 

aviation industry. The FAA is using the 

term to ensure that persons are trained 

to understand that COMAT classified as 

hazardous material must be marked, 

labeled, and identified as hazmat, and 

that there is no exception for the 

transport of hazardous material as 

COMAT for will-not-carry certificate 

holders. In the final rule the FAA is not 

changing this definition. 

Paragraph (b)(2) defines ‘‘initial 

hazardous material training.’’ The 

definition of ‘‘initial hazardous material 

training’’ is consistent with the initial 

training requirement in 49 CFR part 172 

subpart H, although 49 CFR does not 

specifically define initial hazmat 

training. In the final rule the FAA is not 

changing this definition. 

Paragraph (b)(3) defines ‘‘recurrent 

hazardous material training.’’ The 

definition of ‘‘recurrent hazardous 

materials training’’ is also consistent 

with the way the term is used in 49 CFR 

part 172 subpart H, although under 

PHMSA’s rules, this term is not defined. 

The NPRM proposed retaining an 

annual training requirement. However, 

the FAA is amending this proposal in 

the final rule to mandate recurrent 

hazardous material training every 24 

months, consistent with the ICAO TI 

and the IATA DGR. 

2. General Requirement to Train 

(§§ 121.1003 and 135.503) (proposed as 

§§ 121.802 and 135.502))—In the 

NPRM, the FAA proposed mandating a 

‘‘curriculum’’ for both will-carry and 

will-not-carry certificate holders to 

improve the knowledge base of persons 

supervising or performing a TRF. The 

term ‘‘curriculum,’’ as used in the 

NPRM was widely misunderstood. 

Upon further consideration, the FAA 

realizes that the term ‘‘content’’ would 

have been a better description of the 

requirement. Actual curriculum 

(content) would vary depending upon 

the certificate holder’s hazmat 

acceptance policy and the worker’s job 

function. Standards for will-not-carry 

operators require that both part 121 and 

part 135 operators conduct training to 

assist those persons directly supervising 

or performing a job function listed in 

§ 121.1001 or § 135.501 to identify 

possible undeclared, as well as 

declared, hazmat. 

The training for will-carry operators 

covers two phases of training specified 

by the HMRs—general awareness 

training and function-specific training. 

The type of hazmat training necessary 

depends upon the job function 

performed or directly supervised. It is 

the responsibility of the certificate 

holder to ensure that the level of 

training is adequate and appropriate for 

each worker’s job function. The specific 

level and duration of training is 

determined by the certificate holder, not 

the FAA. 

2.A. Paragraph (a)—Sections 

121.1003(a) and 135.503(a) (proposed as 

§§ 121.802(a) and 135.502(a)) require all 

hazmat training programs to include, at 

a minimum, the requirements of 

Appendix O of part 121. The training 

programs will ensure that each 

crewmember and person directly 

supervising or performing a job function 

listed in § 121.1001 or § 135.501 is 

trained to comply with the applicable 

requirements of 49 CFR parts 171 

through 180, and that persons are 

trained to look for certain indicia that 

may indicate an undeclared 

(discoverable hazmat) or improperly 

prepared hazmat item. The FAA is 

closely aligning the job functions and 

the associated minimum aspects of 

training with the 2005 edition of the 

ICAO TI and the IATA DGR standards. 

2.B. Paragraph (b)—Under paragraph 

(b), a certificate holder must develop an 

organized training program that will 

build upon a person’s knowledge of 

hazmat regulations, keep up with 

current requirements, and focus on any 

problem areas. This requirement is 

consistent with current regulatory 

provisions. With certain exceptions, 

each crewmember and person 

performing or directly supervising a job 

function listed in § 121.1001 or 

§ 135.501 will be required to receive 

initial hazardous materials training 

prior to performing or directly 

supervising that job function. 

2.C. Paragraph (c)—Under paragraph 

(c) the certificate holder must obtain 

FAA approval of the hazmat training 

program prior to implementing the 

program. This requirement is consistent 

with the current training requirements 

in §§ 121.401 and 135.323. 

3. Training Requirement 

(§§ 121.1005(a) and 135.505(a)) 

(proposed as §§ 121.803 (a) and 135.503 

(a))—Sections 121.1005(a) and 

135.505(a) provide that no certificate 

holder can use any crewmember and 

person to directly supervise or perform 

a job function listed in § 121.1001 or 

§ 135.501, unless that person has 

satisfactorily completed the certificated 

holder’s FAA-approved initial or 

recurrent hazardous materials training 

program within the past 24 months. A 

person is satisfactorily trained when 

that person understands the relevant 

training material and is capable of 

performing his or her job in compliance 

with both 49 CFR parts 171 through 180 

and part 121, subpart Z, or part 135, 

subpart K, as applicable. 

A person who has not received this 

training cannot be used to directly 

supervise or perform a job function 

listed in § 121.1001 or § 135.501, unless 

the conditions of an exception were 

satisfied. 

4. New Hire/New Job Functions—

(§§ 121.1005(b) and 135.505(b)) 

(proposed as §§ 121.803(b) and 

135.50(b))—The FAA proposed two 

exceptions to the training requirements 

contained in §§ 121.1005(a) and 

135.505(a). These exceptions apply to 

persons who are new hires or who are 

changing job functions and have not 

received the required initial or recurrent 

58814 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

hazmat training for the new job 

function. The new hire/new job 

function exception applies only to 

persons performing a job function 

involving storage incidental to 

transport, or loading of items on the part 

121 or part 135 operator’s aircraft for 

transport. This exception could not be 

used for persons performing or directly 

supervising any other job function listed 

in § 121.1001 or § 135.501 for, or on 

behalf of the part 121 or part 135 

operator. The new hire/new job function 

exception can be applied for a period of 

not more than 30 days from either the 

date of hire or, for a change of job 

function, the date the person began 

performing the new job function. 

To use this exception, the person 

would have to be under the direct visual 

supervision of another properly trained 

employee authorized to directly 

supervise him or her by the part 121 or 

part 135 operator. The direct supervisor 

must have successfully completed the 

certificate holder’s approved initial or 

recurrent hazardous materials training 

program. In addition, the certificate 

holder must comply with the 

recordkeeping requirements in 

§ 121.1007(b) or § 135.507(b) (proposed 

as §§ 121.804(b) and 135.804(b)), as 

applicable. The direct supervisor must 

observe the untrained person’s 

performance to ensure that the job 

function is performed in compliance 

with both the FAA’s regulations and the 

DOT’s HMRs. Use of a video camera 

will not satisfy the direct visual 

supervision requirement. The 

requirement for the supervisor-toworker ratio to be approved by the 

principal operations inspector or the 

principal security inspector is being 

removed. The FAA has determined that 

the requirement for the supervisor to 

visually observe the untrained person’s 

performance provides sufficient 

oversight. 

The new hire/new job function 

exception is similar to the exception in 

49 CFR 172.704(c)(1) for multi-modal 

training in that it applies to new hires 

or persons changing job functions. 

However, unlike the exception in 49 

CFR, this exception is only valid for 30 

days from the date of employment or a 

change in job function. This is more 

limited than the new hire/new job 

function exception now in 49 CFR, 

which applies for 90 days after 

employment or a change in job function. 

5. Persons Working for More Than 

One Certificate Holder (§§ 121.1005(c) 

and 135.505(c)) (proposed as 

§§ 121.803(c) and 135.503(c))—The 

second exception is in §§ 121.1005(c) 

and 135.505(c) and applies to workers 

who directly supervise or perform a job 

function listed in § 121.1001 or 

§ 135.501 for, or on behalf of more than 

one part 121 or part 135 operator. Under 

this exception, a part 121 or part 135 

operator using a person to directly 

supervise or perform a job function 

listed in § 121.1001 or § 135.501 need 

only train that person in its own 

policies and procedures and any 

additional information not covered by 

the other part 121 or part 135 operator’s 

training program, in accordance with its 

own hazardous materials training 

program. In the final rule, the FAA is 

changing the term ‘‘authorized, 

knowledgeable person’’ to ‘‘person 

designated to hold the records 

representing the other certificate 

holder.’’ This change is necessary 

because there are no standards a 

certificate holder can apply to 

determine who is an ‘‘authorized, 

knowledgeable person.’’ However, a 

certificate holder should have an 

individual responsible for maintaining 

records. 

The certificate holder can use this 

exception only if both of the following 

conditions are met: 

(1) The certificate holder using this 

exception receives written verification 

from the person designated to hold the 

records representing the other certificate 

holder for whom the person works that 

the person has satisfactorily completed 

that certificate holder’s required initial 

or recurrent approved hazardous 

material training for that specific job 

function in the last 24 months. 

(2) The certificate holder who trained 

the person has the same will-carry or 

will-not-carry status listed in its 

operations specifications as the 

certificate holder using the exception. 

This also applies to an employee who 

previously worked for a will-not-carry 

certificate holder providing any policy 

differences are communicated to the 

employee. 

The NPRM contained an example for 

a repair station that was misunderstood. 

The only repair station workers required 

to be trained in the part 121 or part 135 

operator’s FAA-approved training 

program are the repair station workers 

performing or directly supervising a job 

function listed in § 121.1001 or 

§ 135.501 for, or on behalf of the part 

121 or 135 operator including loading 

the certificate holder’s aircraft for 

transport. The requirement to train the 

repair station workers who perform or 

directly supervise a job function listed 

in § 121.1001 or § 135.501 for, or on 

behalf of the part 121 or 135 operator is 

not any different than training any other 

contractor performing or directly 

supervising a job function listed in 

§ 121.1001 or § 135.501 for, or on behalf 

of the part 121 or 135 operator. The 

FAA is providing the following example 

to help clarify the application of this 

exception. 

Example B: Employees loading (a job 

function listed in § 121.1001 or § 135.501) a 

part 121 or part 135 operator’s aircraft for 

transport perform work, including the job 

function of loading the aircraft, for 10 willcarry certificate holders. Persons performing 

any job function involving loading of a part 

121 or a part 135 operator’s aircraft will have 

to be trained according to Appendix O 

(proposed as Appendix N) of part 121 under 

the part 121 or part 135 operator’s FAAapproved hazmat training program. Then the 

repair station employees will receive training 

in the policies, procedures, and any 

differences for each of the remaining nine 

part 121 or part 135 operator’s training 

programs. The substantive requirements such 

as marking, labeling, documentation, etc. in 

the hazmat training programs are 

standardized by PHMSA’s HMRs, and vary 

little among will-carry certificate holders. 

The person required to be trained under the 

FAA-approved training program would have 

to receive this training every 24 months. 

However, if a worker performed loading for 

part 121 or part 135 will-not-carry certificate 

holders, the repair station could not use the 

exception to also perform loading or any 

other job function listed in § 121.1001 or 

§ 135.501 for, or on behalf of, a will-carry 

certificate holder, without the worker being 

trained. The worker will have to complete 

the hazmat training required under the willcarry certificate holder’s approved hazmat 

training program. 

The FAA believes that this exception 

will help to minimize the training 

burden. Given that the core of each 

certificate holder’s hazmat training 

program will be substantially the same; 

the only differences will be a certificate 

holder’s policies and procedures for 

implementing the regulations. 

