
Welcome to J. J. Keller COMPLIANCE NETWORK
Make regulatory compliance easier than ever at your company with expert guidance and resources custom-tailored to your exact needs.
Welcome to J. J. Keller COMPLIANCE NETWORK
Make regulatory compliance easier than ever at your company with expert guidance and resources custom-tailored to your exact needs.
Workplace safety (OSHA).
Transportation (DOT).
Environment (EPA).
Human resources (DOL).
At first glance, an empty container seems like a non-issue – no product, no problem. But in the eyes of regulators, “empty” is a carefully defined status that can determine whether a container is harmless or still subject to hazardous waste rules, labeling, and fire or environmental risk controls. The EPA and OSHA have detailed definitions of what “empty” truly means. Misunderstanding these rules can lead to serious incidents, hefty fines, and unintentional non-compliance.
Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), a container that once held hazardous waste is only legally “empty” if it meets particular criteria outlined in 40 CFR 261.7. The first standard that must be satisfied is that all material has been removed from the container using normal means such as pouring, pumping, or aspirating. Secondly, no more than 2.5 centimeters or 1 inch of residue remains on the container's bottom or inner lining. Additionally, if the container holds less than 110 gallons, it is “empty” if no more than 3% of the total weight or volume exists. Of course, sometimes special circumstances require further evaluation. For example, a gas cylinder is not “empty” until the pressure has reduced to atmospheric levels, and acute hazardous waste containers must be triple rinsed with an appropriate solvent or cleaned by another approved method. If these conditions are not met, the container is still legally considered to contain hazardous waste, even if it feels empty.
While the EPA focuses on environmental disposal and waste management, OSHA’s concern with empty containers centers on worker safety—particularly the potential for exposure to hazardous residues or vapors. Under OSHA’s Hazard Communication Standard (29 CFR 1910.1200), a container that previously contained hazardous chemicals must retain its original hazard label until it is adequately cleaned or until the employer removes the label following proper decontamination procedures. For example, a drum labeled “Flammable” must keep this label even if it appears empty, as residual material or vapors may still pose a significant ignition or fire risk. Removing such labels prematurely could lead to workplace hazards and violations of OSHA regulations.
Employers must first clearly determine which rules apply to them: whether the container held hazardous materials governed by EPA regulations, hazardous chemicals subject to OSHA requirements, or both. Emptying procedures should be followed, including properly draining the container, performing triple-rinsing when required, and thoroughly documenting all decontamination activities. Original hazard labels must be maintained on containers until they are thoroughly cleaned or reconditioned, as removing labels prematurely violates OSHA’s Hazard Communication Standard. Additionally, employers should provide employees with training on the proper handling, labeling, and disposal of containers and ensure they fully understand what constitutes an ‘empty’ container under federal standards. Finally, a detailed record of all rinsing, draining, and cleaning processes should be maintained to demonstrate compliance during EPA or state inspections.
Keys to remember: Employers should educate their teams, enforce proper cleaning procedures, and maintain compliance records to ensure they are staying compliant with “empty” container standards.
When it comes to oil spill prevention, it’s a good thing to be in “tiers.” Why? It’s because Tier I or Tier II qualified facilities have simplified requirements for the Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires facilities subject to the SPCC rule (40 CFR Part 112) to develop and implement a plan that describes how they will use operating procedures, control measures, and countermeasures to prevent oil spills from reaching navigable waters or adjoining shorelines. Typically, SPCC Plans must be certified by a professional engineer (PE), but qualified facilities can self-certify the plans.
Let’s compare Tier I and Tier II qualified facilities.
A qualified facility:
The SPCC rule identifies two types of qualified facilities:
SPCC Tier Tip: EPA provides a fact sheet (Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan Qualified Facilities Applicability) to help facilities determine eligibility as a qualified facility and (if applicable) which tier applies.
Tier I and Tier II qualified facilities are subject to many of the same requirements for SPCC Plans, including basic requirements, certification, and updates to qualification changes.
All qualified facilities have to develop and implement a written SPCC Plan. Each plan is unique to the facility, but all plans must include:
The primary similarity is that Tier I and Tier II qualified facilities may self-certify their SPCC Plans and amendments to the plan.
SPCC Tier Tip: Some states may not allow self-certification. EPA recommends checking with the state engineer licensing board to determine whether SPCC Plans can be self-certified.
When the status of a facility changes, the owner or operator must prepare and implement an SPCC Plan according to the requirements that apply to its new designation within six months.
Tier I facilities may still be able to self-certify if they meet the Tier II criteria; if so, these facilities can comply with the Tier II rules. However, facilities that are no longer eligible as qualified facilities have to comply with the full SPCC Plan requirements, including obtaining PE certification of the plan.
The primary difference between Tier I and Tier II facilities is the extent of the SPCC Plan. Additionally, Tier II facilities may employ certain alternative spill control methods.
Tier I qualified facilities may use the template in Appendix G of Part 112 as their SPCC Plan. It’s a simplified plan that only contains the requirements applicable to Tier I facilities.
These facilities must also:
Tier II qualified facilities have to develop a full SPCC Plan that complies with 112.7 and the applicable requirements of Subparts B and C of Part 112. This includes developing facility diagrams.
Tier II qualified facilities (with certification) may implement certain alternative measures and methods that Tier I facilities can’t. Tier II facilities must obtain written certification from a PE to include:
Qualified facilities, whether Tier I or Tier II, benefit from the ability to self-certify their SPCC Plans. That’s something that can make owners and operators “tier” up with happiness.
Key to remember: Tier I and Tier II qualified facilities share many similarities under the SPCC rule, but knowing where the requirements differ is vital to maintaining compliance.
Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news. Let's take a look at what happened over the last month!
OSHA will host an informal public hearing on its proposed Heat Injury and Illness Prevention rule on June 16. Information about the proposed rule and instructions on how to watch the hearing can be found on OSHA’s website.
OSHA’s National Safety Stand-Down to Prevent Falls in Construction event, held the week of May 5, raised awareness of fall hazards in an effort to help prevent injuries and fatalities. Slips, trips, and falls were the leading cause of death in the construction industry in 2023, accounting for 421 fatalities.
After concluding its investigation of a California chemical facility fire, the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board is calling for improved heater safeguards to prevent similar incidents. The fire was caused by an overheated refinery furnace. The Board also made several safety recommendations for chemical facilities.
Following a number of recent fall incidents, the Mine Safety and Health Administration issued a safety alert advising miners to use fall protection. The most recent incident occurred when a miner fell from the deck of a bulldozer.
Turning to environmental news, EPA further delayed the PFAS manufacturing report submission period. The date was moved from July 11, 2025, to April 13, 2026. This is a one-time reporting requirement for manufacturers of per- and polyfluoroalkyl, or PFAS, substances.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has again delayed the deadline for submitting data on 16 chemical substances required by the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Health and Safety Data Reporting rule. Manufacturers (including importers) now have until May 22, 2026, to report on all of the covered chemical substances.
What’s required?
The TSCA Section 8(d) Health and Safety Data Reporting rule (40 CFR Part 716) requires manufacturers (including importers) of 16 chemical substances to report data from:
The covered chemical substances include:
|
|
Note that EPA’s first extension in March 2025 moved the submission deadline for vinyl chloride to June 11, 2025, and for the remaining 15 chemical substances to September 9, 2025. This rule pushes the submission deadline for all chemical substances (including vinyl chloride) to May 22, 2026.
Who’s covered?
The rule applies to manufacturers in the North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes for chemical manufacturing (NAICS code 325) and petroleum refineries (NAICS code 324110) that:
The reporting requirement also applies to manufacturers of substances for commercial purposes that coincidentally produced a covered chemical substance during the manufacture, processing, use, or disposal of another substance or mixture (including byproducts and impurities).
How do you report?
Reporters submit the TSCA Section 8(d) data via the Chemical Information Submission System (or CISS) tool on the Chemical Safety and Pesticide Program (CSPP) system. The CSPP is accessed through EPA’s Central Data Exchange.
Key to remember: Manufacturers now have even more time to submit TSCA Section 8(d) health and safety data reports for 16 chemical substances.
There’s one question that all potential purchasers should ask before buying an industrial or commercial property: Could the business be held liable for hazardous substance contamination? The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), also called “Superfund,” allows the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to make both current and past facility owners and operators responsible for cleaning up sites contaminated by hazardous substances.
However, CERCLA offers liability protections to landowners and potential purchasers who didn’t cause or contribute to property contamination if they meet specific requirements, including conducting All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI).
Here’s how AAI can shield your organization from Superfund liability.
EPA defines AAI as “the process of evaluating a property’s environmental conditions and assessing potential liability for any contamination.” It encompasses the activities required by the AAI rule (40 CFR Part 312) to:
Potential property owners must comply with the AAI rule to claim protection from CERCLA liability. They may use one of three landowner defenses:
You must meet the AAI requirements if you plan to purchase a property for nonresidential use and may want to use CERCLA liability protections for hazardous substance releases or threatened releases after purchase.
The AAI rule requires an environmental professional to conduct most of the activities (312.21), but it also contains provisions that the potential owner must meet (312.22).
Who qualifies as an environmental professional?
An environmental professional has the needed background to identify conditions of a property that indicate releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances. According to 312.10, an environmental professional needs:
The AAI rule lists the actions needed to qualify for CERCLA liability protection using the landowner defenses. All AAI tasks must be completed before acquiring the property. Most tasks need to be completed within one year prior to purchasing a property. However, a handful of actions must happen within 180 days before purchase:
The environmental professional:
The potential landowner:
Report the results
The AAI results must be documented in a written report that’s signed by the environmental professional. It must include:
The regulations don’t provide specific requirements for the AAI format, and although the rules outline the actions you must take, it can be daunting to implement AAI without further guidance.
Consider using industry standards! EPA even references ASTM International Standards at 312.11 that you can use to comply.
Key to remember: Potential landowners can shield themselves from CERCLA liability for hazardous substance contamination by conducting All Appropriate Inquiries.
Thank you to all our members that have taken the time to provide the Compliance Network team with feedback on what they like and do not like about the site. We have taken this feedback to heart and have redesigned the homepage to better serve our members. Our goal is to make finding the information you need easier and faster.
Let’s take a tour!
Sitewide Search
We heard you. Search has been brought front and center to help you find the information you need quickly.
Activity Overview
The Activity Overview will provide quick access to items that matter to you.
Latest in your favorite Topics
This section will highlight any new content added to your selected topics of interest.
Network Polls and Discussion Activity
See what other professionals in your field are saying.
Premium Content
Exclusive content only available to Compliance Network members.
Trending
Catch up with what other professional like yourself are reading.
The new homepage will go live in June. Don’t hesitate to let us know what you think: compliancenetwork@jjkeller.com
A Title V operating permit is a legally enforceable document with the federal and state air emissions regulations that a facility must meet to operate. One requirement that applies to all Title V permit holders is the annual compliance certification. It answers whether a facility fulfills the permit’s terms and conditions (such as emissions limits, monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting).
