
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).
Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) coverage is narrowing after the Supreme Court’s Sackett v. EPA decision (2023) and a 2025 EPA/U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)proposal to align waters of the United States (WOTUS) with that ruling. Expect fewer federally regulated wetlands, more state-by-state differences, and continued uncertainty through 2026.
Post-Sackett, WOTUS includes traditional navigable waters, territorial seas, certain interstate waters, impoundments, tributaries that are relatively permanent, and adjacent wetlands that directly abut those waters through a continuous surface connection. Non-jurisdictional ditches do not create adjacency.
Implementation is split:
Kentucky now follows the 2023 rule except for certain litigants. Always check EPA’s “Current Implementation” page to check state status before filing permits.
Key to Remember: WOTUS and “navigable waters” definitions are narrowing, reducing some federal burdens but increasing state variability. For industrial and commercial projects, early jurisdictional work and state-specific permitting plans are essential to protect schedules and budgets.
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.
In fiscal year 2025, the top three violations for non-construction small employers, those with under 100 employees, were hazard communication, respiratory protection, and powered industrial trucks. Three industries dominated these violations: fabricated metal product manufacturing, repair and maintenance, and non-metallic mineral product manufacturing.
OSHA issued several new letters of interpretation on a variety of workplace topics, including permit required confined spaces, recordkeeping, and powered industrial trucks. Letters of interpretation help ensure the consistent application of federal workplace safety and health standards, and provide regulatory clarification to employers, workers, and safety professionals.
California’s STOP Act took effect January 1. The law targets the state’s fabricated stone industry. It prohibits dry cutting of stone countertops, mandates employee training, and classifies silicosis and silica-related lung cancer from artificial stone as a serious injury or illness.
As of January 1, Washington state requires tower crane permits for all construction work involving tower crane operation, assembly, disassembly, and reconfiguration. Before issuing permits, Washington Department of Labor and Industries will conduct safety conferences to ensure all parties understand the safety requirements and related responsibilities.
Turning to environmental news, EPA issued compliance deadline extensions for certain emissions standards. The delays affect the New Source Performance Standards for crude oil and natural gas facilities and the emissions guidelines for such facilities. Compliance timelines have been pushed into mid- to late-2026 and early 2027.
And finally, although EPA has been deregulating or loosening some environmental requirements, there are still some standards being tightened. These include renewable fuel standards, stormwater management, and PFAS disclosure. Changes to these requirements will reshape compliance obligations for U.S. companies in 2026, and reflect a trend toward increased transparency and environmental accountability.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news. There’s a lot going on, so let’s get started!
As happens at the start of most incoming presidential administrations, a freeze has been placed on all regulatory activity at the federal level, giving the new administration time to review agencies’ plans. The Office of Management and Budget, which must approve most rulemaking activities, has sent numerous pending rules back to the agencies for review. In addition, OSHA withdrew its infectious diseases proposed rule and its COVID-19 in healthcare rule prior to the inauguration.
OSHA’s penalties increased on January 15. The maximum penalty amounts for serious and other-than-serious violations increased to $16,550. For willful or repeated violations, the maximum penalty increased to $165,514 per violation.
OSHA updated its directive on injury and illness recordkeeping policies and procedures. While it’s intended for OSHA compliance officers, employers can use the information to help with recordkeeping compliance.
Fewer workers died on the job in 2023, as fatal work injuries decreased 3.7 percent from 2022. Transportation incidents remained the most frequent type of fatal event, accounting for over 36 percent of all occupational fatalities.
California’s Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board voted to adopt a permanent silica standard. If approved, it would extend and strengthen the state’s emergency temporary standard, which was put in place in December 2023.
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health updated its List of Hazardous Drugs in Healthcare Settings. This is a resource for employers and employees in identifying drugs that are hazardous to the health and safety of those who handle them.
Turning to environmental news, EPA released the biannual update of the nonconfidential TSCA inventory. The inventory helps facilities determine their regulatory requirements for the chemicals they use or plan to use.
And finally, EPA added new Management Method Codes to describe how hazardous waste will be managed after temporary storage and transfer. As of January 1st, hazardous waste handlers must use the codes on the Biennial Report Waste Generation and Management forms.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a final rule on December 31, 2025, that changes certain requirements for wastewater discharges from coal-fired steam electric power plants. It applies to regulations established by the preceding rule finalized in 2024.
The 2025 final rule:
Who’s affected?
The final rule impacts EGUs subject to the effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the steam electric power generating point source category (40 CFR Part 423).
What are the new deadlines?