6. Recurrent Training (§§ 121.1005(d) 

and 135.505(d)) (proposed as 

§§ 121.803(d) and 135.503(d))—The 

definition of the term ‘‘recurrent 

hazardous materials training’’ is similar 

to the definition of ‘‘recurrent training’’

used in part 121, subpart O, for flight 

and proficiency training. The FAA is 

mandating that the recurrent hazmat 

training be completed within 24 months 

while recurrent flight and proficiency 

training remains on an annual schedule. 

Thus, all persons affected by this rule 

are required to receive hazardous 

materials training every 24 months. 

However, a person may receive 

recurrent hazardous material training 

earlier than it is due or before the end 

of the month after it is due. These 

timing provisions are similar to those 

requirements currently contained in 

§ 121.433a(a). Therefore, if recurrent 

hazmat training is due in January, but 

completed in February, it will be 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 58815 

considered as having been 

accomplished in January, and recurrent 

training would be due again before the 

end of 24 months following January. 

The training is not considered out-ofdate until 31 days after the 24-month 

anniversary of the last training. Section 

121.1005(d) states: ‘‘A person who 

satisfactorily completes recurrent 

hazmat training in the calendar month 

before or the calendar month after the 

month in which the training is due is 

considered to have taken that training 

during the month in which it is due. If 

the person completes this training 

earlier than the month before it is due, 

the month of the completion date 

becomes the new anniversary date.’’

7. Notice to Repair Stations 

(§§ 121.1005(e) and 135.505(e)) 

(proposed as §§ 121.803(e) and 

135.503(e))—Based on the NTSB’s 

report on Valujet Flight 592 and the 

FAA’s experience with repair stations, 

the FAA has concluded that there 

should be better communication 

between repair stations and the part 121 

and part 135 operators regarding the 

will-carry or will-not-carry status of the 

certificate holder. The NPRM proposed 

to ensure this communication in, 

§§ 121.1005(e) and 135.505(e) which 

required certificate holders to provide 

written notification of their will-carry or 

will-not-carry status and policies and 

procedures to each repair station that 

performed work on their behalf and that 

uses or replaces consumable materials, 

aircraft parts, or other items regulated 

by 49 CFR parts 171 through 180. The 

repair stations covered by this 

requirement were viewed broadly by 

many commenters because the language 

used in the NPRM was unclear. The 

FAA is therefore clarifying that the 

repair stations intended to be covered 

under this rule are the repair stations 

that perform work for, or on behalf of a 

part 121 or part 135 operators and are 

regulated by 49 CFR parts 171 through 

180. 

The proposed rule also contained 

language that would have required the 

certificate holder to make sure the repair 

station was aware of the will-carry or 

will-not-carry status of the certificate 

holder. The FAA is removing this 

language in the final rule and replacing 

it with a requirement for the part 145 

certificate holder to acknowledge 

receipt of the notification. 

8. Foreign Locations (§§ 121.1005(f) 

and 135.505(f)) (proposed as 

§§ 121.803(f) and 135.503(f))—The 

current exception in § 121.433a for 

operators operating at a foreign location 

in §§ 121.1005(f) and 135.505(f) is 

maintained in the final rule. Under the 

final rule, part 121 or part 135 operators 

operating in foreign locations where 

they are required to use persons 

working in that country to load aircraft 

can use persons even if they have not 

received the required hazmat training, 

but only if they are under the direct 

visual supervision of someone who has 

received the required initial or recurrent 

training. The current exception in 

§ 121.433a applies to those persons 

loading and unloading an item onto an 

aircraft. The job function of unloading 

has been removed from this exception 

as it has been removed from the list of 

covered job functions that require 

hazmat training under this final rule. 

The current exception also includes the 

term ‘‘handling;’’ however, the FAA is 

not including handling in the final rule 

because it may be confusing. The use of 

the term ‘‘handling’’ in the current CFR 

refers to the handling that would be 

required during the loading of the 

aircraft. Although the FAA is not 

including this term in the final rule, the 

FAA still recognizes that those people 

who load must handle the cargo. The 

removal of the term ‘‘handling’’ is 

necessary, however, to eliminate any 

confusion over the breadth of the 

exception. 

9. Recordkeeping Requirements 

(§§ 121.1007 and 135.507) (proposed 

§§ 121.804 and 121.504). 

9.A. Paragraph (a)—Sections 

121.1007(a) and 135.507(a) require each 

certificate holder to maintain training 

records of all initial and recurrent 

hazmat training received within the 

preceding 3 years for all job functions of 

persons listed in Appendix O (proposed 

as Appendix N) of part 121 who directly 

supervise or perform a job function 

listed in § 121.1001 or § 135.501 for 90 

days after they stop directly supervising 

or performing the covered job function. 

This length of time is identical to that 

required by 49 CFR 172.704(d). The 

certificate holder is responsible for 

maintaining records for direct 

employees, contractors, subcontractors, 

and any other person directly 

supervising or performing a job function 

listed in § 121.1001 or § 135.501 for, or 

on behalf of the part 121 or 135 

operator. Records may be maintained 

electronically. 

9.B. Paragraph (b)—Paragraph (b) 

requires the certificate holder make the 

records available to the FAA upon 

request at the location where the trained 

person performs or directly supervises 

the covered job function. Records must 

be available at the location at which a 

person works and may be provided by 

electronic means. This modification 

aligns the provision with 49 CFR, the 

ICAO TI, and the IATA DGR. The 

records are required to be maintained 

for 90 days after the person stops 

directly supervising or performing a job 

function listed in § 121.1001 or 

§ 135.501. 

9.C. Paragraph (c)—Under proposed 

§§ 121.804(c) and 135.504(c) the 

required information to be maintained 

was more specific than that required by 

49 CFR 172.704(d). The FAA proposed 

that the records would have to contain 

references to the individual’s job 

function performed or supervised; dates 

of each training course successfully 

completed within the preceding three 

years; a statement signed and dated by 

a person designated by the director of 

training; and a description of each 

training course successfully completed. 

In §§ 121.1007(c) and 135.507(c) of the 

final rule, the FAA is aligning the 

required contents for each record with 

the ICAO TI, the IATA DGR, and 49 

CFR. Under the final rule, the records 

must contain the individual’s name; 

most recent training completion date; a 

description, copy, or reference to 

training materials used to meet the 

training requirement; name and address 

of organization providing the training; 

and a copy of the certification issued 

when an individual was trained 

(showing that a test was satisfactorily 

completed). 

Both the ‘‘format’’ of the record 

verifying completion of training and 

‘‘who’’ records the verification would be 

left to the operator. The recordkeeping 

enables the FAA to monitor compliance 

with the hazmat training requirements. 

However, to alleviate duplication of 

recordkeeping, the FAA is changing the 

final rule so that the required contents 

are aligned with 49 CFR 172.704(d), 

ICAO TI 1;4.2.4 and IATA DGR 

1;1.5.4.1. 

9.D. Paragraph (d)—Sections 

121.1007(d) and 135.507(d) contain a 

recordkeeping requirement for a 

certificate holder using the new hire/ 

new job function exception. This 

requirement is necessary to monitor 

compliance with the new exception. 

Under the requirements of 

§§ 121.1007(b) and 135.507(b), a 

certificate holder must maintain a 

record that includes: 

(1) A signed statement from an 

authorized representative of the 

certificate holder authorizing the use of 

the person in accordance with the 

exception; 

(2) The date of hire or change in job 

function; 

(3) The person’s name and assigned 

job functions; 

(4) The name of the supervisor of the 

job function; and 

(5) The date the person is to receive 

and complete hazmat training in 

58816 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

accordance with Appendix O of part 

121. 

Part 121—Appendix O (Proposed as 

Appendix N)—Hazardous Materials 

Training Requirements for Certificate 

Holders 

The FAA notes that the lettering of 

the appendices in part 121 has changed 

due to other rulemaking activity since 

the NPRM was published. In the final 

rule, therefore, proposed Appendix N is 

being adopted as Appendix O. 

Many commenters disagreed with the 

proposal to mandate curriculum for the 

certificate holder’s hazmat training 

program. The FAA agrees and is closely 

aligning the final rule with the training 

requirements in the 2005 edition of the 

ICAO TI and the IATA DGR. The 

certificate holders indicated that the 

ICAO TI standards are the best common 

reference point to facilitate the uniform, 

seamless handling of hazmat in 

international air transport. By modifying 

the final rule to allow certificate holders 

to develop their own training 

curriculum, the FAA believes that the 

need to provide model hazardous 

material training programs has been 

diminished. 

Consequently, the FAA is removing 

the training modules from Appendix O. 

Table 1 ‘‘Operators That Transport 

Hazardous Materials (Will-Carry 

Certificate Holders)’’ and Table 2 

‘‘Operators That Do Not Transport 

Hazardous Materials (Will-Not-Carry 

Certificate Holders)’’ in Appendix O 

will provide the minimum aspects to be 

covered in the certificate holder’s 

hazmat training program. These 

minimum requirements will apply to 

persons performing or directly 

supervising a job function listed in 

§ 121.1001 or § 135.501 for, or on behalf 

of the part 121 or part 135 operator. If 

a certificate holder’s FAA-approved 

hazmat training program currently 

contains the minimum requirements, no 

changes will be required. 

Will-not-carry certificate holders 

(both part 121 and part 135) will be 

required to conduct recognition training 

to assist persons directly supervising or 

performing a job function covered in 

Appendix O Table 2 in identifying 

discoverable undeclared hazmat offered 

for shipment. 

Will-carry certificate holders (both 

part 121 and part 135) are required to 

cover the three phases of training 

specified by the HMRs—General 

awareness, function-specific, and safety 

training. The specific job function 

performed or directly supervised and 

the certificate holder’s policies and 

procedures will determine the level of 

training required under Appendix O. 

General awareness training is intended 

to give general information and 

guidance about the overall hazmat 

regulations. Function-specific training is 

intended to give an in-depth and 

detailed understanding of the 

regulations regarding a specific job 

function that the employee will 

perform. 

The change adopted in the final rule 

reflects changes to the 2005 edition of 

the ICAO TI and the IATA DGR. The 

FAA proposed a category of staff 

approach consistent with the ICAO TI 

and the IATA DGR at the time the 

NPRM was drafted. However, the 2005 

edition of the ICAO TI adopts a taskoriented approach, and this is the 

approach the FAA is now adopting. The 

2005 edition of the ICAO TI 

recommended that dangerous goods 

training programs, approved by the 

competent authorities, be established 

and maintained by or on behalf of 

persons with various responsibilities in 

processing cargo (not necessarily 

involving dangerous goods). The ICAO 

Dangerous Goods Panel determined that 

persons handling only non-dangerous 

goods should undertake dangerous 

goods training. Subsequent to the 2005 

ICAO TI amendments being announced, 

IATA adopted the same training 

requirement to be included in the 2005–

2006 IATA DGR. The IATA DGR reflects 

the industry standard practices or 

operational considerations, including 

training for those employees and 

operators handling only non-dangerous 

goods. 