Whether the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or a state or local regulatory agency issues the Title V permit, your facility must complete the annual compliance certification.
Discover what your facility needs to comply, certify, and repeat.
Facilities submit annual compliance certifications to the Title V permitting authority, which is usually a state or local regulatory agency (40 CFR 70.6). An EPA Regional Office serves as the permitting authority (71.6) for federally issued permits.
Title V tip:Check the state or local regulations for Title V compliance certification rules. They may require more frequent submissions and additional information.
At a minimum, the annual compliance certification covers two major areas for every permit term or condition:
Let’s take a closer look at each element.
Your facility’s compliance methods are the ways it tracks whether it’s meeting the Title V permit requirements or not. When a term or condition isn’t met (like exceeding an emission limit), it’s known as a deviation.
Compliance methods consist of monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting:
Three questions determine the compliance status of each permit requirement during the covered period:
Intermittent vs. continuous compliance
For each permit term or condition, your facility has intermittent compliance if it doesn’t meet the requirements at any time during the covered period. Your facility achieves continuous compliance only if it:
Possible exception to compliance
EPA defines a possible exception to compliance as “any periods during which compliance is required and in which an excursion or exceedance … occurred” (70.6(c)(5)(iii)(C)).
Simply put, a possible exception to compliance is a deviation that occurs when compliance is mandated. If compliance isn’t required or another permit requirement excuses it, the deviation isn’t a possible exception.
Your facility’s Title V permit provides instructions for how to submit the annual compliance certification, including the required forms and methods (via mail or electronic submission). You can also confirm requirements with your permitting authority. Generally, federally permitted facilities use the Annual Compliance Certification (EPA Form 5900-04).
Title V tip: Electronic submissions may be an option through the Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI) on EPA’s Central Data Exchange. Check with your permitting authority to determine whether you may submit the annual compliance certification electronically via CEDRI.
Annual compliance certification is vital to maintaining your Title V permit. Keep in mind: comply, certify, and repeat.
Key to remember: Facilities with a Title V operating permit must certify compliance with the requirements at least annually.
In today's rapidly evolving energy landscape, businesses are turning to back-up emergency generators to keep operations running smoothly. Several key factors are driving this growing trend:
Climate change has led to more intense weather like hurricanes, wildfires, and heatwaves. These events put pressure on power grids, causing outages that disrupt business operations. Generators help by providing backup power during unexpected failures.
Artificial intelligence (AI) and data centers need a lot of electricity. As these technologies grow, power grids struggle to keep up. Companies use generators to prevent power shortages and keep essential systems running.
Aging infrastructure and unsteady energy supply from renewable sources can make electrical supply unstable. Industries like manufacturing, healthcare, and finance need steady power to avoid costly interruptions. Generators act as a safety net when the grid fails.
Backup generators help keep businesses running, but they also impact the environment. Companies must follow air quality regulations to reduce pollution and operate safely.
Air permits
•State agencies usually oversee air permits, but The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has granted many county and city agencies the authority to issue them. For major permits such as New Source Review (NSR) and Title V, federal regulations apply, but state or local governments may still manage the process.
•In some areas, businesses can apply for a general permit or permit-by-rule for emergency generators. These permits are often easier to obtain and take less time to process. Checking air permitting regulations will help determine if this option is available.
•Businesses should find out if they need a pre-construction or construction air permit before setting up an emergency generator. These permits are based on the proposed equipment’s potential to emit (PTE) of criteria pollutants such as NOx, SO2, CO, and CO2 and hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) such as formaldehyde and acrolein, which are emitted during the combustion of fuel. The type(s) of fuel used in the generator, such as diesel, natural gas, gasoline, or propane, will affect the calculated PTE. Read more about construction permits in this ezExplanation: NSR Permits.
(Note: many state and local permitting agencies allow for the use of 500 hours for calculating PTE from an emergency engine, as per EPA’s 2011 Fox Memo, but some agencies still require using 8,760 hours and only accept 500 hours as an enforceable limit defined in a permit.)
•Federal law sets a limit on emergency generators, allowing less than 100 hours of non-emergency use per year. This includes maintenance and testing. Some permits may also restrict the times of day when the generator can be used for non-emergency purposes.
•The permit may require businesses to use the generator according to the manufacturer’s specifications. This is especially important if the business used manufacturer guarantees to calculate PTE.
•Businesses must track fuel use and operating hours to stay within the limits used in emissions calculations. They can do this using fuel records, fuel measuring devices, and hour meters that log the generator’s usage time.
•After getting a construction permit, a facility may need to apply for an operating permit within a year of the generator beginning operation. Some state and local agencies have stricter rules and deadlines. Check out J. J. Keller’s ezExplanation for Operating Permits: Clean Air Act: Operating Permits
EPA emission standards
The EPA enforces strict emissions regulations for stationary engines. Businesses must ensure their generators meet the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for compression ignition (40 CFR 60 Subpart IIII) and spark ignition internal combustion engines (ICE) (40 CFR 60 Subpart JJJJ), which can be found here. Additionally, the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) apply to reciprocating internal combustion engines (RICE). 40 CFR 63 Subpart ZZZZ can be found here.
These rules, depending on the specific type of generator engine, will be required even if a permit is not necessary.
Keep in mind that using an emergency generator may also involve other factors depending on the type and amount of fuel stored:
•Aboveground Storage Tank (AST) Requirements
•Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plans
•EPCRA Tier II Reporting
Key to remember: When installing an emergency generator, companies must navigate complex air quality regulations to ensure compliance. By selecting the right fuel type and securing necessary permits, businesses can maintain reliable power while minimizing environmental impact.
Several questions we receive from our customers use the terms “hazardous waste” and “hazardous materials” interchangeably. At a recent event, a few attendees admitted that they didn’t think there was a difference between the two. This is a common point of confusion and we want to ensure that our readers know the difference. Let’s dive into it!
The term hazardous material is defined by the Department of Transportation and refers to any substance or material that poses an unreasonable risk to health, safety, and property during transportation. Hazardous materials include hazardous substances, hazardous wastes, marine pollutants, and elevated-temperature materials. Essentially, if it’s dangerous and transported, it’s considered a hazardous material.
On the other hand, hazardous waste is defined by the Environmental Protection Agency. It refers to contaminated chemicals or by-products that no longer serve their purpose and need to be disposed of. Hazardous wastes are either listed or exhibit characteristics like ignitability, corrosivity, toxicity, or reactivity. It’s essentially waste that poses a danger to health or the environment and requires special handling and disposal.
To put it simply, hazardous material is a broad term that includes various dangerous substances during transportation, while hazardous waste specifically refers to dangerous by-products that need disposal. Understanding these terms is crucial for compliance with environmental and safety regulations.
If you ever find yourself unsure, remember that hazardous materials are about transportation risks, and hazardous wastes are about disposal risks.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued an interim final rule that further delays the submission period for the one-time reporting requirement for manufacturers of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). It pushes the starting submission period to April 2026.
Under Section 8(a)(7) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), EPA requires any business that manufactured (including imported) any PFAS or PFAS-containing article between 2011 and 2022 to submit the report.
What’s the new timeline?
The Section 8(a)(7) PFAS report’s opening submission period was moved from July 11, 2025, to April 13, 2026. Most manufacturers have six months to submit the report. Small manufacturers reporting only as importers of PFAS-containing articles have one year.
TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS report submission period | |
---|---|
Most manufacturers | April 13, 2026–October 13, 2026 |
Small manufacturers reporting solely as PFAS article importers | April 13, 2026–April 13, 2027 |
About the report
Manufacturers (including importers) covered by the TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS reporting rule (40 CFR Part 705) must provide information about:
It’s the second time EPA has postponed the reporting period. In September 2024, the agency moved the beginning submission period from November 2024 to July 2025. This latest interim rule pushes the starting period from July 2025 to April 2026.
Why the delay?
EPA needs more time to prepare the online reporting tool on the Central Data Exchange that businesses will use to submit the data. The agency will conduct tests to ensure that the application can accept submissions and that reporters don’t encounter technical issues.
Key to remember: EPA further delayed TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS reporting. The submission period now begins on April 13, 2026.
Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news. Let’s take a look at what’s happened over the last month!
On April 17, OSHA released 2024 injury and illness data. This includes information from more than 370,000 establishments that submitted Form 300A, as well as partial data from more than 732,000 Form 300 and Form 301 records. OSHA provides public access to the data in an effort to identify unsafe conditions and workplace hazards that may lead to occupational injuries and illnesses.
This year’s National Stand-Down to Prevent Struck-by Incidents took place the week of April 21. Struck-by incidents are the second leading cause of death among construction workers and the leading cause of nonfatal injuries in the construction industry. The stand-down emphasized the importance of training and prevention on worksites.
A safety alert from the Mine Safety and Health Administration urges the mining community to implement effective safety and health programs, with a focus on identifying and eliminating health and safety hazards. The alert was issued due to a high number of mining fatalities in the first quarter of 2025.
The Mine Safety and Health Administration temporarily paused its silica enforcement for coal mine operators until August 18, four months from its original compliance date of April 14. Under the agency’s silica rule, mine operators must update their respiratory protection programs. This may require them to obtain additional respirators and sampling devices. The agency says this four-month pause provides time for operators to come into compliance.
And finally, turning to environmental news, EPA updated the process for making data corrections to hazardous waste manifests. Waste handlers must correct errors on the manifest within 30 days of a request from EPA or a state agency. They also must submit corrections electronically.
And finally, EPA streamlined its pesticide registration process. The agency updated its MyPest app and made policy changes regarding how to submit two of its registration forms.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
You’ve likely never thought of “staying in touch” as a legal obligation, but that’s exactly what it is for facilities that generate small quantities of hazardous waste. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) mandates that small quantity generators (SQGs) give updates on their hazardous waste activities every four years. The next re-notification is right around the corner; it’s due by September 1, 2025.
Here's what SQGs need to know to stay in touch — and in compliance — with EPA.
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) enables EPA to control hazardous waste from generation to disposal. The agency keeps tabs on SQGs through the re-notification regulation at 40 CFR 262.18(d). It requires SQGs to re-notify EPA or the state environmental agency of their generator status and activities every four years by submitting the:
Regulated SQGs must submit the Site ID Form. EPA and many states use the myRCRAid module on RCRA Information (RCRAInfo) for re-notifications.
Here’s how to submit the Site ID Form on myRCRAid:
Once you submit the Site ID Form, its status on myRCRAid will display “Pending.” EPA or the state regulator will approve or reject the re-notification submission.
Consider these tips when preparing your SQG re-notification:
Submitting the SQG re-notification properly keeps EPA updated and your facility compliant.
Key to remember: Small quantity generators of hazardous waste must re-notify EPA or the state agency by September 1, 2025.