In Appendix O of part 121, the FAA 

is using a matrix similar to the matrix 

in the ICAO TI Table 1–4 and the IATA 

DGR Table 1.5A. The matrix has seven 

categories of personnel and 14 aspects 

of hazmat training. Since the categories 

and matrices are function-based, the 

required components in the training 

programs will be the same or similar to 

requirements for compliance with 

ICAO, IATA, and 49 CFR. The aspects 

of training in Appendix O are 

designated subject matter relating to 

dangerous goods transport with which 

the various persons performing specific 

functions must be familiar. These are 

comparable to the ‘‘area of training’’

listed in the tables of proposed 

Appendix N of the NPRM. The detailed 

curriculum, previously proposed in 

Modules 1 through 13 in the NPRM, are 

removed in the final rule to allow the 

certificate holder to use the functions 

being performed to determine the 

training commensurate with the 

personnel’s responsibilities taking into 

account the requirements in Appendix 

O. Therefore, in the final rule, the FAA 

is clarifying that the certificate holder 

has the responsibility to determine the 

level of training required, the method of 

training, duration, type of testing 

necessary, and the method of 

recordkeeping. Thus, in the final rule, 

the FAA is amending the proposed 

requirement to test all persons through 

a method that verifies comprehension of 

each subject area. The certificate holder 

must certify that a test has been 

completed satisfactorily. 

Under the final rule, part 121 and part 

135 operators will still need to provide 

any operator-specific policies and 

procedures not specifically mentioned 

in Appendix O. The FAA believes each 

certificate holder currently trains all 

workers in its individual policies and 

procedures, so this will not be an 

additional requirement. If a certificate 

holder’s training program differs from 

the required format, that fact can be 

discussed with the FAA during the 

approval process. 

The following examples are designed 

to clarify the application of hazmat 

training. 

Example C: A will-carry certificate holder 

that accepts all hazmat allowed by regulation 

will develop a training program to include all 

applicable topics or aspects identified in the 

table in Appendix O. The training must 

provide both an in-depth appreciation of the 

whole subject and, policies and procedures 

specific to the job function being performed. 

Depending on the responsibilities of the 

person, the aspects of training to be covered 

may vary from those shown in Appendix O. 

Example D: A will-carry certificate holder 

that accepts hazmat, but has a prohibition on 

carrying radioactive material will develop a 

training program to include all applicable 

topics or aspects identified in Table 1 in 

Appendix O. This training must provide an 

in-depth appreciation of hazmat as a whole 

and will contain an awareness of radioactive 

material and knowledge of the policy of the 

certificate holder’s prohibition against the 

transport of radioactive material for 

transportation. Depending on the 

responsibilities of the person, the aspects of 

training to be covered may vary from those 

shown in Appendix O. 

Example E: A certificate holder’s worker 

(applies to both will-carry and will-not-carry 

certificate holders) accepts small parcel cargo 

at the ticket counter. In addition to general 

awareness training on the general philosophy 

and limitations of hazmat, the person is 

required to have training applicable to 

passenger handling and cargo acceptance. 

Depending on the responsibilities of the 

person and whether or not hazardous 

materials are accepted at that counter, the 

aspects of training to be covered may vary 

from those shown in Appendix O. 

Example F: A will-not-carry certificate 

holder that does not accept hazmat develops 

a training program that includes all required 

aspects or topics in Table 2 of Appendix O. 

This training must provide general 

information and guidance to workers to give 

a general appreciation of the requirements. 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 58817 

Depending on the responsibilities of the 

person, the aspects of training to be covered 

may vary from those shown in Appendix O. 

Example G: When a part 121 or part 135 

operator, its subsidiary or agent offers a 

consignment of hazmat for air transport, the 

certificate holder, subsidiary, or agent is a 

shipper and must comply with shipper’s 

responsibilities and training. This is 

applicable even if the consignment is to be 

transported on its own or another certificate 

holder’s aircraft. 

Part 135—Hazardous Materials 

Training Program (§§ 135.501 Through 

135.507) (Proposed as §§ 135.501 

Through 135.504) 

The FAA notes that the numbering of 

sections in part 135 has changed due to 

the adoption of new rules since the 

NPRM was published. In the final rule, 

therefore, sections in subpart K are 

renumbered accordingly. In addition, 

the FAA is skipping numbers in 

between sections to allow room for the 

addition of new sections in the future. 

Therefore, sections in subpart K that 

were proposed as §§ 135.501 through 

135.504 are renumbered as §§ 135.501 

through 135.507 in the final rule. 

Currently, part 135 contains 

exceptions for certificate holders who 

use only one pilot in their operations. 

Specifically, these certificate holders are 

excepted from the manual requirements 

in § 135.21. These certificate holders, 

however, will remain subject to the 

hazmat training requirements in subpart 

K. 

All part 135 operators, including 

single-pilot certificate holders, must 

meet the hazmat training requirements 

in Appendix O of part 121. 

Additionally, those persons loading 

aircraft for these certificate holders must 

have hazmat training that meets the 

requirements of Appendix O of part 121, 

including being informed of the 

certificate holder’s restrictions and 

limitations regarding the transport of 

hazmat or meet the exception in 

§ 135.505(b). 

The certificate holders with only one 

pilot do not have an approved hazmat 

training program. These certificate 

holders must be able to demonstrate 

compliance with this hazmat training 

rule and will have to continue to 

maintain records of training. In 

addition, certificate holders conducting 

operations that transport hazmat with 

one pilot remain subject to DOT’s 

hazardous material training and 

recordkeeping requirements in 49 CFR 

part 172 subpart H. 

Part 145—Repair Stations 

Section 145.53 Issue of Certificate 

(Proposed as § 145.11 (a)(5)) 

Section 145.57 Amendment to or 

Transfer of a Certificate 

The FAA notes that the numbering of 

sections in part 145 has changed due to 

the adoption of new rules since the 

NPRM was published. Therefore, 

proposed § 145.11 (a)(5) is incorporated 

into § 145.53 in the final rule. 

The FAA continues to be concerned 

about hazmat training provided to 

persons performing work at repair 

stations used by part 121 or part 135 

operators. Repair stations workers that 

perform work on behalf of part 121 or 

part 135 operators that are ‘‘hazmat 

employers’’ as defined by 49 CFR 171.8, 

currently must establish a hazmat 

training program under 49 CFR part 172 

subpart H. Historically, the FAA has 

verified compliance with hazmat 

training requirements only after an 

enforcement proceeding was initiated. 

The FAA believes this regulation adopts 

a pro-active approach. If the hazmat 

training requirements are not complied 

with, the FAA will not issue the repair 

station’s certificate or rating. 

As revised in this final rule, § 145.53 

(proposed as § 145.11(a)(5)) requires 

part 145 certificate holders located 

within the United States to certify in 

writing that all hazmat employees (see 

49 CFR 171.8) for the repair station, its 

contractors, or subcontractors are 

trained as required in 49 CFR part 172 

subpart H. Part 145 certificate holders 

located outside the United States must 

certify in writing that all employees for 

the repair station, its contractors, or 

subcontractors performing a job 

function involving the transport of 

dangerous goods (hazardous material) 

are trained as outlined in the most 

current edition of the International Civil 

Aviation Organization Technical 

Instructions for the Safe Transport of 

Dangerous Goods by Air. 

This certification must be submitted 

prior to the FAA’s issuing a part 145 

certificate or rating. The certification 

also must be provided by the holder of 

a repair station certificate when 

applying for a change to its certificate. 

This includes a change to the location 

of the repair station, or a request to add 

or amend a rating. Requiring a repair 

station to provide this certification 

imposes minimal additional 

documentation as part of the application 

for certification or rating process, but 

ensures that the applicant is aware of its 

training responsibility under the HMRs. 

Section 145.165 Hazardous Materials 

Training (Proposed as § 145.5) 

The FAA notes that the numbering of 

sections in part 145 has changed due to 

the adoption of new rules since the 

NPRM was published. Therefore, 

proposed § 145.5 is adopted as § 145.165 

in the final rule. 

Section § 145.165 paragraph (a) 

(proposed as § 145.5(a)) provides a cross 

reference to the hazardous materials 

training requirement in 49 CFR. By 

including this cross reference in part 

145, the FAA is notifying all repair 

stations that they must carefully review 

the hazardous properties of the items 

with which they work to determine 

whether they are regulated by 49 CFR 

parts 171 through 180. If so, the repair 

station must establish and implement a 

hazardous materials training program as 

currently required by 49 CFR part 172 

subpart H. 

In the final rule, the FAA is removing 

the language ‘‘uses or replaces aircraft 

components, uses or handles 

consumable hazardous materials or 

other items regulated by 49 CFR parts 

171 through 180’’ to clarify that the 

repair stations intended to be covered 

under this final rule are the repair 

stations that perform work for, or on 

behalf of a part 121 or part 135 operator 

and are regulated by 49 CFR parts 171 

through 180. A repair station may use or 

handle hazardous materials without 

placing those items in transportation. 

Thus only the repair stations that 

perform functions regulated under 49 

CFR parts 171–180 would be covered by 

this requirement. 

Many required items on aircraft are 

regulated hazmat when shipped as 

cargo. Examples include oxygen 

generators used to provide oxygen to 

passengers in the event of an 

emergency, and fuel control units for jet 

engines. Since the crash of Valujet 

Flight 592, the FAA repeatedly has 

investigated incidents where oxygen 

generators and fuel control units were 

transported as cargo that were offered 

and accepted for air transportation 

improperly. 

While this regulation is designed to 

help improve compliance and prevent 

these types of mistakes, the FAA is also 

clarifying the interplay of requirements 

between FAA and DOT hazmat training 

regulations. If a repair station is 

performing the functions of a shipper 

and preparing an item classified as a 

hazardous material (including materials 

shipped as COMAT) for shipment by 

air, DOT’s hazmat training regulations 

in 49 CFR part 172 H currently apply. 

If a person does not perform a job 

function listed in § 121.1001 or 

58818 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

§ 135.501 on behalf of the part 121 or 

part 135 operator, then that person does 

not have to be trained under the FAA’s 

training regulations. However, if a repair 

station worker performs a job function 

listed in § 121.1001 or § 135.501 for, or 

on behalf of the part 121 or 135 operator 

then that person must be trained in 

accordance with both DOT’s hazmat 

training regulations and FAA’s hazmat 

training regulations. 

The FAA believes the only job 

function currently or previously 

performed by repair stations that are not 

also affiliated with part 121 and part 

135 operators is the loading of the 

certificate holder’s aircraft for transport. 

Since any person currently loading the 

part 121 or part 135 operator’s aircraft 

would have to be trained under the 

FAA’s hazmat training requirements, 

the repair station employee also would 

have to complete the required FAA 

hazmat training. Section 145.165(b) 

prohibits repair station workers from 

directly supervising or performing a job 

function listed in § 121.1001 or 

§ 135.501 for, or on behalf of the part 

121 or 135 operator unless those 

persons have been trained in accordance 

with the part 121 or part 135 operator’s 

FAA-approved hazardous material 

training program applicable to that job 

function. 

Section 145.206 Notification of 

Hazardous Materials Authorizations 

(Proposed as § 145.27) 

The FAA notes that the numbering of 

sections in part 145 has changed due to 

the adoption of new rules since the 

NPRM was published. In the final rule, 

therefore, proposed § 145.27 is 

renumbered § 145.206 in the final rule. 

In addition, the section is divided into 

paragraphs (a) and (b), as discussed 

below. 