The next time you’re at a service station, consider the fact that you’re standing above underground tanks holding the fuel that you’re pumping into your vehicle. This brings up an important question about any underground tank: Since you can’t see the tank, how do you know if it starts to leak? The answer is a release detection system.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires that all regulated underground storage tanks (USTs) have release detection systems and that owners and operators of USTs test the equipment annually to ensure it operates correctly.
Let’s look at three aspects of release detection equipment testing: how to conduct testing, what to test for, and what to record.
UST owners and operators may conduct release detection equipment testing according to:
Manufacturer’s instructions
Each piece of release detection equipment should have an associated manual or guide for owners to reference. The manual or guide will explain how to test the equipment.
Tip: Most equipment manufacturers provide online versions of their product manuals and guides, which you can likely find on the manufacturer’s website. If you can’t find guidance, contact the manufacturer directly.
Industry codes and standards
EPA’s regulations stipulate that UST owners and operators who follow industry codes and standards must choose ones developed by a nationally recognized association (like ASTM International or the Petroleum Equipment Institute (PEI)) or an independent testing laboratory.
For instance, the agency states at 280.40(a)(3) that UST owners and operators may use PEI/RP1200, Recommended Practices for the Testing and Verification of Spill, Overfill, Leak Detection and Secondary Containment Equipment at UST Facilities, to comply.
Implementing agency requirements
EPA’s rules for testing release detection equipment serve as the minimum standards. Most state regulatory agencies implement UST programs and may impose stricter or additional requirements. Plus, local regulations may apply.
Check state and local rules to ensure your UST complies with the right requirements.
At a minimum, UST owners and operators must test the following factors that apply to their release detection systems.
The regulation at 280.45(b)(1) mandates that UST owners and operators keep records of the annual release detection equipment testing results for at least three years.
For each annual testing record, list:
Petroleum and other hazardous substances that leak from USTs can endanger human and environmental health. A leaking UST’s primary threat is groundwater contamination. Groundwater supplies drinking water for almost half of Americans.
A release detection system enables a facility to respond sooner to accidental releases and, therefore, limit potential harmful impacts — only if the equipment used for the system operates properly.
Testing your UST’s release detection equipment is vital because it allows you to identify which components function accurately and which parts have problems that need correction. A well-functioning release detection system can help your facility:
Key to remember: EPA requires facilities to test the release detection equipment used on underground storage tanks each year to make sure it operates properly.
Pesticide registrations just became simpler, more modern, and more transparent! EPA recently updated an app and made policy changes regarding how to submit two forms. All these changes result in a streamlined pesticide registration process.
On April 18, EPA made enhancements to its MyPest app, which sources say was initially launched in mid-January. EPA is proud to say that MyPest already boasts over 1,200 registrants. The new app allows registrants of pesticide products to:
Updates to MyPest include an enhanced dashboard page. The page offers information about the registrant’s cases and products. More updates are planned later this year.
On April 4, EPA announced in the Federal Register the issuance of Pesticide Registration (PR) Notice 2025-1. The notice itself is dated effective March 27, 2025. Its subject line reads, “Revised Procedures for Citing Data to Support Pesticide Registrations (EPA Forms No. 8570-34 and 8570-35).”
The latest PR notice supersedes PR Notice 98-5, dated June 12, 1998. While the revisions were proposed last June, the agency only finalized them now. According to PR Notice 2025-1:
The two forms — EPA Forms 8570-34 and 8570-35 — have not been modified. Only policies regarding the submission of the two forms have changed. The agency:
EPA contends that none of the information on Form 8570-35 is confidential. Put another way, none of the information on the Data Matrix is protected from public release. Therefore, the agency claims there is no reason to submit two versions of the form.
According to EPA, entities potentially affected by the policy changes include, but are not limited to:
Using electronic reporting for EPA Forms 8570-34 and 8570-35 brings efficient data transmittal, argues EPA. A bonus is that electronic reporting will also reduce errors. That’s because of automated validation tools in the portal. Submitters should experience lower costs and faster review and transmission of data, the agency adds.
In 2024, EPA received a total of 3,309 Data Matrices. Moving from two versions to just one for the Data Matrix form should save registrants and EPA time. Specifically, completing, submitting, and processing the Data Matrix should be quicker. EPA will also experience time savings when providing the public access to the information. Extra steps under the Freedom of Information Act would not be needed.
The MyPest app update is a step forward in efficiency and transparency, concludes EPA. The app enhancements are part of the agency’s overall move toward digital and streamlined processes. EPA projects that the app will improve the timeliness of pesticide registration decisions.
Recent actions streamline the pesticide registration process and make it more transparent. These actions relate to the MyPest app and EPA Forms 8570-34 and 8570-35.
Think recycling at work is just tossing paper in a blue bin? Think again. In 2025, workplace recycling is being redefined — from a basic office task to a strategic initiative that impacts your company’s bottom line, brand reputation, and environmental footprint.
From cardboard and plastics to e-waste and food scraps, today’s leading businesses are building smarter, circular systems that turn trash into opportunity — one department at a time.
Here are five reasons why recycling matters now more than ever.
Sustainability is no longer just a corporate social responsibility (CSR) talking point. It’s a core business differentiator. As a management or EHS leader, you’re often on the frontlines of implementing the visible changes that shape public perception. Recycling programs are a low-barrier, high-impact initiative that sends a clear message to customers, investors, and employees: We walk the talk.
Failing to prioritize environmental responsibility puts your company’s reputation at risk — especially in industries with public visibility or regulatory scrutiny. Forward-thinking competitors are already using circular economy models and zero-waste initiatives to win market share.
Champion a program that reflects your company’s values and positions you as a sustainability leader in your field.
Recycling is no longer a “nice-to-have.” Many jurisdictions now require commercial recycling, especially for packaging waste, e-waste, and food scraps. Increasingly, regulations also demand data transparency, such as tracking waste volumes, diversion rates, and sustainability goals.
Supervisors in environmental and safety roles are responsible for ensuring compliance and minimizing risk. Violations can result in hefty fines, bad press, or loss of contracts.
Stay ahead of compliance trends and implement a recycling program that satisfies current and future requirements while keeping auditreadiness top of mind.
Landfill disposal is becoming more expensive due to tipping fees and transportation costs. By diverting materials through recycling or reuse programs, companies can reduce both their environmental footprint and their operational spend.
In addition, smart material handling and waste segregation can lead to process improvements — less clutter, fewer hauling pickups, and even opportunities to monetize recyclable materials like scrap metal, cardboard, or used electronics.
Use data from your waste audits and vendor reporting to identify high-volume waste streams and optimize for both cost reduction and resource efficiency.
Today’s workforce, particularly younger employees, is drawn to employers who align with their values. A clean, green workplace that visibly supports recycling and sustainability reinforces a positive culture, boosts morale, and improves engagement — especially when employees feel like they’re contributing to something bigger.
Recycling initiatives are also an easy win for cross-departmental engagement. Whether through green teams, signage campaigns, or employee challenges, these programs offer hands-on ways to involve everyone.
Build internal buy-in by showing how your initiatives support company values, employee wellness, and sustainability goals through shared responsibility.
In 2025, companies are under increasing pressure from stakeholders to report measurable progress on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) initiatives. Waste reduction, recycling rates, and landfill diversion metrics are among the top data points requested in annual sustainability reports and RFPs.
Supervisors and EHS leaders are often the owners of the data. You're tasked with tracking, verifying, and reporting on these outcomes. Without a structured recycling program in place, those metrics are impossible to capture, and your ESG report falls flat.
Establish a system for measuring, improving, and communicating progress toward zero-waste or landfill diversion targets, and support leadership in meeting ESG benchmarks.
Key to remember: Embracing workplace recycling in 2025 isn’t just good for the planet — it’s a smart move that drives innovation, saves money, and positions your company as a leader in sustainability.
Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news. Let’s get started!
Ladders were the cause of over 22,000 workplace injuries and 161 deaths in 2020. Each March, the American Ladder Institute promotes ladder safety awareness with the goal of reducing ladder-related injuries and fatalities. Every Step Matters was the theme of this year’s National Ladder Safety Month.
Stand Up 4 Grain Safety Week kicked off on March 24. This annual event brings attention to preventable grain handling hazards and promotes safety in this high-hazard industry.
Federal agencies must review their regulations and report back to the White House by April 20. The priority is on “significant” rules, generally considered to be those with an annual effect on the economy of 100 million dollars or more. Once the regulations have been identified, the Office of Management and Budget and the Department of Government Efficiency will work with agency leaders to create a plan for rescinding or modifying the regulations and begin winding down their enforcement.
A highwall fatality at a surface mine prompted the Mine Safety and Health Administration to issue a safety alert. It outlines what miners should do to prevent similar incidents, including looking for hazards such as loose rocks and overhangs before beginning work.
The American Society of Safety Professionals revised its construction training standard. It outlines training requirements for new hires in construction and demolition operations, site procedures, regulatory compliance, and more.
And finally, turning to environmental news, EPA will reconsider a number of major rulemakings that may impact a variety of industries. This is in response to an executive order that federal agencies review their regulations. Among the rules under consideration include those related to clean power, oil and gas emission limits, greenhouse gas reporting, and risk management.
EPA’s Waste Emissions Charge on petroleum and natural gas facilities with high methane emissions is no longer in effect. The rule initially took effect in January and was then disapproved by Congress on March 14.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
Hazardous waste manifests are like travel logs. They track the entire journey of regulated hazardous waste, from the starting point (the generator’s facility) to the final destination (the off-site waste management facility). Like travel logs, a manifest is only as accurate as the information provided. Thankfully, you can correct manifest errors.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized the Third Rule under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), which took effect in January 2025. It made noteworthy changes to the manifest corrections process. Here’s what hazardous waste generators, transporters, and treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs) need to know.
The Third Rule impacts entities subject to RCRA’s manifest regulations. This article focuses on the manifest correction rules that apply to these waste handlers:
Note that the final rule amends post-manifest correction regulations for other entities, such as exporters, that are beyond the scope of this article.
EPA’s final rule maintains most of the post-receipt manifest data corrections process.
What’s the same?
Specifically:
What’s different?
Previously, when EPA or a state regulatory agency requested corrections to data on a manifest, waste handlers weren’t required to make them. The Third Rule now mandates that waste handlers:
Post-receipt corrections are made via the Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System (e-Manifest) on the RCRA Information (RCRAInfo) system.
The Third Rule also clarifies that receiving facilities (TSDFs) can make corrections only after the manifest is completed (i.e., signed and submitted to the e-Manifest system).
Waste handlers submitting voluntary or mandatory post-receipt corrections to hazardous waste manifests must follow the process established at 40 CFR 264.71(l).
Follow this general process on the e-Manifest System:
Check out some top questions and answers about post-receipt manifest corrections.
What manifest information can I correct?
The type of waste handler your facility is determines which items on the manifest you can change for voluntary corrections or must change for mandatory corrections. Typically:
What user role do I need on RCRAInfo to submit manifest corrections?
You must be registered in RCRAInfo as a user with the e-Manifest Certifier or Site Manager role for the facility’s site to submit manifest corrections.