Section 145.206 (proposed as 

§ 145.27) requires each repair station to 

notify repair station employees, its 

contractors, or subcontractors that 

handle or replace aircraft components or 

other items regulated by 49 CFR parts 

171 through 180 of the will-carry or 

will-not-carry status of the part 121 or 

part 135 operators for which the repair 

station does work. 

In the final rule, the FAA is adding a 

requirement (as paragraph (a)) that the 

repair stations must inform the part 121 

or part 135 operator that it has received 

the required notification. This receipt 

notification replaces the proposed 

requirement for the part 121 and part 

135 operators to make sure that the 

repair station is aware of its status. 

The language proposed in § 145.27 is 

adopted as paragraph (b) in the final 

rule, with modification. In the final rule, 

the FAA is changing the words ‘‘notify 

all workers’’ to ‘‘notify its employees, 

contractors, or subcontractors that 

handle or replace aircraft components or 

other items regulated by 49 CFR parts 

171 through 180.’’ This language 

clarifies that all workers do not require 

notification. 

VII. Regulatory Analysis and Notices 

VII.1. Paperwork Reduction Act 

An agency may not collect or sponsor 

the collection of information, nor may it 

impose an information collection 

requirement unless it displays a 

currently valid Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) control number. As 

required by the Paperwork Reduction 

Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3507(d)), the 

FAA submitted a copy of the new 

information collection requirements in 

this rule to the OMB for its review. OMB 

approved the collection of this 

information and assigned OMB control 

number 2120–0705. 

This rule was proposed in the Federal 

Register of May 8, 2003. At that time, 

the FAA requested public comments on 

the proposed information collection 

requirements. These comments, and the 

FAA’s responses, are discussed under 

‘‘V.11. Recordkeeping Requirements.’’

The following is a summary of the full 

‘‘Supporting Statement’’ of information 

collection requirements submitted to 

OMB for review. The numbers in the 

‘‘Supporting Statement’’ are derived 

from the full Economic Evaluation, 

which is in the docket for this 

rulemaking. 

• The estimated first-year hour and 

cost burdens to part 121 operators and 

part 135 operators to revise their 

hazardous materials manuals are as 

follows: 

Large part 121 operators: 408 hours/ 

$27,299 

Small part 121 operators: 856 hours/ 

$36,988 

Large part 135 operators: 24 hours/ 

$1,037 

Small part 135 operators: 12,624 hours/ 

$365,970 

Total: 13,912 hours/$431,294 

• The estimated annual manual 

revision hour and cost burdens for years 

1–10 are as follows: 

Large part 121 operators: 40.8 hours/ 

$2,730 

Small part 121 operators: 85.6 hours/ 

$3,699 

Large part 135 operators: 2.4 hours/$104 

Small part 135 operators: 1,262.4 hours/ 

$36,597 

Total: 1,391.2 hours/$43,130 

• The estimated first-year hour and 

cost burden for part 121 operators and 

part 135 operators to restructure their 

databases are as follows: 

Large part 121 operators: 72 hours × 36 

firms/$114,860 

Small part 121 operators: 32 hours × 87 

firms/$81,153 

Large part 135 operators: 72 hours × 3 

firms/$6,819 

Small part 135 operators: 8 hours × 

2,536 firms/$588,149 

Total: 25,880 hours/$790,981 

• The estimated annual hour and cost 

burden for years 1–10 for part 121 and 

part 135 operators to restructure their 

databases are as follows: 

Large part 121 operators: 259.2 hours/ 

$11,486 

Small part 121 operators: 278.4 hours/ 

$8,115 

Large part 135 operators: 21.6 hours/ 

$682 

Small part 135 operators: 2,028.8 hours/ 

$58,815 

Total: 2,588 hours/$79,098 

• The estimated annual hour and cost 

burden to part 121 operators and part 

135 operators to update their training 

records is as follows: 

Part 121 operators: 1,052 hours/$20,071 

Part 135 operators: 2,617 hours/$1,939 

Total: 3,669 hours/$22,010 

• The estimated first-year hour and 

cost burden to part 121 operators and 

part 135 operators to notify 145 repair 

stations of their will-carry or will-notcarry statuses are as follows: 

Part 121 operators: 4,386.8 hours/ 

$75,853 

Part 135 operators: 2,792.9 hours/ 

$38,314 

Total: 7,179.7 hours/$114,167 

• The estimated hour and cost burden 

for years 1–10 to part 121 operators and 

part 135 operators to notify 145 repair 

stations of their will-carry or will-notcarry statuses are as follows: 

Part 121 operators: 797.6 hours/$15,170 

Part 135 operators: 507.8 hours/$7,663 

Total: 1,305.4 hours/$22,833 

• The total estimated annual hour 

and cost burdens to part 145 operators 

to comply with §§ 145.53 and 145.206 

are as follows: 

440 hours/$87,560 

• All estimated annual burdens to 

part 121 operators, part 135 operators, 

and part 145 repair stations are as 

follows: 

Part 121 operators: 1,461.6 hours/ 

$41,200 

Part 135 operators: 3,823 hours/ 

$103,861 

Part 145 repair stations: 440 hours/ 

$87,560 

Total: 5,724.6 hours/$232,621 

• Additional annual costs to part 121 

and part 135 operators that are not 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 58819 

1A deficient operator is an operator who is not 

already in compliance with the standards, while a 

non-deficient operator is an operator who is already 

in compliance with the standards. This 

determination was based on the operators’

responses to the ‘‘Special Emphasis Review: 

Hazardous Materials or Dangerous Goods Programs 

and Requirements,’’ as summarized in Appendix A 

of the full regulatory evaluation in the public 

docket for this rulemaking. 

already following the procedures 

required by the final rule for the 

collection of information are as follows: 

Large will-not-carry part 121 operators: 

$120,528 

Small will-not-carry part 121 operators: 

$6,912 

Large will-not-carry part 135 operators: 

$6,048 

Small will-carry part 135 operators: 

$8,100 

Small will-not-carry part 135 operators: 

$78,192 

Total: $219,780 

VII.2. International Compatibility 

In keeping with U.S. obligations 

under the Convention on International 

Civil Aviation, it is FAA policy to 

comply with International Civil 

Aviation Organization (ICAO) Standards 

and Recommended Practices to the 

maximum extent practicable. The FAA 

has reviewed the corresponding ICAO 

Standards and Recommended Practices 

and has determined that differences 

would affect U.S. aircraft operators only, 

and therefore it is not necessary for the 

FAA to file any differences with ICAO. 

Foreign carriers operating in the United 

States will not be affected by the rule. 

VII.3. Economic Evaluation Summary 

Changes to Federal regulations must 

undergo several economic analyses. 

First, Executive Order 12866 directs 

each Federal agency to propose or adopt 

a regulation only upon a reasoned 

determination that the benefits of the 

intended regulation justify its costs. 

Second, the Regulatory Flexibility Act 

of 1980 requires agencies to analyze the 

economic impact of regulatory changes 

on small entities. Third, the Trade 

Agreements Act (19 U.S.C. 2531–2533) 

prohibits agencies from setting 

standards that create unnecessary 

obstacles to the foreign commerce of the 

United States. In developing U.S. 

standards, this Trade Act also requires 

agencies to consider international 

standards and, where appropriate, use 

them as the basis of U.S. standards. 

Fourth, the Unfunded Mandates Reform 

Act of 1995 (Public Law 104–4) requires 

agencies to prepare a written assessment 

of the costs, benefits, and other effects 

of proposed or final rules that include 

a Federal mandate likely to result in the 

expenditure by State, local, or tribal 

governments, in the aggregate, or by the 

private sector, of $100 million or more 

annually (adjusted for inflation). 

In conducting these analyses, FAA 

has determined this rule: 

(1) Has benefits that justify its costs; 

is a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ as 

defined in section 3(f) of Executive 

Order 12866; and is ‘‘significant’’ as 

defined in DOT’s Regulatory Policies 

and Procedures; 

(2) Will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities; 

(3) Will not impact international 

trade; and 

(4) Does not impose an unfunded 

mandate on state, local, or tribal 

governments, or on the private sector. 

These analyses, available in the 

public docket for this rulemaking, are 

summarized below. 

Cost Assumptions 

• Discount rate: 7%. 

• Because there will be a 15-month 

transition from the effective date of the 

rule, the time horizon for this cost 

section is from 2006 through 2015. 

• Monetary Values expressed in 2003 

dollars. 

• To calculate recurrent training 

costs, the FAA assumes a 24-month 

cycle instead of the annual cycle used 

in the proposed rule. The 24-month 

cycle is consistent with ICAO/IATA 

recommendations. 

• Because hazmat training records are 

already kept electronically, updating 

these records with recurrent training 

information every two years is estimated 

to take approximately five additional 

minutes per employee in the final rule 

instead of the 10 minutes per employee 

estimated in the proposed rule. 

• The FAA assumes the cost of the 

IATA/FIATA International Cargo Agents 

training course to be $216, which 

includes training materials, an 

examination fee, and a shipping fee. 

• The FAA assumes that training will 

be conducted based on a self-taught, 

independent study method (as all IATA/ 

FIATA International Cargo Agents 

training courses are conducted) or based 

on computer-based training (CBT). 

• The FAA assumes that many of 

these operators will maintain computerbased records. 

• 5% of employees of deficient part 

121 carriers 1 will receive hazardous 

materials training. 

• 10% of non-crewmember 

employees of deficient part 135 

carriers 1 will receive hazardous 

materials training. 

• 5% of employees, of non-deficient 

part 121 carriers,1 who have already 

received the necessary hazardous 

materials training, will receive that 

training every other year resulting in 

cost saving for their employer. 

• All crewmembers and 10% of 

employees, of non-deficient part 135 

carriers,1 who have already received the 

necessary hazardous materials training, 

will receive that training every other 

year resulting in cost savings for their 

employer. 

Changes in Cost Analysis From the 

NPRM to the Final Rule 

The NPRM costs were estimated to be 

$107.5 million ($75.8 million, 

discounted) over a 10-year period. The 

final rule costs are estimated at $7.2 

million ($5.0 million, discounted) over 

a 10-year period. This decrease in costs 

is attributed to several changes made 

from the issuance of the NPRM to the 

publication of this final rule. 

As shown in the table below, the 

majority of the cost reduction is due to 

aligning the training requirements to the 

ICAO/IATA standards, reducing the 

number of employees at part 121 and 

part 135 operators who will need to be 

trained, and reducing the recurrent 

training requirements to every 24 

months instead of the every 12-month 

requirement in the NPRM. Additionally, 

administrative costs were reduced 

significantly from the NPRM for part 

121 and part 135 operators, largely due 

to the final rule allowing for electronic 

recordkeeping. 

58820 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

Administrative Training 

Total 

Recordkeeping Alignment with 

ICAO/IATA 

Change in 

population 

estimates 

Undiscounted 

NPRM .............................................................................................................. $13,525,600 $91,565,900 $105,091,500 

Final Rule ......................................................................................................... 220,107 4,608,915 4,829,022 

Difference ......................................................................................................... 13,305,493 7,763,157 16,193,828 100,262,478 

Discounted 

NPRM .............................................................................................................. 9,294,000 64,523,400 73,817,400 

Final Rule ......................................................................................................... 220,107 3,056,216 3,276,323 

Difference ......................................................................................................... 9,073,893 44,064,820 17,402,364 70,541,077 

Further, the NPRM estimated 

significant training costs for repair 

stations. The FAA has since learned that 

repair stations have stopped performing 

job functions related to hazardous 

materials transport, including loading. 