What’s the CROMERR certification?
EPA requires manifest correction submitters to use a CROMERR-compliant electronic signature, which requires a higher level of identity proofing than the Quick Sign signature.
Can I revert to a previous manifest version?
Once the corrected manifest has been signed, you can’t revert it to a previous version. The e-Manifest system does, however, let you view all versions of the manifest.
Can brokers sign corrected manifests?
Although brokers can initiate a manifest correction for generators, they may not sign a corrected manifest unless they (a) operate at the generator’s facility and (b) can sign the manifest as an offeror of the waste shipment.
Key to remember: EPA’s Third Rule updates the process for making data corrections to RCRA hazardous waste manifests.
Are you storing and disposing of hazardous waste correctly or sitting on disaster? Hazardous waste storage is not just a regulatory headache – it is a time bomb for the environment and your company’s bottom line. A disaster in east London, England, is an ongoing issue for nearby residents that highlights the importance of hazardous waste management and why employers must take it seriously.
Originally intended for construction waste disposal, the site eventually turned into a dumping ground for hazardous industrial materials. Investigations found plastics, asbestos, industrial chemicals, and carcinogenic substances illegally dumped, creating an environmental and public health hazard. These materials fuel the fires, continuously releasing toxic smoke into the air. Residents have reported respiratory problems, skin irritation, and other health issues while authorities struggle to contain the situation. Even though this incident occurred in London, we can learn plenty of valuable lessons from the incident. Here’s how employers can take proactive measures to ensure compliance, protect workers, and prevent environmental harm:
A hazardous waste management plan should:
Train personnel on their roles and responsibilities when handling hazardous waste. Training should include:
The primary reason behind illegal waste dumping is financial. We all know it is not cheap to dispose of hazardous waste, but waste generators are responsible for their waste from “cradle to grave.”
One of the most effective ways to prevent hazardous waste incidents is to reduce reliance on them in the first place. By switching to safer alternatives, employers can lower their risk of exposure. Industries now offer eco-friendly coatings, adhesives, and cleaning agents that perform well without all the side effects. Safer alternatives also reduce compliance costs by lowering the burdens for hazardous waste disposal.
The disaster near London is a stark reminder of the consequences of negligent hazardous waste management. Businesses that cut corners on waste disposal risk legal penalties and contribute to long-term environmental and public health damage.
Keys to remember: Employers can protect their workforce, comply with regulations, and prevent environmental disasters by adopting proactive waste management strategies.
A joint Congressional resolution disapproved the 2024 Final Waste Emissions Charge (WEC) Rule on oil and gas facilities with high methane emissions. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that the regulation, which initially took effect on January 17, 2025, is now no longer in effect.
Who’s impacted?
The WEC rule applied to facilities in the Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems category that:
Facilities that were subject to the rule are no longer required to comply (i.e., submit WEC filings by September 2, 2025).
What’s next?
EPA stated it’s “currently evaluating options and obligations for implementing Clean Air Act Section 136(c–g) and will provide additional information to the regulated community at an appropriate time."
Section 136, added by the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, mandates that EPA implement a methane reduction incentive program for petroleum and natural gas systems, including imposing and collecting a WEC on methane emissions above waste emissions limits.
The disapproval occurred on March 14, 2025, just two days after the agency announced 31 deregulatory actions it plans to take.
Key to remember: EPA’s Waste Emissions Charge on petroleum and natural gas facilities for excess methane is no longer in effect.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced on March 12, 2025, that it’s taking 31 actions to advance President Trump’s Day One executive orders and the new “Powering the Great American Comeback” Initiative. The agency’s actions will likely impact environmental regulations across various industries.
Rules under review
EPA will reconsider an assortment of rulemakings, including:
The agency will also take other actions, such as:
About EPA’s new initiative
In February 2025, the agency announced the Powering the Great American Comeback Initiative, which outlines EPA’s priorities. The initiative consists of five pillars:
EPA’s 31 actions will primarily address the first three pillars.
Key to remember: EPA will reconsider major rulemakings that may impact a variety of industries.
ENTER THE INSTITUTE
Be your company’s leading compliance authority with a robust library of articles, videos, and practical exercises designed to grow your knowledge of 120+ regulatory subjects.
At first glance, an empty container seems like a non-issue – no product, no problem. But in the eyes of regulators, “empty” is a carefully defined status that can determine whether a container is harmless or still subject to hazardous waste rules, labeling, and fire or environmental risk controls. The EPA and OSHA have detailed definitions of what “empty” truly means. Misunderstanding these rules can lead to serious incidents, hefty fines, and unintentional non-compliance.
Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), a container that once held hazardous waste is only legally “empty” if it meets particular criteria outlined in 40 CFR 261.7. The first standard that must be satisfied is that all material has been removed from the container using normal means such as pouring, pumping, or aspirating. Secondly, no more than 2.5 centimeters or 1 inch of residue remains on the container's bottom or inner lining. Additionally, if the container holds less than 110 gallons, it is “empty” if no more than 3% of the total weight or volume exists. Of course, sometimes special circumstances require further evaluation. For example, a gas cylinder is not “empty” until the pressure has reduced to atmospheric levels, and acute hazardous waste containers must be triple rinsed with an appropriate solvent or cleaned by another approved method. If these conditions are not met, the container is still legally considered to contain hazardous waste, even if it feels empty.
While the EPA focuses on environmental disposal and waste management, OSHA’s concern with empty containers centers on worker safety—particularly the potential for exposure to hazardous residues or vapors. Under OSHA’s Hazard Communication Standard (29 CFR 1910.1200), a container that previously contained hazardous chemicals must retain its original hazard label until it is adequately cleaned or until the employer removes the label following proper decontamination procedures. For example, a drum labeled “Flammable” must keep this label even if it appears empty, as residual material or vapors may still pose a significant ignition or fire risk. Removing such labels prematurely could lead to workplace hazards and violations of OSHA regulations.
Employers must first clearly determine which rules apply to them: whether the container held hazardous materials governed by EPA regulations, hazardous chemicals subject to OSHA requirements, or both. Emptying procedures should be followed, including properly draining the container, performing triple-rinsing when required, and thoroughly documenting all decontamination activities. Original hazard labels must be maintained on containers until they are thoroughly cleaned or reconditioned, as removing labels prematurely violates OSHA’s Hazard Communication Standard. Additionally, employers should provide employees with training on the proper handling, labeling, and disposal of containers and ensure they fully understand what constitutes an ‘empty’ container under federal standards. Finally, a detailed record of all rinsing, draining, and cleaning processes should be maintained to demonstrate compliance during EPA or state inspections.
Keys to remember: Employers should educate their teams, enforce proper cleaning procedures, and maintain compliance records to ensure they are staying compliant with “empty” container standards.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released the biannual update of the nonconfidential Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Chemical Substance Inventory (TSCA Inventory) on January 17, 2025. It includes all nonexempt chemical substances manufactured, processed, and imported in the U.S. that TSCA regulates.
Please note that the nonconfidential TSCA Inventory contains no chemical identities claimed as confidential business information, so it’s not a comprehensive list. The TSCA Master Inventory File is the only complete list.
How does this impact my facility?
The TSCA Inventory helps facilities determine TSCA’s regulatory requirements for the chemicals they use or plan to use. Chemicals on the list (i.e., “existing chemicals”) may be subject to rules such as reporting requirements and manufacturing limits. Chemicals not on the list (i.e., “new chemicals”) have specific notification and review requirements before they can be used.
About the updated TSCA Inventory
The TSCA Inventory has 86,847 chemicals, and 42,495 of these chemicals are active (i.e., in use). EPA also updated commercial activity data as well as regulatory flags that indicate:
EPA plans to release the next updated TSCA Inventory by Summer 2025.
How to access the TSCA Inventory
You can download the nonconfidential TSCA Inventory from EPA’s website or view it online via the agency’s Substance Registry Services (search by list).
Key to remember: EPA updated the nonconfidential TSCA Inventory, including regulatory flags that indicate certain regulatory restrictions and/or reporting exemptions.
OSHA requires employers to provide all workers with immediately available and sanitary restroom or toilet facilities. But does this include truckers and delivery drivers that stop at your facilities? The sanitation standards (1910.141, 1926.51, and 1928.110) are meant to protect all workers from adverse health effects from unsanitary toilets facilities, or the unavailability of facilities when needed.
Bipartisan legislation has recently been introduced in the House that would require businesses to provide restroom access to truckers who are loading or delivering cargo at their warehouses, manufacturers, distribution centers, retailers, and ports.
Supported by leading organizations in the trucking industry, the Trucker Bathroom Access Act (H.R. 9592) was introduced on Dec. 15, 2022. The bill requires retailers, warehouses, and other establishments with existing restrooms to provide access to drivers who are loading or delivering cargo. Additionally, operators of ports and marine terminals must provide access for drayage and parking while accessing such restrooms.
This amendment to Title 49 would exempt some employers from the bill including filling and service stations, and restaurants 800-square feet or smaller with restrooms intended for employee use only. The bill doesn’t require employers to construct new restrooms but to give truck drivers the same access as employees or customers.
Commercial truckers and delivery drivers are the lifeline of our supply chain of supplies, products, and consumables. Working tirelessly all hours, during holidays and weekends, and throughout the pandemic, they continue to deliver critical food and emergency supplies to companies everywhere. Employers have the privilege of demonstrating gratitude to truckers and delivery drivers with a positive work environment.
The benefits of allowing truckers and delivery drivers the convenience and safety of readily available, sanitary restroom facilities are plenty. They’re able to rest and reset when necessary, which keeps them and others safer on the roads. Equally important, restroom availability prevents drivers from having to search for available facilities elsewhere, allowing them to keep a timely delivery schedule, limit supply chain delays, and ultimately lower costs for employers and customers.
The proposed Trucker Bathroom Access Act will require retailers, warehouses, and other establishments with existing restrooms to provide access to truckers and delivery drivers who are loading or delivering cargo. Access to restrooms keeps them refreshed and ready to deliver essential supplies to companies across the country.
Quick action using cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and automated external defibrillators(AEDs) can save the lives of the nearly 350,000 cardiac event victims each year outside of a hospital setting. But what does OSHA require for the workplace? What you didn’t know about OSHA regulations regarding AEDs may surprise you.
For every minute a patient is in cardiac arrest, their chances of survival decrease dramatically. When a patient doesn’t have a pulse and isn’t breathing, CPR should be performed until an AED is available. It’s important to note that CPR alone does not restart the heart. CPR is an oxygen circulation procedure. AEDs, on the other hand, are meant for lifesaving intervention.
CPR and early defibrillation are vital components of the emergency medical services (EMS) chain of survival that increases the odds of cardiac patient survival. However, according to the American Heart Association (AHA), even the best CPR can’t provide enough circulation of oxygen to the brain and heart for more than a few minutes. In fact, a patient whose brain is deprived of oxygen for 10 minutes or more seldom recovers.