However, this rule requires repair 

stations to train their employees, 

contractors, and subcontractors if they 

are performing job functions related to 

hazardous materials transport for part 

121 or part 135 carriers. Repair stations 

that are hazmat employers will be 

required to train their employees so they 

are in compliance with 49 CFR part 172, 

but that is not a cost of this rule. Repair 

stations that do not perform the listed 

job functions will not be required to 

train their employees, so generally, the 

only increased costs borne by repair 

stations will be administrative. 

Costs of This Rulemaking 

The estimated cost to part 121, part 

135 operators, and domestic part 145 

repair stations to comply with the 

administrative and training provisions 

over a 10-year period are approximately 

$3.1 million ($2.1 million, discounted), 

$3.2 million ($2.3 million, discounted), 

and $876,000 ($575,000, discounted), 

respectively. The total costs of this 

rulemaking are approximately, $7.2 

million ($5.0 million, discounted), over 

a 10-year period. 

Cost Savings and Safety Benefits of This 

Rulemaking 

The cost savings over a 10-year period 

are estimated at $70.8 million, or $44.1 

million, discounted, of which ‘‘will 

carry’’ operators will realize cost savings 

of $37.4 million ($23.3 million, 

discounted) and ‘‘will not carry’’

operators will realize cost savings of 

$33.4 million ($20.8 million, 

discounted). 

The expected part 121 benefits of the 

rule over 10 years from avoided 

accidents involving the carriage of 

hazardous materials will be 

approximately $60.9 million. However, 

there is a 15 percent probability (based 

on the Poisson distribution) that the 

estimated benefits from avoiding these 

types of accidents could be $319.7 

million or higher over 10 years. The 

Poisson distribution model was used to 

estimate the probability of experiencing 

potential rare incidents on board U.S. 

air carriers over the next 10 years. The 

Poisson distribution provides a realistic 

model for predicting rare and random 

phenomena. 

The expected part 135 benefits of the 

rule over 10 years from avoided 

accidents involving the carriage of 

hazardous materials will be 

approximately $3.4 million. However, 

there is a 26 percent probability (based 

on the Poisson distribution) of one or 

more fatal accidents and the estimated 

benefits from avoiding these types of 

accidents will range between $6 million 

and $25 million. 

VII.4. Regulatory Flexibility 

Determination 

The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 

(Act) establishes ‘‘as a principle of 

regulatory issuance that agencies shall 

endeavor, consistent with the objective 

of the rule and of applicable statutes, to 

fit regulatory and informational 

requirements to the scale of the 

business, organization, and government 

jurisdictions subject to regulation.’’ To 

achieve that principle, the Act requires 

agencies to solicit and consider flexible 

regulatory proposals and to explain the 

rationale for their actions. The Act 

covers a wide-range of small entities, 

including small businesses, not-forprofit organizations and small 

governmental jurisdictions. 

Agencies must perform a review to 

determine whether a proposed or final 

rule will have a significant economic 

impact on a substantial number of small 

entities. If the determination is that it 

will, the agency must prepare a 

regulatory flexibility analysis as 

described in the Act. 

However, if an agency determines that 

a proposed or final rule is not expected 

to have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small 

entities, section 605(b) of the 1980 act 

provides that the head of the agency 

may so certify and a regulatory 

flexibility analysis is not required. The 

certification must include a statement 

providing the factual basis for this 

determination, and the reasoning should 

be clear. 

The Small Business Administration 

(SBA) suggests that ‘‘small’’ entities can 

be identified either on the basis of 

employees or revenues. For this rule, 

small entities are composed of two 

distinct groups: aircraft operators and 

repair stations. The SBA suggests that 

aircraft operators with 1,500 or fewer 

employees are ‘‘small’’ entities. The 

SBA does not provide revenue 

information for firms with fewer than 

1,500 employees, but does provide data 

for firms with fewer than 500 and fewer 

than 20 employees. To determine the 

impact of the proposed rule on the 87 

small part 121 operators and the 2,536 

small part 135 operators, the FAA has 

estimated the annualized cost impact on 

these two categories of small entities 

separately, since the rule’s impacts 

differ. 

The final rule is expected to impose 

an estimated cost of $2.1 million on the 

87 small part 121 operators over the 

next 10 years. The average annualized 

cost per small operator is estimated at 

$2,600. However, the FAA estimates 

that part 121 ‘‘will not carry’’ operators 

will incur all six cost elements and the 

annualized cost to each of these entities 

is estimated at $3,500. The costs to ‘‘will 

carry’’ operators will be lower since less 

training will be required. According to 

a Small Business Administration 

analysis of Bureau of Census data for 

scheduled air transportation firms, firms 

with fewer than 500 employees have 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 58821 

average revenues of $10.8 million. 

(Source: http://www.SBA/gov/advo/ 

stats. Data are not available for firms 

with fewer than 1,500 employees. 

Presumably, the average revenue for 

firms with 1,500 employees would be 

higher than those firms with fewer than 

500 employees.) Data are not available 

for firms with fewer than 1,500 

employees. Presumably, the average 

revenue for firms with 1,500 employees 

would be higher than those firms with 

fewer than 500 employees. The 

estimated cost to each of the ‘‘will not 

carry’’ entities is only .032 of one 

percent of the average revenue of $10.8 

million of these firms. The FAA does 

not consider a cost of 0.032 of one 

percent of revenues to be a significant 

cost. Thus none of the 87 small part 121 

entities will incur a significant 

economic impact in the form of higher 

annual costs as the result of the final 

rule. 

The final rule is expected to impose 

an estimated cost of $3.1 million on the 

2,536 small part 135 operators over the 

next 10 years. The average annualized 

cost per small 135 operator is estimated 

at $150. The FAA does not consider 

$150 costs to be significant. Thus none 

of the small part 135 entities will incur 

a significant economic impact in the 

form of higher annual costs as the result 

of the rule. Therefore, the FAA has 

determined that this final rule will not 

have a significant impact on a 

substantial number of small part 121 or 

part 135 operators. 

The SBA suggests that ‘‘small’’ repair 

stations can be identified as those firms 

with annual revenues of $5 million or 

less. Research conducted for the FAA 

indicates that approximately 56 percent 

of all repair stations meet this criterion. 

(‘‘An Analysis of International Trade 

Flows in Aircraft Repair Services’’ GRA 

Inc. Contract No. DTFA01–93–C–00066 

Work Order 46 Figure 6, page 18.) The 

final rule is expected to impose an 

estimated cost of $876,000 on the 2,006 

small independent domestic part 145 

repair stations. The average annualized 

cost to the 62 small repair stations that 

incur both cost elements is estimated at 

$76. The FAA considers this amount 

economically insignificant. 

Therefore, the FAA has determined 

that this final rule will not have a 

significant impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. Accordingly, 

pursuant to the Regulatory Flexibility 

Act, 5 U.S.C. 605(b), the Federal 

Aviation Administration certifies that 

this final rule will not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. 

VII.5. International Trade Impact 

Assessment 

The Trade Agreement Act of 1979 

prohibits Federal agencies from 

engaging in any standards or related 

activities that create unnecessary 

obstacles to the foreign commerce of the 

United States. Legitimate domestic 

objectives, such as safety, are not 

considered unnecessary obstacles. The 

statute also requires consideration of 

international standards and where 

appropriate, that they be the basis for 

U.S. standards. 

In accordance with the above statute, 

the FAA has assessed the potential 

effect of this final rule and has 

determined that it will have the same 

impact on foreign sponsors as on 

domestic sponsors and, therefore, 

creates no obstacles to the foreign 

commerce of the United States. 

VII.6. Unfunded Mandates Assessment 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (the Act) is intended, among 

other things, to curb the practice of 

imposing unfunded Federal mandates 

on State, local, and tribal governments. 

Title II of the Act requires each Federal 

agency to prepare a written statement 

assessing the effects of any Federal 

mandate in a proposed or final agency 

rule that may result in an expenditure 

of $100 million or more (adjusted 

annually for inflation) in any one year 

by State, local, and tribal governments, 

in the aggregate, or by the private sector; 

such a mandate is deemed to be a 

‘‘significant regulatory action.’’ The 

FAA currently uses an inflationadjusted value of $120.7 million in lieu 

of $100 million. 

This final rule does not contain such 

a mandate. The requirements of Title II 

of the Act, therefore, do not apply. 

VII.7. Executive Order 13132, 

Federalism 

The FAA has analyzed this final rule 

under the principles and criteria of 

Executive Order 13132, Federalism. The 

FAA determined that this action will 

not have a substantial direct effect on 

the States, or the relationship between 

the national Government and the States, 

or on the distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government, and therefore does 

not have federalism implications. 

VII.8. Environmental Analysis 

FAA Order 1050.1E identifies FAA 

actions that are categorically excluded 

from the preparation of an 

environmental assessment or 

environmental impact statement under 

the National Environmental Policy Act 

in the absence of extraordinary 

circumstances. The FAA has 

determined that this rulemaking action 

qualifies for the categorical exclusion 

identified in paragraph 312f of FAA 

Order 1050.1E and involves no 

extraordinary circumstances. 

VII.9. Regulations That Significantly 

Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or 

Use 

The FAA has analyzed this final rule 

under Executive Order 13211, Actions 

Concerning Regulations that 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use (May 18, 2001). The 

FAA has determined that it is not a 

‘‘significant energy action’’ under the 

executive order because it is not a 

‘‘significant regulatory action’’ under 

Executive Order 12866, and it is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. 

List of Subjects 

14 CFR Part 119 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Air carriers, Aircraft, 

Aviation safety, Charter flights, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

14 CFR Part 121 

Air carriers, Aircraft, Airmen, 

Aviation safety, Charter flights, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements, Safety, Transportation. 

14 CFR Part 135 

Aircraft, Airmen, Aviation Safety, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

14 CFR Part 145 

Aircraft, Aviation safety, Reporting 

and recordkeeping requirements. 

The Amendments 

■ In consideration of the foregoing, the 

Federal Aviation Administration 

amends chapter I of title 14, Code of 

Federal Regulations as follows: 

PART 119—CERTIFICATION: AIR 

CARRIERS AND COMMERCIAL 

OPERATORS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 119 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 1153, 40101, 

40102, 40103, 40113, 41721, 44105, 44106, 

44111, 44701–44717, 44722, 44901, 44903, 

44904, 44906, 44912, 44914, 44936, 44938, 

46103, 46105. 

■ 2. Amend part 119 by adding Special 

Federal Aviation Regulation No. 99 as 

follows: 

58822 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

Special Federal Aviation Regulation 

No. 99—Hazardous Materials 

Regulations Governing Manual and 

Training Requirements 

1. Applicability. This Special Federal 

Aviation Regulation (SFAR) applies to 

all U.S. air carriers and commercial 

operators that are issued a certificate 

under part 119 of this chapter on or 

before November 7, 2005 to operate 

under part 121 or part 135 of this 

chapter. For purposes of hazardous 

materials training, these air carriers and 

commercial operators may comply with 

the provisions of this SFAR until its 

expiration. Alternatively, they may 

comply with the provisions of part 121, 

subpart Z, or part 135, subpart K, as 

applicable. All other provisions of parts 

121 and 135 not affected by this rule 

remain applicable. 