Just like a reliable vehicle, the circulatory system is the human body’s blood transportation system, and the heart is the engine. Amazingly, the heart generates its own electrical impulses, pumping in a regular, rhythmic manner. As with any engine, the heart requires a certain amount of pressure to function and doesn’t work well when clogged with grease or debris. The most common causes of sudden cardiac arrest include a heart attack, electrocution, and asphyxiation — all of which could occur in the workplace. Common signs and symptoms include:
CPR provides the pressure for the body’s “engine” to oxygen circulating, while an AED provides the electrical impulses to keep the engine pumping.
OSHA 1910.151 requires first aid treatment be provided in the absence of an infirmary, clinic, or hospital in near proximity to the workplace used to treat injured employees. This may include assisting a victim of cardiac arrest using CPR or defibrillation.
OSHA requirements for CPR and defibrillation differ considerably. Standards requiring CPR include:
OSHA recommends basic adult CPR refresher training and retesting every year, and first aid training at least once every three years. CPR training include facilitated discussion along with ’hands-on’ skills training that uses mannequins and partner practice.
Though OSHA recognizes AEDs as important lifesaving technology that plays a role in treating cardiac arrest, the agency doesn’t currently require their use in the workplace. Instead, OSHA wants employers to assess their own requirements for AEDs as part of their first aid response.
AEDs are considered Class III medical devices which means the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has some oversight on their use. Almost all AEDs require the purchaser to obtain a prescription from a physician under FDA regulations. The prescription process is meant as a quality control mechanism to ensure AEDs are properly maintained, that all designated responders are properly trained, and assist employers with establishing an emergency response plan for their workplace AED program.
The AHA requires AED operators to also receive CPR training as an “integral part of providing lifesaving aid to people suffering sudden cardiac arrest.” Though easy to use, each AED is slightly different, so training helps users understand the unique traits and supplies for the individual units at their workplace. Additionally, AED users must be trained to understand the signs of a sudden cardiac arrest, when to activate the EMS system, and how to perform CPR.
AEDs are light, portable, easy to use, and inexpensive. They’re best placed near high-hazard areas such as confined spaces, near electrical energy, or in remote work areas. Response time to reach AEDs should be kept within 3–5-minutes.
Need more information on defibrillators in the workplace? See our ezExplanation on AEDs. |
Many states require or encourage CPR and AED training from nationally recognized organizations. Any AED training should include CPR training. OSHA doesn’t offer first aid or CPR training, nor certify trainers. Training by a nationally recognized organization, such as AHA, the American Red Cross, or National Safety Council is recommended.
While OSHA doesn’t currently require the use of AEDs in the workplace, they do expect employers to assess their own AED requirements as part of their first aid response. AED training is required by most states and should include CPR with a hands-on practical component.
When it comes to oil spill prevention, it’s a good thing to be in “tiers.” Why? It’s because Tier I or Tier II qualified facilities have simplified requirements for the Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires facilities subject to the SPCC rule (40 CFR Part 112) to develop and implement a plan that describes how they will use operating procedures, control measures, and countermeasures to prevent oil spills from reaching navigable waters or adjoining shorelines. Typically, SPCC Plans must be certified by a professional engineer (PE), but qualified facilities can self-certify the plans.
Let’s compare Tier I and Tier II qualified facilities.
A qualified facility:
The SPCC rule identifies two types of qualified facilities:
SPCC Tier Tip: EPA provides a fact sheet (Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan Qualified Facilities Applicability) to help facilities determine eligibility as a qualified facility and (if applicable) which tier applies.
Tier I and Tier II qualified facilities are subject to many of the same requirements for SPCC Plans, including basic requirements, certification, and updates to qualification changes.
All qualified facilities have to develop and implement a written SPCC Plan. Each plan is unique to the facility, but all plans must include:
The primary similarity is that Tier I and Tier II qualified facilities may self-certify their SPCC Plans and amendments to the plan.
SPCC Tier Tip: Some states may not allow self-certification. EPA recommends checking with the state engineer licensing board to determine whether SPCC Plans can be self-certified.
When the status of a facility changes, the owner or operator must prepare and implement an SPCC Plan according to the requirements that apply to its new designation within six months.
Tier I facilities may still be able to self-certify if they meet the Tier II criteria; if so, these facilities can comply with the Tier II rules. However, facilities that are no longer eligible as qualified facilities have to comply with the full SPCC Plan requirements, including obtaining PE certification of the plan.
The primary difference between Tier I and Tier II facilities is the extent of the SPCC Plan. Additionally, Tier II facilities may employ certain alternative spill control methods.
Tier I qualified facilities may use the template in Appendix G of Part 112 as their SPCC Plan. It’s a simplified plan that only contains the requirements applicable to Tier I facilities.
These facilities must also:
Tier II qualified facilities have to develop a full SPCC Plan that complies with 112.7 and the applicable requirements of Subparts B and C of Part 112. This includes developing facility diagrams.
Tier II qualified facilities (with certification) may implement certain alternative measures and methods that Tier I facilities can’t. Tier II facilities must obtain written certification from a PE to include:
Qualified facilities, whether Tier I or Tier II, benefit from the ability to self-certify their SPCC Plans. That’s something that can make owners and operators “tier” up with happiness.
Key to remember: Tier I and Tier II qualified facilities share many similarities under the SPCC rule, but knowing where the requirements differ is vital to maintaining compliance.
The existing National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for particulate matter (PM) will remain unchanged — at least until the next review. EPA says its decision to retain existing standards (last reviewed in 2012) comes after careful consideration of recent available scientific evidence and technical data, consultation with independent scientific advisors, and weighing more than 60,000 public comments on the proposal.
The standards being retained include the existing primary (health-based) and secondary (welfare-based) NAAQS for both fine (PM2.5) and coarse (PM10) particulate matter. Fine particles can be emitted directly from a variety of sources, including vehicles and fires. PM2.5 can also be formed when gases emitted by power plants, industrial processes, and gasoline and diesel engines react in the atmosphere. Coarse particles include road dust, agricultural operations, construction and demolition operations, industrial processes, and biomass burning.
Had the standard been revised, it would have triggered a cascade of updates to federal and state air programs: beginning with redesignation of attainment and nonattainment areas; followed by updates to State Implementation Plans (SIP); and finally leading to revisions with state regulations and permits to progress toward meeting the new standards.
Key to remember: The Clean Air Act requires a review of the NAAQS for a particular air pollutant every five years. A review is a lengthly undertaking consisting of five major phases, including planning, assessment of the science, assessment of the risks and exposures, assessment of policy, and rulemaking.
As of June 19, 2025, 14 states had not yet connected to the National Registry of Certified Medical Examiners, which is also called NRII. Some states have said they will not meet the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) June 23rd deadline and some plan to be connected in time. This news is making carriers, drivers, and medical examiners justifiably nervous. Fortunately, FMCSA communicated guidance outlined below that should help.
Drivers:
Certified medical examiners (CMEs):
State Driver Licensing Authorities (SDLAs):
Keys to remember: Follow the FMCSA guidance published to the NRII Learning Center Website (Link is above). If the state has not transitioned by June 23, 2025, continue to follow the manual update process.
The latest updates in international air transportation safety are reshaping how dangerous goods are managed worldwide. From new classifications for fire suppressant devices to expanded exceptions for pharmaceutical products, the 66th Edition of the International Air Transport Association’s Dangerous Goods Regulations (IATA DGR) is set to make a significant impact in the new year. Effective January 1, 2025, the 66th IATA DGR introduces essential updates and new entries designed to enhance safety protocols and streamline global operations.
The latest edition of the IATA DGR incorporates all amendments from the 2025-26 edition of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Technical Instructions. Staying informed and compliant with these regulations will ensure smooth and secure operations in 2025 and beyond.
Need additional information about IATA? Check out this ezExplanation.
Updates to classifications and exceptions include:
New entries to the List of Dangerous Goods include:
Changes and additions to special provisions include:
Packing instructions with changes include:
Finally, Appendix A includes several changes to the defined terms in the Glossary, ensuring clarity and up-to-date terminology.
The updates listed above are not the only changes to the 2025 IATA DGR. However, they do show IATA's commitment to enhancing safety and efficiency in the transport of dangerous goods. Staying informed and compliant with these regulations will ensure smooth and secure operations in 2025.
Key to remember: If you are shipping dangerous goods by air, make sure you are using the appropriate IATA DGR, so you can stay in compliance with changing requirements.
Every year the International Air Transport Association (IATA) updates its Dangerous Goods Regulations (DGR) to ensure the safe and secure handling of dangerous goods that are shipped or transported by air. While changes to the 2024 IATA DGR (65th edition) are not as plentiful as they were in previous years, they are no less important.
Mandatory compliance with the 2024 IATA DGR begins on January 1, 2024, and will be valid until the 2025 IATA DGR comes into effect. Let’s look at the key updates, listed by Section, for the 65th edition of the IATA DGR:
Need additional information for IATA? Check out this ezExplanation.
The following packing instructions have been updated:
IATA has added a new appendix to the list of appendices in the DGR. Appendix H includes a list of changes IATA will make to the 2025 IATA DGR. IATA added Appendix H so that shippers and carriers have time to prepare for the substantial updates that are coming for 2025. Some of the changes include:
Making sure you are keeping up with these regulatory changes and preparing for future updates is extremely important if you want to avoid costly delays, fines, and lost revenue. Keep your hazmat employees up to speed and inform them of any changes they need to be aware of.
Key to Remember: IATA updates their DGR every year and changes to the 2024 IATA DGR become effective on January 1, 2024.
Some call them “near misses;” I call them “near hits.” Either way, if they aren’t reported and investigated, lives can be lost in a matter of seconds. Indicators that an incident is likely to occur may be weeks, days, or mere hours before a tragedy strikes.
A tragic example happened recently in Michigan, where a 27-year-old worker lost their life while setting steel trusses on a school gymnasium. According to MIOSHA’s preliminary investigation, just hours before the fatal incident, a near miss occurred when unsecured trusses fell, one of which struck the aerial lift that the two workers were using. The two workers then used the aerial lift attempting to reinforce the steel trusses, when multiple trusses fell for the second time. The trusses landed on the aerial lift, trapping the two workers inside. Both workers were rushed to the hospital where the 27-year-old was pronounced deceased as a result of critical injuries.
This is just one of the 13 Michigan deaths reported for 2025. How many could have been prevented by recognizing and investigating the warning signs leading up to them?
A near miss, or “near hit,” is defined by OSHA as an incident “in which a worker might have been hurt if the circumstances had been slightly different.” In other words, you got lucky that something worse didn’t happen!
Studies have shown that for every fatal or serious injury, there were likely reports of more minor injuries, near hits, and a foundation of workplace hazards or behavior that should have been addressed.
Here are some examples of near hits to give you an idea of what to look for:
Are these types of scenarios being reported in your workplace? If not, why not? If so, what is being done about it? Are investigations being carried out to determine what corrective actions can be taken to prevent an incident from occurring the next time, or when luck runs out?