2. Expiration. This Special Federal 

Aviation Regulation expires on February 

7, 2007. 

3. Definition. The term certificate 

holder, as used in this SFAR, means a 

person certificated in accordance with 

part 119 subpart C, of this chapter and 

operating under part 121 or part 135 of 

this chapter. 

4. Manual Contents. (a) Each manual 

required by § 121.133 shall contain 

procedures and information to assist 

personnel to identify packages marked 

or labeled as containing hazardous 

materials and, if these materials are to 

be carried, stored, or handled, 

procedures and instructions relating to 

the carriage, storage, or handling of 

hazardous materials, including the 

following: 

(1) Procedures for determining 

whether the material is accompanied by 

the proper shipper certification required 

by 49 CFR chapter I, subchapter C; 

whether it is properly packed, marked, 

and labeled; whether it is accompanied 

by the proper shipping documents; and 

whether requirements for compatibility 

of materials have been met. 

(2) Instructions on the loading, 

storage, and handling. 

(3) Notification procedures for 

reporting hazardous material incidents 

as required by 49 CFR chapter I, 

subchapter C. 

(4) Instructions and procedures for the 

notification of the pilot in command 

when there are hazardous materials 

aboard, as required by 49 CFR chapter 

I, subchapter C. 

(b) Each manual required by § 135.21 

of this chapter shall contain procedures 

and instructions to enable personnel to 

recognize hazardous materials, as 

defined in 49 CFR, and if these 

materials are to be carried, stored, or 

handled, procedures and instructions 

for: 

(1) Accepting shipment of hazardous 

material regulated by 49 CFR to assure 

proper packaging, marking, labeling, 

shipping documents, compatibility of 

articles, and instructions for loading, 

storage, and handling; 

(2) Notification and reporting 

hazardous material incidents as 

required by 49 CFR; and 

(3) Notification of the pilot in 

command when there are hazardous 

materials aboard, as required by 49 CFR. 

5. Training Program. (a) Each 

certificate holder required to have a 

training program under § 121.401 of this 

chapter shall establish, obtain the 

appropriate initial and final approval of, 

and provide, a training program that 

meets the requirements of part 121, 

subpart O, and appendices E and F of 

part 121 of this chapter. Each certificate 

holder required to have a training 

program under § 121.401 of this chapter 

shall ensure that each crewmember, 

aircraft dispatcher, flight instructor, and 

check airman, and each person assigned 

duties for the carriage and handling of 

hazardous materials, is adequately 

trained to perform his or her assigned 

duties. 

(b) Each certificate holder required to 

have a training program under § 135.341 

of this chapter shall establish, obtain the 

appropriate initial and final approval of, 

and provide a training program that 

meets the requirements of this SFAR. 

Each certificate holder required to have 

a training program under § 135.341 of 

this chapter shall ensure that each 

crewmember, flight instructor, check 

airman, and each person assigned duties 

for the carriage and handling of 

hazardous materials (as defined in 49 

CFR 171.8) is adequately trained to 

perform their assigned duties. 

6. Training requirements: Handling 

and carriage of hazardous materials 

under part 121 of this chapter. 

(a) No certificate holder conducting 

operations under part 121 of this 

chapter may use any person to perform 

and no person may perform, any 

assigned duties and responsibilities for 

the handling or carriage of hazardous 

materials governed by 49 CFR, unless 

within the past year that person has 

satisfactorily completed training in a 

program established and approved 

under this SFAR, which includes 

instructions regarding the proper 

packaging, marking, labeling, and 

documentation of hazardous materials, 

as required by 49 CFR, and instructions 

regarding their compatibility, loading, 

storage, and handling characteristics. A 

person, who satisfactorily completes 

training in the calendar month before, or 

the calendar month after, the month in 

which it becomes due, is considered to 

have taken that training during the 

month it became due. 

(b) Each certificate holder conducting 

operations under part 121 of this 

chapter shall maintain a record of the 

satisfactory completion of the initial and 

recurrent training given to 

crewmembers and ground personnel 

who perform assigned duties and 

responsibilities for the handling and 

carriage of hazardous materials. 

(c) When a certificate holder 

conducting operations under part 121 of 

this chapter operates in a foreign 

country where the loading and 

unloading of aircraft must be performed 

by personnel of the foreign country, that 

certificate holder may use personnel not 

meeting the training requirements of 

paragraphs 5 (a) and 5 (b) of this SFAR 

if they are supervised by a person 

qualified under paragraphs 5 (a) and 5 

(b) of this SFAR to supervise the 

loading, offloading and handling of 

hazardous materials. 

7. Training requirements: Handling 

and carriage of hazardous materials 

under part 135. 

(a) Except as provided in paragraph 7 

(d) of this SFAR, no certificate holder 

conducting operations under part 135 of 

this chapter may use any person to 

perform, and no person may perform, 

any assigned duties and responsibilities 

for the handling or carriage of hazardous 

materials (as defined in 49 CFR 171.8), 

unless within the past year that person 

has satisfactorily completed initial or 

recurrent training in an appropriate 

training program established by the 

certificate holder, which includes 

instruction on—

(1) The proper shipper certification, 

packaging, marking, labeling, and 

documentation for hazardous materials; 

and 

(2) The compatibility, loading, 

storage, and handling characteristics of 

hazardous materials. 

(b) Each certificate holder conducting 

operations under part 135 of this 

chapter, shall maintain a record of the 

satisfactory completion of the initial and 

recurrent training given to 

crewmembers and ground personnel 

who perform assigned duties and 

responsibilities for the handling and 

carriage of hazardous materials. 

(c) Each certificate holder, conducting 

operations under part 135 of this 

chapter, that elects not to accept 

hazardous materials shall ensure that 

each crewmember is adequately trained 

to recognize those items classified as 

hazardous materials. 

(d) If a certificate holder conducting 

operations under part 135 of this 

chapter operates into or out of airports 

at which trained employees or contract 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 58823 

personnel are not available, it may use 

persons not meeting the requirements of 

paragraph 7 (a) or 7 (b) of this SFAR to 

load, offload, or otherwise handle 

hazardous materials if these persons are 

supervised by a crewmember who is 

qualified under paragraphs 7 (a) and 7 

(b) of this SFAR. 

■ 3. Amend § 119.49 by redesignating 

paragraphs (a)(13), (b)(13), and (c)(12) as 

paragraphs (a)(14), (b)(14), and (c)(13) 

respectively, and adding new 

paragraphs (a)(13), (b)(13), and (c)(12) to 

read as follows: 

§ 119.49 Contents of operations 

specifications. 

(a) * * * 

(13) An authorization permitting, or a 

prohibition against, accepting, handling, 

and transporting materials regulated as 

hazardous materials in transport under 

49 CFR parts 171 through 180. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(13) An authorization permitting, or a 

prohibition against, accepting, handling, 

and transporting materials regulated as 

hazardous materials in transport under 

49 CFR parts 171 through 180. 

* * * * * 

(c) * * * 

(12) An authorization permitting, or a 

prohibition against, accepting, handling, 

and transporting materials regulated as 

hazardous materials in transport under 

49 CFR parts 171 through 180. 

* * * * * 

PART 121—OPERATING 

REQUIREMENTS: DOMESTIC FLAG, 

AND SUPPLEMENTAL OPERATIONS 

■ 4. The authority citation for part 121 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 40119, 

41706, 44101, 44701–44702, 44705, 44709–

44711, 44713, 44716–44717, 44722, 44901, 

44903–44904, 44912, 45101–45105, 46105, 

46301. 

■ 5. Amend § 121.135 by revising the 

section heading and paragraph (b)(23) to 

read as follows: 

§ 121.135 Manual contents. 

* * * * * 

(b) * * * 

(23)(i) Procedures and information, as 

described in paragraph (b)(23)(ii) of this 

section, to assist each crewmember and 

person performing or directly 

supervising the following job functions 

involving items for transport on an 

aircraft: 

(A) Acceptance; 

(B) Rejection; 

(C) Handling; 

(D) Storage incidental to transport; 

(E) Packaging of company material; or 

(F) Loading. 

(ii) Ensure that the procedures and 

information described in this paragraph 

are sufficient to assist the person in 

identifying packages that are marked or 

labeled as containing hazardous 

materials or that show signs of 

containing undeclared hazardous 

materials. The procedures and 

information must include: 

(A) Procedures for rejecting packages 

that do not conform to the Hazardous 

Materials Regulations in 49 CFR parts 

171 through 180 or that appear to 

contain undeclared hazardous materials; 

(B) Procedures for complying with the 

hazardous materials incident reporting 

requirements of 49 CFR 171.15 and 

171.16 and discrepancy reporting 

requirements of 49 CFR 175.31 

(C) The certificate holder’s hazmat 

policies and whether the certificate 

holder is authorized to carry, or is 

prohibited from carrying, hazardous 

materials; and 

(D) If the certificate holder’s 

operations specifications permit the 

transport of hazardous materials, 

procedures and information to ensure 

the following: 

(1) That packages containing 

hazardous materials are properly offered 

and accepted in compliance with 49 

CFR parts 171 through 180; 

(2) That packages containing 

hazardous materials are properly 

handled, stored, packaged, loaded, and 

carried on board an aircraft in 

compliance with 49 CFR parts 171 

through 180; 

(3) That the requirements for Notice to 

the Pilot in Command (49 CFR 175.33) 

are complied with; and 

(4) That aircraft replacement parts, 

consumable materials or other items 

regulated by 49 CFR parts 171 through 

180 are properly handled, packaged, 

and transported. 

* * * * * 

■ 6. Amend § 121.401 by revising 

paragraph (a)(1) to read as follows: 

§ 121.401 Training program: General. 

(a) * * * 

(1) Establish and implement a training 

program that satisfies the requirements 

of this subpart and appendices E and F 

of this part and that ensures that each 

crewmember, aircraft dispatcher, flight 

instructor and check airman is 

adequately trained to perform his or her 

assigned duties. Prior to 

implementation, the certificate holder 

must obtain initial and final FAA 

approval of the training program. 

* * * * * 

§ 121.433a [Removed] 

■ 7. Remove § 121.433a. 

■ 8. Add subpart Z, consisting of 

§§ 121.1001 through 121.1007, to read 

as follows: 

Subpart Z—Hazardous Materials 

Training Program 

Sec. 

121.1001 Applicability and definitions. 

121.1003 Hazardous materials training: 

General. 

121.1005 Hazardous materials training 

required. 

121.1007 Hazardous materials training 

records. 

§ 121.1001 Applicability and definitions. 

(a) This subpart prescribes the 

requirements applicable to each 

certificate holder for training each 

crewmember and person performing or 

directly supervising any of the following 

job functions involving any item for 

transport on board an aircraft: 

(1) Acceptance; 

(2) Rejection; 

(3) Handling; 

(4) Storage incidental to transport; 

(5) Packaging of company material; or 

(6) Loading. 

(b) Definitions. For purposes of this 

subpart, the following definitions apply: 

(1) Company material (COMAT)—

Material owned or used by a certificate 

holder. 

(2) Initial hazardous materials 

training—The basic training required for 

each newly hired person, or each person 

changing job functions, who performs or 

directly supervises any of the job 

functions specified in paragraph (a) of 

this section. 

(3) Recurrent hazardous materials 

training—The training required every 24 

months for each person who has 

satisfactorily completed the certificate 

holder’s approved initial hazardous 

materials training program and performs 

or directly supervises any of the job 

functions specified in paragraph (a) of 

this section. 

§ 121.1003 Hazardous materials training: 

General. 

(a) Each certificate holder must 

establish and implement a hazardous 

materials training program that: 

(1) Satisfies the requirements of 

Appendix O of this part; 

(2) Ensures that each person 

performing or directly supervising any 

of the job functions specified in 

§ 121.1001(a) is trained to comply with 

all applicable parts of 49 CFR parts 171 

through 180 and the requirements of 

this subpart; and 

(3) Enables the trained person to 

recognize items that contain, or may 

58824 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

contain, hazardous materials regulated 

by 49 CFR parts 171 through 180. 

(b) Each certificate holder must 

provide initial hazardous materials 

training and recurrent hazardous 

materials training to each crewmember 

and person performing or directly 

supervising any of the job functions 

specified in § 121.1001(a). 

(c) Each certificate holder’s hazardous 

materials training program must be 

approved by the FAA prior to 

implementation. 

§ 121.1005 Hazardous materials training 

required. 

(a) Training requirement. Except as 

provided in paragraphs (b), (c) and (f) of 

this section, no certificate holder may 

use any crewmember orperson to 

perform any of the job functions or 

direct supervisory responsibilities, and 

no person may perform any of the job 

functions or direct supervisory 

responsibilities, specified in 

§ 121.1001(a) unless that person has 

satisfactorily completed the certificate 

holder’s FAA-approved initial or 

recurrent hazardous materials training 

program within the past 24 months. 

(b) New hire or new job function. A 

person who is a new hire and has not 

yet satisfactorily completed the required 

initial hazardous materials training, or a 

person who is changing job functions 

and has not received initial or recurrent 

training for a job function involving 

storage incidental to transport, or 

loading of items for transport on an 

aircraft, may perform those job 

functions for not more than 30 days 

from the date of hire or a change in job 

function, if the person is under the 

direct visual supervision of a person 

who is authorized by the certificate 

holder to supervise that person and who 

has successfully completed the 

certificate holder’s FAA-approved 

initial or recurrent training program 

within the past 24 months. 

(c) Persons who work for more than 

one certificate holder. A certificate 

holder that uses or assigns a person to 

perform or directly supervise a job 

function specified in § 121.1001(a), 

when that person also performs or 

directly supervises the same job 

function for another certificate holder, 

need only train that person in its own 

policies and procedures regarding those 

job functions, if all of the following are 

met: 

(1) The certificate holder using this 

exception receives written verification 

from the person designated to hold the 

training records representing the other 

certificate holder that the person has 

satisfactorily completed hazardous 

materials training for the specific job 

function under the other certificate 

holder’s FAA approved hazardous 

material training program under 

Appendix O of this part; and 

(2) The certificate holder who trained 

the person has the same operations 

specifications regarding the acceptance, 

handling, and transport of hazardous 

materials as the certificate holder using 

this exception. 

(d) Recurrent hazardous materials 

training—Completion date. A person 

who satisfactorily completes recurrent 

hazardous materials training in the 

calendar month before, or the calendar 

month after, the month in which the 

recurrent training is due, is considered 

to have taken that training during the 

month in which it is due. If the person 

completes this training earlier than the 

month before it is due, the month of the 

completion date becomes his or her new 

anniversary month. 

(e) Repair stations. A certificate 

holder must ensure that each repair 

station performing work for, or on the 

certificate holder’s behalf is notified in 

writing of the certificate holder’s 

policies and operations specification 

authorization permitting or prohibition 

against the acceptance, rejection, 

handling, storage incidental to 

transport, and transportation of 

hazardous materials, including 

company material. This notification 

requirement applies only to repair 

stations that are regulated by 49 CFR 

parts 171 through 180. 

(f) Certificate holders operating at 

foreign locations. This exception applies 

if a certificate holder operating at a 

foreign location where the country 

requires the certificate holder to use 

persons working in that country to load 

aircraft. In such a case, the certificate 

holder may use those persons even if 

they have not been trained in 

accordance with the certificate holder’s 

FAA approved hazardous materials 

training program. Those persons, 

however, must be under the direct 

visual supervision of someone who has 

successfully completed the certificate 

holder’s approved initial or recurrent 

hazardous materials training program in 

accordance with this part. This 

exception applies only to those persons 

who load aircraft. 

§ 121.1007 Hazardous materials training 

records. 

(a) General requirement. Each 

certificate holder must maintain a 

record of all training required by this 

part received within the preceding three 

years for each person who performs or 

directly supervises a job function 

specified in § 121.1001(a). The record 

must be maintained during the time that 

the person performs or directly 

supervises any of those job functions, 

and for 90 days thereafter. These 

training records must be kept for direct 

employees of the certificate holder, as 

well as independent contractors, 

subcontractors, and any other person 

who performs or directly supervises 

these job functions for or on behalf of 

the certificate holder. 

(b) Location of records. The certificate 

holder must retain the training records 

required by paragraph (a) of this section 

for all initial and recurrent training 

received within the preceding 3 years 

for all persons performing or directly 

supervising the job functions listed in 

Appendix O at a designated location. 

The records must be available upon 

request at the location where the trained 

person performs or directly supervises 

the job function specified in 

§ 121.1001(a). Records may be 

maintained electronically and provided 

on location electronically. When the 

person ceases to perform or directly 

supervise a hazardous materials job 

function, the certificate holder must 

retain the hazardous materials training 

records for an additional 90 days and 

make them available upon request at the 

last location where the person worked. 

(c) Content of records. Each record 

must contain the following: 

(1) The individual’s name; 

(2) The most recent training 

completion date; 

(3) A description, copy or reference to 

training materials used to meet the 

training requirement; 

(4) The name and address of the 

organization providing the training; and 

(5) A copy of the certification issued 

when the individual was trained, which 

shows that a test has been completed 

satisfactorily. 

(d) New hire or new job function. Each 

certificate holder using a person under 

the exception in § 121.1005(b) must 

maintain a record for that person. The 

records must be available upon request 

at the location where the trained person 

performs or directly supervises the job 

function specified in § 121.1001(a). 

Records may be maintained 

electronically and provided on location 

electronically. The record must include 

the following: 

(1) A signed statement from an 

authorized representative of the 

certificate holder authorizing the use of 

the person in accordance with the 

exception; 

(2) The date of hire or change in job 

function; 

(3) The person’s name and assigned 

job function; 

(4) The name of the supervisor of the 

job function; and 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 58825 

(5) The date the person is to complete 

hazardous materials training in 

accordance with appendix O of this 

part. 

Appendix N—[Reserved] 

■ 8.A. Add and reserve Appendix N. 

■ 9. Add Appendix O to read as follows: 

Appendix O—Hazardous Materials 

Training Requirements For Certificate 

Holders 

This appendix prescribes the requirements 

for hazardous materials training under part 

121, subpart Z, and part 135, subpart K of 

this chapter. The training requirements for 

various categories of persons are defined by 

job function or responsibility. An ‘‘X’’ in a 

box under a category of persons indicates 

that the specified category must receive the 

noted training. All training requirements 

apply to direct supervisors as well as to 

persons actually performing the job function. 

Training requirements for certificate holders 

authorized in their operations specifications 

to transport hazardous materials (will-carry) 

are prescribed in Table 1. Those certificate 

holders with a prohibition in their operations 

specifications against carrying or handling 

hazardous materials (will-not-carry) must 

follow the curriculum prescribed in Table 2. 

The method of delivering the training will be 

determined by the certificate holder. The 

certificate holder is responsible for providing 

a method (may include email, 

telecommunication, etc.) to answer all 

questions prior to testing regardless of the 

method of instruction. The certificate holder 

must certify that a test has been completed 

satisfactorily to verify understanding of the 

regulations and requirements. 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

58826 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 


ER07OC05.000</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 58827 


ER07OC05.001</GPH>
58828 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 


ER07OC05.002</GPH>
Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 58829 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–C 

PART 135—OPERATING 

REQUIREMENTS: COMMUTER AND 

ON-DEMAND OPERATIONS 

■ 10. The authority citation for part 135 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 41706, 44113, 

44701–44702, 44705, 44709, 44711–44713, 

44715–44717, 44722. 

■ 11. Amend § 135.23 by revising 

paragraph (p) to read as follows: 

§ 135.23 Manual contents. 

* * * * * 

(p)(1) Procedures and information, as 

described in paragraph (p)(2) of this 

section, to assist each crewmember and 

person performing or directly 

supervising the following job functions 

involving items for transport on an 

aircraft: 

(i) Acceptance; 

(ii) Rejection; 

(iii) Handling; 

(iv) Storage incidental to transport; 

(v) Packaging of company material; or 

(vi) Loading. 

(2) Ensure that the procedures and 

information described in this paragraph 

are sufficient to assist a person in 

identifying packages that are marked or 

labeled as containing hazardous 

materials or that show signs of 

containing undeclared hazardous 

materials. The procedures and 

information must include: 

(i) Procedures for rejecting packages 

that do not conform to the Hazardous 

Materials Regulations in 49 CFR parts 

171 through 180 or that appear to 

contain undeclared hazardous materials; 

(ii) Procedures for complying with the 

hazardous materials incident reporting 

requirements of 49 CFR 171.15 and 

171.16 and discrepancy reporting 

requirements of 49 CFR 175.31. 

(iii) The certificate holder’s hazmat 

policies and whether the certificate 

holder is authorized to carry, or is 

prohibited from carrying, hazardous 

materials; and 

(iv) If the certificate holder’s 

operations specifications permit the 

transport of hazardous materials, 

procedures and information to ensure 

the following: 

(A) That packages containing 

hazardous materials are properly offered 

and accepted in compliance with 49 

CFR parts 171 through 180; 

(B) That packages containing 

hazardous materials are properly 

handled, stored, packaged, loaded and 

carried on board an aircraft in 

compliance with 49 CFR parts 171 

through 180; 

(C) That the requirements for Notice 

to the Pilot in Command (49 CFR 

175.33) are complied with; and 

(D) That aircraft replacement parts, 

consumable materials or other items 

regulated by 49 CFR parts 171 through 

180 are properly handled, packaged, 

and transported. 

* * * * * 

■ 12. Amend § 135.323 by revising 

paragraph (a)(1) as follows: 

§ 135.323 Training program: General. 

(a) * * * 

(1) Establish and implement a training 

program that satisfies the requirements 

of this subpart and that ensures that 

each crewmember, aircraft dispatcher, 

flight instructor and check airman is 

adequately trained to perform his or her 

assigned duties. Prior to 

implementation, the certificate holder 

must obtain initial and final FAA 

approval of the training program. 

* * * * * 

§ 135.333 [Removed] 

■ 13. Remove § 135.333. 

■ 14. Add subpart K, consisting of 

§§ 135.501 through 135.507, to read as 

follows: 

Subpart K—Hazardous Materials 

Training Program 

Sec. 

135.501 Applicability and definitions. 

135.503 Hazardous materials training: 

General. 

135.505 Hazardous materials training 

required. 

135.507 Hazardous materials training 

records. 