Near hit reporting is a crucial component of a proactive safety and risk management program. These close calls may not cause injuries, or property or equipment damage, but they are precursors to potential workplace hazards and risks. Workers often overlook these incidents due to their seemingly harmless nature, but when reported and acted upon, they can serve as early intervention points to prevent serious accidents involving property damage, serious injuries, or even fatalities.
Near hits (or near misses) are valuable learning opportunities, and smart employers know how to use them to improve safety and prevent future incidents. Here are some examples of how employers can encourage reporting:
Workers must develop the habit of reporting near hits just as they do incidents. Likewise, employers must be diligent in enforcing near hit reporting as well as investigating each report. Think of these close calls like playing the lottery — you keep playing to win — the more you “let them ride” and ignore them, the closer you get to hitting the “jackpot.” Only in this case, it’s one you don’t want to win!
Key to remember: Identifying, reporting, and investigating near hits and taking corrective action to eliminate them are essential for avoiding serious incidents and fatalities in the future.
The 150 air-mile exemptions, which are in the regulations at 395.1(e)(1) and (2), allow a driver to use a time record in place of a log, provided that certain conditions are met. While this is possibly the most widely used hours-of-service exemption, it may be the most commonly misused exemption, as well.
To be able to use this logging exemption in 395.1(e)(1), the driver must:
The company must retain the time record and have it available for inspection for six months.
Need more info? View our ezExplanation on the 150 air-mile exception. |
If the driver cannot meet the terms of the exemption (he or she goes too far or works too many hours), the driver must complete a regular driver’s log for the day as soon as the exemption no longer applies.
If the driver has had to complete a log 8 or fewer days out of the last 30 days, the driver can use a paper log for the day. If the driver had to complete a log more than 8 days out of the last 30 days, the driver needs to use an electronic log for the day (unless one of the ELD exemptions applies, such as operating a vehicle older than model year 2000).
When a property-carrying driver is operating under the 150 air-mile exemption, the driver is also exempt from having to take the required 30-minute break (see 395.3(a)(3)(ii)).
If the driver began the day as a 150 air-mile driver and has driven more than 8 consecutive hours without a break, and something unexpected happens and the driver can no longer use the 150 air-mile exemption, the driver must stop and immediately take the 30-minute break as well as start logging. If the driver went outside of the 150 air-mile area before the driver had 8 hours of driving without a break from driving, the driver would be expected to take the break at the appropriate time.
Here are some of the common myths and misunderstandings about the 150 air-mile exemption:
The 150 air-mile exemption at 395.1(e)(2) only applies to drivers that: Operate property-carrying vehicles that do not require a CDL to operate, and Stay within the 150 air-miles of their work reporting location.
If the driver stays within the 150 air-mile radius of the work reporting location, and returns to the work reporting location within 14 hours on 5 of the last 7 days, and 16 hours on 2 of the last seven days, the driver is allowed to use a time record in place of a log.
If the driver does not meet the terms of the exception, the driver will need to complete a log for the day. If the driver had to log more than 8 days out of the last 30 days, the driver will need to use an electronic log for the day. All of the other issues discussed above would apply to these drivers as well.
If you have drivers that use these exemptions, you will need to check time records to make sure they are complying with the appropriate time limits. You will also need to check movement records to verify that the drivers using these exemptions are staying within the mandated area (within 150 air-miles of the work reporting location for the day).
If a driver is over the hours limit, or has gone too far, you need to verify that the submitted a log for the day, either paper or electronic, depending on how many days the driver had to log out of the previous 30 days.
During an audit, if it is discovered that your drivers are using these exemptions incorrectly, you will be cited for not having drivers’ logs when required. Each day this occurred will be another violation, so the fine could be rather large if you are not managing the use of these exemptions!
Under an Executive Order issued on April 28, all interstate commercial motor vehicle drivers must have adequate English language skills, as required in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) regulations at 391.11(b)(2). The determination will be made by officers during roadside inspections. On May 20, FMCSA issued guidance on how officers are to determine if the driver’s English language skills are adequate. As of June 25, any driver not meeting the English language requirement will be placed out of service.
Procedures
Officers are to use a two-step process to evaluate the driver’s English language skills. First, the officer will conduct an official interview with the driver in English. The driver will be required to answer all questions in English. Common questions asked by an officer during the interview can include:
If the driver cannot adequately answer the officer’s interview questions due to poor English language skills, the driver is to be cited for a violation of 391.11(b)(2) and placed out of service.
If the driver’s English language skills are found to be adequate during the interview phase, the next step will be for the officer to verify that the driver can read and understand English road signs. If the driver cannot read the signs and provide the correct answers, the driver is to be cited for a violation of 391.11(b)(2) and placed out of service.
Returning to service
To return to service, there are two choices:
Either way, the driver is out of service until the violation is addressed. If the second was done, having proof of the English training would be important if the driver receives another violation in the future.
Key to remember: While the rules are not changing, the way they’re being enforced is. To avoid having drivers cited and placed out of service, carriers should be conducting basic interviews in English and verifying drivers can understand English road signs during the hiring and qualification processes. If you have drivers that you’re not sure about, it might be a good idea to have them undergo a mock roadside inspection interview to verify their English skills are adequate.
Are your forklift operators certified? Do they need a state driver’s license? Are they physically able to operate forklifts? All are commonly asked questions — so, let’s make sure you're compliant.
OSHA’s powered industrial truck (PIT) standard (29 CFR 1910.178) is intended to ensure the safe use of fork trucks, tractors, platform lift trucks, motorized hand trucks, and other specialized industrial trucks powered by electric motors or internal combustion engines. The standard outlines requirements for operational permits and certification.
And, though not specified in the standard itself, PIT operators must be at least 18 years old per federal child labor regulations.
The OSHA PIT standard clearly defines requirements for training and certification. However, some licensing and certification information isn’t as clear. Here are some clarifications:
Q: Who can train, evaluate, and certify PIT operators?
A: OSHA requires in 1910.178(l)(2)(iii) that, “All operator training and evaluation shall be conducted by persons who have the knowledge, training, and experience to train powered industrial truck operators and evaluate their competence.” The OSHA standard doesn’t further define this requirement or set any specific or additional certifications.
Q: Does OSHA require PIT operators to have a valid driver's license?
A: Federal OSHA has no requirement that a forklift operator has a valid motor vehicle driver's license. Some states are more stringent, so check your local and state requirements to confirm.
Q: Does OSHA have regulations that impact an employee’s ability to operate PITs if they’ve received a DUI or suspended license?
A: Because OSHA doesn't require a valid motor vehicle driver's license, the status of that license doesn’t impact PIT operator permitting. Individual states or the employer may have policies that dictate otherwise.
Q: Are PIT drivers required to have their license on them when they are working?
A: Federal OSHA doesn’t require PIT operators to have a license or permit. However, some states such as Michigan do require this. Typically, in states that require a permit or license, the license must be “readily available.” Companies have the option to require the permit or license be carried with the operator.
Q: Are operators required to be trained on each manufacture of PIT model?
A: A June 15, 1999, OSHA letter of interpretation (LOI) clarifies that operators are to be trained and evaluated in the safe operation for the type of truck they’ll be assigned. Operators wouldn’t need additional training for same truck types but would need additional training when truck- or workplace-related training topics are different.
Q: Do PIT operators need to be recertified if they move from one state to another with the same company?
A: In an LOI dated October 1, 1999, OSHA states, "As long as the employer has a reasonable basis to believe that the third-party trainer is qualified and has a program that meets the requirements of the standard, it can rely on that trainer to conduct the training and evaluation of employees and can certify that these employees have been trained. However, the employer may need to provide additional training on site-specific or truck-specific matters." This shouldn’t require retraining for the same type of forklift as already certified; however, workplace conditions or other factors of the new work location may require training for forklift operation in the other state(s).
Interested in information on how material handler training can help forklift operators? See our Compliance Network article "To improve forklift safety, train material handlers." |
In addition to being properly trained and evaluated, OSHA expects employers to ensure physical capabilities. OSHA references the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standard B56.1-1969. Section 6 clarifies that, “Operators of powered industrial trucks shall be physically qualified. An examination should be made on an annual basis and include such things as field of vision, hearing, depth perception, and reaction timing."
Employers should consider OSHA PIT regulations and the General Duty Clause, ANSI standards, and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements when evaluating physical qualifications. In short, if a worker demonstrates the visual, auditory, and mental ability to safely operate PITs, he or she is permitted to operate them.
OSHA requires employers ensure the safe use of forklifts and other powered industrial vehicles. Employers must ensure operators have the knowledge, skills, and physical ability to safely operate PITs.
Back in October 2018, Laffon had a medical emergency and needed some time off under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA).
Her leave lasted until November 15. Ten days after she returned to work, on November 26, her employer terminated her.
She sued, arguing that the employer retaliated against her because of her FMLA leave.
The catch? She didn't bring the suit until almost three years later.
No link between leave and termination
In court, the employer argued that there was no causal link between Laffon taking FMLA leave and her termination. Although the court documents aren't robust, they do reveal that the employer indicated that Laffon's allegations didn't show that her taking FMLA leave was a factor in the decision to terminate her. The documents showed only that the termination chronologically followed her leave.
The court agreed with the employer. It also agreed that Laffon failed to allege a willful violation of the FMLA, which would allow her to benefit from the FMLA's three-year statute of limitations.
Laffon appealed the case to the Ninth Circuit.
Statute of limitations
Under the FMLA, employees have two years from the date of the last event constituting the alleged violation for which they can bring a claim.
Those two years are extended to three years if the employer's actions were "willful." This means that an employee must show that the employer either knew or showed reckless disregard for whether its conduct violated the FMLA.
Ruling overturned
Fast forward to August 2023, when the Ninth Circuit reversed the lower court's decision. It indicated that, based on Laffon's amended complaint and liberally construing the law, her allegations establish that her leave was causally connected to her termination and that the employer's action (her termination) was willful.
Glymph v. CT Corporation Systems, No. 22-35735, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, August 22, 2023.
Key to remember: Terminating an employee soon after returning from FMLA leave is risky, unless there is a clear, well-documented, non-leave-related reason. Case documents did not show such a clear reason, which can also increase the risk of a willful finding. Employees have time to file claims, even years.
Heating fish or burning popcorn in the breakroom microwave. Loud conversations. A cubicle with questionable décor. These are just a few egregious workplace etiquette offenses, and if you haven’t noticed any of these behaviors, you might be the culprit eating reheated halibut at your desk.
As more companies bring employees back on site, annoying behaviors and complaints to managers increase.
The issues themselves may not be new, but people who’ve been working solo in their home environments might need a quick refresher on what it means to be a good coworker.
Strengthening those etiquette muscles could take a little time, and the tactics to address concerns likely vary based on the number of employees, the type of work environment, etc., but below are three focus areas to help guide managers in getting a handle on etiquette.
Everyone slips up once in a while. It’s part of being human. Encourage workers to help each other out by picking up a piece of trash someone missed or politely reminding them. While good workplace etiquette is important, being a good team player and lending a hand is even more valuable.
Key to remember: People who haven’t worked on site for a while may be a little rusty in their workplace etiquette. Help them become better coworkers.
Independence Day falls on a Friday this year. Because of this, employers with employees taking leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) might wonder whether they must count that day as FMLA leave or not.
Whether employers count a holiday as FMLA leave will depend on whether the employee is taking leave in full weeks, or on an intermittent or reduced schedule basis.
If an employee is taking FMLA leave continuously, the fact that the holiday occurs within that week has no effect; employers would count the entire week as FMLA leave.
If, however, an employee is using FMLA leave intermittently or on a reduced schedule (in small chunks), employers don’t count the holiday as FMLA leave unless the employee was otherwise scheduled to work on the holiday and didn’t because of an FMLA-qualifying reason.
If, for example, Jo Employee will be on FMLA leave for the first full three weeks of July, the employer would count the entire week during which Independence Day falls as FMLA leave.
If, on the other hand, Jo is on FMLA leave only on the Monday and Tuesday before Independence Day, works Wednesday, and is not scheduled to work Friday of that week, the employer would count only Monday and Tuesday as FMLA leave.
If Jo also needed Friday off that week for an FMLA-qualifying reason, and were scheduled to work on that day, the employer would also count Friday as FMLA leave.
Employers must keep records of the dates on which employees take FMLA leave. When employees take small chunks of FMLA leave, employers must record the minutes or hours of leave employees take. Employers must identify the leave as FMLA leave in the records. They may not include leave required under state law or an employer plan that isn’t also covered by FMLA.
Employers can find such information from time records, requests for leave, etc., making it beneficial, then, to know how to track FMLA leave when a holiday is involved.
Happy Independence Day!
Key to remember: Whether employers should count time off as FMLA leave around a holiday will depend upon some specifics, such as whether the employee takes leave in full weeks or not.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has indicated that the Know Your Rights: Workplace Discrimination is Illegal posting is being revised due to executive orders issued by the president.
The announcement has been on the agency’s posting website since February, but no timeline for the new version has been released.
The agency has not commented on the delay. However, the commission currently lacks a quorum (i.e., minimum number of members) which restricts its ability to take certain actions.
At full strength, the commission has five members. It needs three to have a quorum, and currently has two, Acting Chair Andrea Lucas and Commissioner Kalpana Kotagal.
The commission indicates that it remains open for business and continues to enforce federal antidiscrimination laws. Employees can still file discrimination charges and the agency can investigate them.
However, a quorum is needed for the agency to vote on rulemaking, issue new policies, or rescind guidance documents.
A third member, Brittany Bull Panuccio, was nominated to serve on the commission in May. The nomination has been received by the Senate and referred to the committee, but no further action has been taken.
The agency has not commented on whether a quorum is needed for it to revise the EEOC poster. It is possible, however, that the lack of a quorum is contributing to the delay in the release of the revised poster.
The poster is being revised to bring its wording in line with two executive orders:
The Know Your Rights: Workplace Discrimination is Illegal posting is required for employers with 15 or more employees and federal contractors. Covered employers should continue to display the most recent version of the poster, which has a June 27, 2023, revision date. They should be prepared to display the new version after it is released.
Key to Remember: There’s no timeline for the release of an updated Know Your Rights posting, but the EEOC still indicates that it is on the way. Covered employers should be ready to update their posters.
When an employee asks for a workplace change because of a medical condition, the employer’s obligations to find a possible solution are triggered, and they must act promptly.
Since employees usually ask their supervisors for such changes, supervisors must be able to recognize these as requests for reasonable accommodations under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
During an interactive process with the employee, employers may ask for documentation about the need for an accommodation.
But what happens if an employer asks for reasonable documentation, then asks for more, and then more? This could delay the accommodation by months, hindering the employee from being able to do the job and putting the employer at risk of violating the ADA.
The next thing the employer knows, it’s in court defending its actions. Recently, this happened to an employer.
Alisha worked for a school district. Her military service left her with some disabilities, for which she had a service dog. On August 30, 2022, Alisha asked her employer to allow her service dog, Inde, to accompany her to work.
After meeting on September 16, the employer asked Alisha for additional information to determine what specific job functions were impacted by her disabilities and whether there were alternative accommodations. Alisha provided a letter signed by her Veterans Affairs (VA) treating provider, who confirmed that Inde was key to Alisha’s mental and physical health recovery.
The employer, however, said the letter wasn’t sufficient because the provider wasn’t a board-certified medical doctor. Alisha thus provided a letter from her treating psychiatrist, which again confirmed that Alisha needed Inde at work.
On November 11, the employer asked Alisha to undergo an independent medical exam, and she did. After that, the employer still balked, arguing whether a service dog was the only accommodation. Alisha then provided three letters, including correspondence from two other physicians, confirming limitations, and urging that the employer approve the request.
On January 6, a frustrated Alisha filed a claim that the employer failed to accommodate her disability.
Four days later, on January 10, Alisha underwent a VA-led examination that assessed her physical disabilities. Two doctors separately confirmed that Alisha needed Inde in all settings, including the workplace.
The employer said that the documents didn’t provide any information regarding potential alternative accommodations.
On February 1, Alisha filed a lawsuit against her employer. On February 17, the employer granted her accommodation request, but it was too late.
The court agreed with Alisha that the employer’s six-month delay in granting her accommodation constituted a failure to accommodate her disability. It indicated that employer ADA obligations, including the interactive process, are triggered when an employee asks for an accommodation.
Employers that drag their feet could force employees to work under suboptimal conditions to endure an endless interactive process. They could simply document an employee’s failures and use the employee’s difficulties as an excuse to terminate them.
Disability laws and applicable case laws don’t require employers to move with maximum speed to complete this process and preempt any possible concerns. But employers that delay in providing reasonable accommodation may show a lack of good faith in the interactive process.
The employer’s insistence that Alisha repeatedly give it information that confirmed her disabilities and need for accommodation could be seen as unreasonable.
Strife v. Aldine Independent School District, Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 24-20269, May 16, 2025.
Key to remember: While employers don’t have to go through the ADA’s interactive process at light speed, if they drag their feet, they can risk a violation and court case.
Training forklift operators is an OSHA requirement per 1910.178(l). Do you want to do it in house? If you said yes, follow this step-by-step guide.
It all starts with a competent trainer. OSHA’s view is that all operator training and evaluation must be conducted by persons who have the “knowledge, training, and experience” to train operators and evaluate their competence. The standard doesn’t go into any more detail. It’s up to the employer to ensure trainers meet these general qualifications, but OSHA has no requirements for trainers to take certain classes, hold any sort of certifications, or be re-certified as trainers at specified intervals.
Need more information on OSHA’s Forklift Standard? See our ezExplanation on Powered Industrial Trucks. |
The only aspect that OSHA has clarified is that the trainer does need to have experience operating the equipment and attachments. However, the standard doesn’t require that the trainers operate a forklift regularly (that is, outside of their operator training duties) as part of their job function or responsibility.
First, OSHA requires that all operators must be trained prior to being allowed to operate forklifts. And the same thing goes for pallet trucks, order pickers, and stand-up units…. Any powered type of material handling equipment requires training.
But what does training entail? Well, the OSHA regulations are very specific. All operators must receive a combination of training. Training must consist of formal training, which is a lecture, discussion, interactive computer learning, video tape, written material, and so on.
They must also receive practical training, which means demonstrations performed by the trainer and practical exercises performed by the trainee.
And the third component is that operators must receive a performance evaluation. So, they must operate the equipment and be observed and evaluated before being considered trained per the OSHA standard.
Usually, you’ll introduce the concepts during the classroom portion of training, the more informational aspects, such as the OSHA requirements. Then you’ll use the practical part of training to familiarize trainees with controls, talk about load handling, and so on. With the practical part, it’s usually best to ramp up the training, meaning start with simple skills and then build on those.
Aside from requirements for how to do the training, OSHA gives us a detailed list of topics to cover during the training.
The main categories are truck-related and workplace-related topics. And remember that OSHA does require you to include information on OSHA’s forklift standard as part of the training program. This requirement can be easy to overlook, but a good way to approach it is in the classroom portion of the program.
Keep in mind that if a topic doesn’t apply to your trucks or workplace, you don’t have to train on it. For example, if you don’t have any ramps or hazardous (classified) locations in your facility, your forklift operators don’t need training on these topics.
Truck-related topics include the following:
Workplace-related topics are examples like these:
The trainees must successfully complete the formal and practical instruction, but how you determine success is up to you. For the classroom portion, you could give a written or oral test or otherwise evaluate the trainees’ knowledge. For the practical training, the trainee must be able to safely perform all the operations used on the job.
An evaluation of the operator’s performance in the workplace must be conducted at the time of initial training. And an evaluation is required to determine the effectiveness of any refresher training.
Also, you must conduct an evaluation at least every three years. This means that at least once every three years every operator must be observed while they operate in the workplace under actual workplace conditions. During the evaluation, the operator must also be able to answer pertinent questions to demonstrate they have the knowledge to operate the forklift safely.
A key point to note here, this evaluation must be more than just a written or verbal test. The employer must observe the operator in action performing all typical tasks related to running the forklift. And, going back to where we started, the evaluation must be conducted by someone who has the knowledge, training, and experience to evaluate the truck operator’s competence.
Document the evaluation — this means placing a record in your training file that includes the name of the operator, the date of the training, the date of the evaluation, and the identity of the person(s) performing the training or evaluation.
This may be a good time for you to review your options for training forklift operators to ensure they’re meeting these guidelines. And, it’s always a great idea to have all your training procedures in written format for consistency.
Training forklift operators is an OSHA requirement. Follow this step-by-step guide and you can do it in-house.
Although tornadoes can occur at any time, the “tornado season” generally runs from March through June, with May typically having the most storms. Although OSHA’s regulations do not specifically mention tornadoes, OSHA does require an Emergency Action Plan under 1910.38. The plan must include procedures for reporting fires or other emergencies (such as severe weather).
Below are some questions our experts commonly get regarding tornadoes.
Does OSHA require an alarm? Generally, yes, unless the workplace has 10 or fewer employees per 1910.165. Employers must provide a way to communicate an emergency in a manner that notifies employees of the expected response. A fire alarm typically warns employees to evacuate to a headcount location. If the nature of the emergency requires a different response (such as proceeding to a tornado shelter), employees must recognize the alarm and understand the appropriate response.
Does OSHA require annual drills? OSHA does not require drills, but does require annual testing of alarms under 1910.165. In addition, 1910.38 requires that employees understand their responsibilities under the Emergency Action Plan. Conducting annual fire evacuation drills is common, and your insurance company may require them. However, many employers do not conduct annual tornado drills because employees would typically proceed to the nearest shelter, which may not allow for a headcount. Still, annual alarm testing can let employees know what it sounds like, and employers can deliver reminders on shelter locations at that time.