§ 135.501 Applicability and definitions. 

(a) This subpart prescribes the 

requirements applicable to each 

certificate holder for training each 

crewmember and person performing or 

directly supervising any of the following 

job functions involving any item for 

transport on board an aircraft: 

(1) Acceptance; 

(2) Rejection; 

(3) Handling; 

(4) Storage incidental to transport; 

(5) Packaging of company material; or 

(6) Loading. 

(b) Definitions. For purposes of this 

subpart, the following definitions apply: 

(1) Company material (COMAT)—

Material owned or used by a certificate 

holder. 

(2) Initial hazardous materials 

training—The basic training required for 

each newly hired person, or each person 

changing job functions, who performs or 

directly supervises any of the job 

functions specified in paragraph (a) of 

this section. 


ER07OC05.003</GPH>
58830 Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 

(3) Recurrent hazardous materials 

training—The training required every 24 

months for each person who has 

satisfactorily completed the certificate 

holder’s approved initial hazardous 

materials training program and performs 

or directly supervises any of the job 

functions specified in paragraph (a) of 

this section. 

§ 135.503 Hazardous materials training: 

General. 

(a) Each certificate holder must 

establish and implement a hazardous 

materials training program that: 

(1) Satisfies the requirements of 

Appendix O of part 121 of this part; 

(2) Ensures that each person 

performing or directly supervising any 

of the job functions specified in 

§ 135.501(a) is trained to comply with 

all applicable parts of 49 CFR parts 171 

through 180 and the requirements of 

this subpart; and 

(3) Enables the trained person to 

recognize items that contain, or may 

contain, hazardous materials regulated 

by 49 CFR parts 171 through 180. 

(b) Each certificate holder must 

provide initial hazardous materials 

training and recurrent hazardous 

materials training to each crewmember 

and person performing or directly 

supervising any of the job functions 

specified in § 135.501(a). 

(c) Each certificate holder’s hazardous 

materials training program must be 

approved by the FAA prior to 

implementation. 

§ 135.505 Hazardous materials training 

required. 

(a) Training requirement. Except as 

provided in paragraphs (b), (c) and (f) of 

this section, no certificate holder may 

use any crewmember or person to 

perform any of the job functions or 

direct supervisory responsibilities, and 

no person may perform any of the job 

functions or direct supervisory 

responsibilities, specified in 

§ 135.501(a) unless that person has 

satisfactorily completed the certificate 

holder’s FAA-approved initial or 

recurrent hazardous materials training 

program within the past 24 months. 

(b) New hire or new job function. A 

person who is a new hire and has not 

yet satisfactorily completed the required 

initial hazardous materials training, or a 

person who is changing job functions 

and has not received initial or recurrent 

training for a job function involving 

storage incidental to transport, or 

loading of items for transport on an 

aircraft, may perform those job 

functions for not more than 30 days 

from the date of hire or a change in job 

function, if the person is under the 

direct visual supervision of a person 

who is authorized by the certificate 

holder to supervise that person and who 

has successfully completed the 

certificate holder’s FAA-approved 

initial or recurrent training program 

within the past 24 months. 

(c) Persons who work for more than 

one certificate holder. A certificate 

holder that uses or assigns a person to 

perform or directly supervise a job 

function specified in § 135.501(a), when 

that person also performs or directly 

supervises the same job function for 

another certificate holder, need only 

train that person in its own policies and 

procedures regarding those job 

functions, if all of the following are met: 

(1) The certificate holder using this 

exception receives written verification 

from the person designated to hold the 

training records representing the other 

certificate holder that the person has 

satisfactorily completed hazardous 

materials training for the specific job 

function under the other certificate 

holder’s FAA approved hazardous 

material training program under 

appendix O of part 121 of this chapter; 

and 

(2) The certificate holder who trained 

the person has the same operations 

specifications regarding the acceptance, 

handling, and transport of hazardous 

materials as the certificate holder using 

this exception. 

(d) Recurrent hazardous materials 

training—Completion date. A person 

who satisfactorily completes recurrent 

hazardous materials training in the 

calendar month before, or the calendar 

month after, the month in which the 

recurrent training is due, is considered 

to have taken that training during the 

month in which it is due. If the person 

completes this training earlier than the 

month before it is due, the month of the 

completion date becomes his or her new 

anniversary month. 

(e) Repair stations. A certificate 

holder must ensure that each repair 

station performing work for, or on the 

certificate holder’s behalf is notified in 

writing of the certificate holder’s 

policies and operations specification 

authorization permitting or prohibition 

against the acceptance, rejection, 

handling, storage incidental to 

transport, and transportation of 

hazardous materials, including 

company material. This notification 

requirement applies only to repair 

stations that are regulated by 49 CFR 

parts 171 through 180. 

(f) Certificate holders operating at 

foreign locations. This exception applies 

if a certificate holder operating at a 

foreign location where the country 

requires the certificate holder to use 

persons working in that country to load 

aircraft. In such a case, the certificate 

holder may use those persons even if 

they have not been trained in 

accordance with the certificate holder’s 

FAA approved hazardous materials 

training program. Those persons, 

however, must be under the direct 

visual supervision of someone who has 

successfully completed the certificate 

holder’s approved initial or recurrent 

hazardous materials training program in 

accordance with this part. This 

exception applies only to those persons 

who load aircraft. 

§ 135.507 Hazardous materials training 

records. 

(a) General requirement. Each 

certificate holder must maintain a 

record of all training required by this 

part received within the preceding three 

years for each person who performs or 

directly supervises a job function 

specified in § 135.501(a). The record 

must be maintained during the time that 

the person performs or directly 

supervises any of those job functions, 

and for 90 days thereafter. These 

training records must be kept for direct 

employees of the certificate holder, as 

well as independent contractors, 

subcontractors, and any other person 

who performs or directly supervises 

these job functions for the certificate 

holder. 

(b) Location of records. The certificate 

holder must retain the training records 

required by paragraph (a) of this section 

for all initial and recurrent training 

received within the preceding 3 years 

for all persons performing or directly 

supervising the job functions listed in 

Appendix O of part 121 of this chapter 

at a designated location. The records 

must be available upon request at the 

location where the trained person 

performs or directly supervises the job 

function specified in § 135.501(a). 

Records may be maintained 

electronically and provided on location 

electronically. When the person ceases 

to perform or directly supervise a 

hazardous materials job function, the 

certificate holder must retain the 

hazardous materials training records for 

an additional 90 days and make them 

available upon request at the last 

location where the person worked. 

(c) Content of records. Each record 

must contain the following: 

(1) The individual’s name; 

(2) The most recent training 

completion date; 

(3) A description, copy or reference to 

training materials used to meet the 

training requirement; 

(4) The name and address of the 

organization providing the training; and 

Federal Register / Vol. 70, No. 194 / Friday, October 7, 2005 / Rules and Regulations 58831 

(5) A copy of the certification issued 

when the individual was trained, which 

shows that a test has been completed 

satisfactorily. 

(d) New hire or new job function. Each 

certificate holder using a person under 

the exception in § 135.505(b) must 

maintain a record for that person. The 

records must be available upon request 

at the location where the trained person 

performs or directly supervises the job 

function specified in § 135.501(a). 

Records may be maintained 

electronically and provided on location 

electronically. The record must include 

the following: 

(1) A signed statement from an 

authorized representative of the 

certificate holder authorizing the use of 

the person in accordance with the 

exception; 

(2) The date of hire or change in job 

function; 

(3) The person’s name and assigned 

job function; 

(4) The name of the supervisor of the 

job function; and 

(5) The date the person is to complete 

hazardous materials training in 

accordance with Appendix O of part 

121 of this chapter. 

PART 145—REPAIR STATIONS 

■ 15. The authority citation for part 145 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701–

44702, 44707, 44717. 

■ 16. Revise § 145.53 to read as follows: 

§ 145.53 Issue of certificate. 

(a) Except as provided in paragraph 

(b), (c), or (d) of this section, a person 

who meets the requirements of this part 

is entitled to a repair station certificate 

with appropriate ratings prescribing 

such operations specifications and 

limitations as are necessary in the 

interest of safety. 

(b) If the person is located in a 

country with which the United States 

has a bilateral aviation safety agreement, 

the FAA may find that the person meets 

the requirements of this part based on 

a certification from the civil aviation 

authority of that country. This 

certification must be made in 

accordance with implementation 

procedures signed by the Administrator 

or the Administrator’s designee. 

(c) Before a repair station certificate 

can be issued for a repair station that is 

located within the United States, the 

applicant shall certify in writing that all 

‘‘hazmat employees’’ (see 49 CFR 171.8) 

for the repair station, its contractors, or 

subcontractors are trained as required in 

49 CFR part 172 subpart H. 

(d) Before a repair station certificate 

can be issued for a repair station that is 

located outside the United States, the 

applicant shall certify in writing that all 

employees for the repair station, its 

contractors, or subcontractors 

performing a job function concerning 

the transport of dangerous goods 

(hazardous material) are trained as 

outlined in the most current edition of 

the International Civil Aviation 

Organization Technical Instructions for 

the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods 

by Air. 

■ 17. Amend 145.57 by revising 

paragraph (a) to read as follows: 

§ 145.57 Amendment to or transfer of 

certificate. 

(a) The holder of a repair station 

certificate must apply for a change to its 

certificate in a format acceptable to the 

Administrator. A change to the 

certificate must include certification in 

compliance with § 145.53(c) or (d), if 

not previously submitted. A certificate 

change is necessary if the certificate 

holder—

(1) Changes the location of the repair 

station, or 

(2) Requests to add or amend a rating. 

* * * * * 

■ 18. Add § 145.165 to subpart D to read 

as follows: 

§ 145.165 Hazardous materials training. 

(a) Each repair station that meets the 

definition of a hazmat employer under 

49 CFR 171.8 must have a hazardous 

materials training program that meets 

the training requirements of 49 CFR part 

172 subpart H. 

(b) A repair station employee may not 

perform or directly supervise a job 

function listed in § 121.1001 or 

§ 135.501 for, or on behalf of the part 

121 or 135 operator including loading of 

items for transport on an aircraft 

operated by a part 121 or part 135 

certificate holder unless that person has 

received training in accordance with the 

part 121 or part 135 operator’s FAA 

approved hazardous materials training 

program. 

■ 19. Add § 145.206 to read as follows: 

§ 145.206 Notification of hazardous 

materials authorizations. 

(a) Each repair station must 

acknowledge receipt of the part 121 or 

part 135 operator notification required 

under §§ 121.905(e) and 135.505(e) of 

this chapter prior to performing work 

for, or on behalf of that certificate 

holder. 

(b) Prior to performing work for or on 

behalf of a part 121 or part 135 operator, 

each repair station must notify its 

employees, contractors, or 

subcontractors that handle or replace 

aircraft components or other items 

regulated by 49 CFR parts 171 through 

180 of each certificate holder’s 

operations specifications authorization 

permitting, or prohibition against, 

carrying hazardous materials. This 

notification must be provided 

subsequent to the notification by the 

part 121 or part 135 operator of such 

operations specifications authorization/ 

designation. 

Issued in Washington, DC, on September 

18, 2005. 

Marion C. Blakey, 

Administrator. 

[FR Doc. 05–19659 Filed 10–6–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P