Does OSHA require tornado shelters? No, OSHA does not specifically require tornado shelters, but does list recommendations from other agencies regarding preferred shelter areas. If a building lacks an ideal location, employers should identify the best potential shelter areas. Employers might also check with their insurance company about building shelter areas. Typically, employees should:
What about remote or traveling employees? Many employees work remotely, travel for business, or even report to off-site locations (such as construction sites). These employees cannot rely on an alarm and should monitor the weather in their area. They should also know how to protect themselves, whether driving, working from home, or working outdoors.
Tornado safety involves three phases: Preparing in advance, Staying safe during the storm, and Staying safe after the storm.
Employees should prepare a plan and an emergency kit, monitor weather conditions during thunderstorms, and know the best places to shelter wherever they work.
Employers should prepare a business continuity plan for dealing with the aftermath, from cleaning up the site to resuming business operations.
During a tornado warning, employees should remain in a shelter until given an all-clear signal. At a fixed worksite, this may come from an employer announcement. At other locations, employees may need to monitor conditions on their phone or radio.
After the storm, employees may need a way to communicate if they are trapped or injured. They should also watch for hazards such as downed power lines, gas leaks, building damage, or debris.
Key to remember: Tornadoes can happen at any time, but Spring is most active, and employers should prepare to protect workers.
State Plans are OSHA-approved workplace safety and health programs run by individual states or U.S. territories. They must provide standards and enforcement programs which are at least as effective as federal OSHA. They also must provide public information programs, on-site consultations, and other initiatives to encourage voluntary compliance with state standards. Over half of states operate as State Plans.
Some benefits of being a State Plan include the ability to cover state and local government workers, enact stricter safety and health regulations, tailor the plan to address specific local industries and hazards, and provide quicker enforcement response times to workplace safety issues.
Twenty-two states and territories have plans that cover both private sector and state and local government workers:
Alaska Arizona California Hawaii Indiana | Iowa Kentucky Maryland Michigan Minnesota | Nevada New Mexico North Carolina Oregon Puerto Rico South Carolina | Tennessee Utah Vermont Virginia Washington Wyoming |
Seven states and territories have plans that cover only state and local government workers: Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and the Virgin Islands.
Federal OSHA covers private sector workers in states without a State Plan. Federal OSHA also protects private sector workers in states with plans that only cover state and local government workers. By law, federal OSHA doesn’t have authority to safeguard state and local government workers, so in states without a State Plan, those workers may be left without protections. It’s a longstanding gap in the Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Act.
Federal employers must comply with all OSHA occupational safety and health standards, or with alternate standards as outlined in 29 CFR 1960 Subpart C.
State Plans must be at least as effective as federal OSHA. They may:
Most State-Plan states adopt the federal laws and regulations as is or with few additional requirements, while some go significantly beyond. For a list of State-Plan state regulations, see https://www.osha.gov/stateplans/statestandards.
The biggest issue with State Plans occurs when federal OSHA issues a new standard or a more stringent amendment to an existing standard. State-Plan states typically have six months to adopt it or complete their own standard. They also may show OSHA why such action is unnecessary; for example, the state has an existing standard that’s at least as effective as the federal standard.
Effective June 27, 2025, Kentucky occupational safety and health standards will be limited to those enforced by federal OSHA. The state will no longer adopt, promulgate, or enforce rules that are stricter than federal OSHA.
Section 18 of the OSH Act gives states an opportunity to run their own occupational safety and health plan upon OSHA approval. To gain OSHA approval as a developmental plan, a state must demonstrate that within three years it will provide:
When all development steps concerning legislation, resources, and other requirements have been completed and approved, OSHA then certifies that a state is able to operate effectively. Once a State Plan is approved, federal OSHA funds up to 50 percent of the plan’s operating costs. Massachusetts and Maine were the most recent states to receive federal OSHA authorization, in 2022 and 2023, respectively.
OSHA continues its monitoring and evaluation of the State-Plan state to assure it maintains its level of effectiveness. If this level declines, OSHA can begin proceedings to withdraw approval and to reinstate federal enforcement authority. OSHA conducts an evaluation of the 29 State-Plan states each fiscal year. Annually, the agency publishes its Federal Annual Monitoring and Evaluation (FAME) Reports.
In April 2022, OSHA announced a proposal to reconsider and revoke Arizona’s State Plan status due to what the agency said was a decades-long failure on the state’s part to keep pace with federal OSHA penalties and regulations. Following corrective actions by the Arizona State Plan, OSHA withdrew its proposal in February 2023.
Key to remember: If you’re an employer in a State-Plan state, it’s important to understand who’s covered by your state instead of federal OSHA and how the state’s laws and regulations may differ from federal OSHA.
A combustible dust explosion, asphyxiating gas release, and flammable vapor explosion are the subjects of three investigation reports issued in the waning days of 2023. Packed with recommendations, the reports from the Chemical Safety Board (CSB) urge OSHA to issue two new regulations. At the same time, all three investigations put a spotlight on a lack of emergency preparedness.
One night in May 2017, workers at a Wisconsin dry corn milling facility smelled smoke in the mill. While investigating the smoke, several heard an explosion and saw fire coming from piping on mill equipment. The workers scrambled to evacuate as the fire spread through the equipment and interconnected dust collection systems. Dust collection equipment exploded, and secondary explosions subsequently occurred throughout the facility.
The CSB determined the cause of the dust explosions was the ignition of combustible corn dust inside process equipment. This transitioned to multiple explosions. The board’s report determined that OSHA regulations for combustible dust operations are insufficient. Therefore, the report recommends that the agency publish a comprehensive regulation on combustible dust with the following elements:
The report also highlights that emergency plans need to instruct workers when and how to trigger evacuations. The workers spent at least 30 minutes trying to locate the source of smoke, but no one attempted to shut down the mill or evacuate until they observed fire.
In January 2021, liquid nitrogen overflowed from a freezer located inside a food plant in Georgia. The release happened while maintenance workers were troubleshooting issues with the freezer. Once released, the liquid nitrogen vaporized filling the room and killing the two workers. An hour later another worker spotted a five-foot vapor cloud filling the room and notified management. During an evacuation, other workers investigated the room or attempted rescue. Unfortunately, four more workers were killed, and three others were injured by asphyxiation.
The CSB’s report concluded that a tube was bent during maintenance in the freezer room. The board also said that the severity of the incident was worsened by the company’s inadequate emergency preparedness. The final CSB report emphasizes five safety issues:
However, the report also suggests that OSHA issue a new regulation on cryogenic asphyxiants that covers:
In April 2021, a mixture of flammable naphtha solvent vapors and resin liquid escaped through the seal of a closed manway of an operating kettle. This created a flammable vapor cloud that spread throughout the Ohio facility. Within minutes the vapor cloud found an ignition source, causing a huge explosion and a fire that burned for roughly 11 hours. The explosion shook nearby homes and caused an estimated $90 million in damage to the site. One employee was killed and eight others transported to area hospitals with third-degree burns and crushed or broken bones.
The latest CSB report highlights three safety issues:
On the night of the incident, evacuation alarms and worker training specific to the hazards of the chemicals present in the resin manufacturing area could have prevented casualties. These precautions were missing in the incident, the board explains.
The CSB report warns that effective emergency preparedness is crucial in the event of a flammable vapor cloud release. This should, among other things, include:
CSB says it’s working to complete two more final investigation reports (with more recommendations) by the end of 2023 for:
With 973 recommendations made so far by CSB since 1998, the agency is closing in on the 1,000 milestone!
Packed with safety recommendations, three chemical incident investigation reports from the CSB urge OSHA to issue two new regulations.
While the Heat rulemaking may be top of mind, instead two never-before-mentioned rulemakings reached the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review on June 18! The two actions (on respiratory protection and the General Duty Clause) are only at the proposed rule stage, so stakeholders will have a chance to comment.
OMB’s website reveals these two proposals are under review:
OSHA’s fiscal year 2026 budget request makes no mention of the two actions, and neither item appeared in the Fall 2024 Regulatory Agenda. The good news is OSHA is anticipated to publish its Spring 2025 Agenda in the coming days. This may shed greater light on the newest rulemakings.
In fact, it is unclear if OSHA’s latest rulemaking will be regulatory or deregulatory. What we do know is both proposals are listed as “not economically significant,” meaning they will not have an impact on the economy of $100 million or more and will not adversely affect any sector of the economy.
The new proposals could come up quickly! OMB review typically takes 90 to 120 days, which means the proposed rules could be published in the Federal Register as soon as September or October. We’ll keep you posted!
Employer expenditures regarding worker protection are substantial. When you consider personal protective equipment (PPE) per employee in identified high-hazard sectors, the cost is even higher. The price of PPE can skyrocket depending on the quality and quantity being purchased and consumed by the employee. As a cost savings strategy, employers may need to tighten up their PPE Program and clarify employee responsibility for the care of such equipment. While employers must supply required PPE at no cost, according to OSHA, the employer is not required to replace PPE when the employee has lost or intentionally damaged the PPE.
More often than not, employers are finding that some employees inadvertently mismanage the very equipment meant to protect them. Whether losing, misplacing, or simply not taking care of supplied PPE, the expectation of the uninformed employee is to request new PPE with little to no regard for who pays for that equipment. This blatant mismanagement of PPE may find employers looking at the bottom line and developing and implementing workplace rules. This may include reasonable and appropriate disciplinary policies, replacement schedules, and allowances to ensure that employees have and use the PPE that the employer provided.
Employers do not have to bear the cost of replacing PPE that the employee has lost, even if it is a single instance. The PPE may be considered “lost” if the employee comes to work without the issued PPE. The rule does not prohibit employers from sending employees home to retrieve the PPE or from charging an employee for replacement PPE when the employee fails to bring the PPE back to the workplace.
While not required for general industry nor construction, writing a “overall” PPE program documenting PPE usage and responsibilities makes it easier to:
The basic element of any PPE Program should be an in-depth evaluation of the equipment needed to protect against hazards in the workplace. This is the initial hazard assessment for which written documentation is required. The two basic objectives of any PPE Program should be to protect the wearer from safety and health hazards and to prevent injury and illness to the wearer from incorrect use and/or malfunction of the PPE. Management can then use this assessment and PPE Program to develop standard operating procedures for employees, and train them to use, maintain, and clean/care for provided PPE while identifying expectations should an employee lose or intentionally damage PPE.
OSHA first issued a proposed rule for employer payment of PPE in March 1999. After almost nine years of public hearings and comment periods, in February 2008, OSHA worked to develop a standard that provides clarity and fairness for employers and employees. OSHA standard 1910.132 clarifies the responsibilities of employers in a way that sets a reasonable PPE payment policy.
Key to remember: The standard states that the employer is required to pay for PPE used to comply with OSHA standards, except when the employee has lost or intentionally damages the PPE.