The 2025 final rule delays the NOPP compliance date. It also extends the deadlines for zero-discharge limitations on FGD wastewater, BA transport water, and CRL. The delays apply to the best available economically achievable (BAT) limitations for direct dischargers and the pretreatment standards for existing sources (PSES) for indirect dischargers.
| Requirement(s) | Previous deadline | New deadline |
|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2025 | December 31, 2031 |
(Direct dischargers)
| No later than December 31, 2029 | No later than December 31, 2034 |
(Indirect dischargers)
| May 9, 2027 | January 1, 2029, or site-specific date for BAT |
What are the other changes?
EPA’s 2025 final rule sets tiered standards for indirect dischargers of FGD wastewater, BA transport water, and CRL:
The final rule also adds provisions that enable facilities to transfer into and out of the subcategory of regulated EGUs that will permanently cease coal combustion by 2034 until December 31, 2034. It allows EGUs to switch between complying with the zero-discharge limitations and the requirements that apply to the subcategory.
Key to remember: EPA has delayed certain compliance requirements for coal-fired steam electric power plants that discharge three types of wastewaters.
Effective date: December 10, 2025
This applies to: Certain GHG emission sources
Description of change: Entities subject to 6 NYCRR Part 253 must submit annual reports of greenhouse (GHG) emissions during the previous calendar year by June 1. Reporting facilities must keep records used for the reports, and larger sources have to obtain third-party verification of their reported emissions. The first report will cover 2026 GHG emissions data and will be due on June 1, 2027.
The regulation applies to emission sources that are in a listed category and operate in New York. The rule establishes three reporting threshold categories:
Related state info: Clean air operating permit state comparison
Effective date: December 21, 2025
This applies to: Manufacturers, sellers, and distributors of certain consumer products with intentionally added PFAS
Description of change: The Washington State Department of Ecology amended regulations to restrict the manufacture, sale, and distribution of consumer products with intentionally added per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in these categories:
The department also added requirements for manufacturers to report intentional use of PFAS for nine other consumer product categories, including:
New restrictions take effect on January 1, 2027, and initial reports are due by January 31, 2027 (and by January 31 annually thereafter).
Related state info: Hazardous waste generators — Washington
Effective date: November 17, 2025
This applies to: Facilities subject to site remediation and redevelopment regulations
Description of change: The New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection made amendments to:
In addition to adding the Site Remediation Reform Act’s requirements to the regulations, the department adopted amendments to simplify the remedial action permit process and implementation of the licensed site remediation professional program.
Effective date: November 4, 2025
This applies to: Parties responsible for investigating and remediating regulated sites impacted by releases of regulated contaminants
Description of change: The New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services readopted contaminated site management rules with changes. The amended rule:
Effective date: December 7, 2025
This applies to: Haulers of grease waste from food establishments
Description of change: The Florida Department of Environmental Protection established removal and disposal regulations for haulers of grease waste from originator food establishments. Haulers must dispose of grease waste at certified facilities and document removals and disposals using a service manifest.
Effective date: November 17, 2025
This applies to: Generators, transporters, and recycling facilities
Description of change: The California Department of Toxic Substances Control adopted a permanent rule that exempts spent, unused, and off-specification industrial ethyl alcohol from a majority of the hazardous waste regulations when it’s recycled at a facility permitted by the Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau.
The exemption isn’t new; it was adopted multiple times via temporary emergency rulemaking. This rulemaking action permanently establishes the exemption in the California Code of Regulations.
Related state info: Hazardous waste generators — California
Effective date: November 14, 2025
This applies to: Manufacturers of nonwoven disposable products sold in D.C.
Description of change: The Washington, D.C. Department of Energy and Environment (DOEE) added regulations (21 DCMR Chapter 24) for nonwoven disposable products labeling to implement the Nonwoven Disposable Products Act of 2016.
The chapter sets the standards for determining whether a nonwoven disposable product may be labeled as flushable, including testing and labeling requirements for flushable and nonflushable products. It applies to all nonwoven products that may potentially be used in a bathroom and flushed (e.g., baby wipes, disinfecting wipes, makeup removal wipes, general purpose cleaning wipes, etc.).
Compliance requirements start in May 2027.
Related state info: Industrial water permitting — District of Columbia
Effective date: December 22, 2025
This applies to: Heating fuel providers delivering heating fuel in Maryland
Description of change: The Maryland Department of the Environment established the Maryland Heating Fuel Provider Reporting Program. It requires heating fuel providers to submit an annual report by April 1 that covers the monthly amount of fuel delivered in the state, organized by fuel type, sector, and county.
Heating fuel providers should begin gathering data in January 2026. The initial report for calendar year 2026 will be due by April 1, 2027. The department plans to publish the annual reporting template in Spring 2026.
Related state info: Clean air operating permit state comparison
Effective date: January 1, 2026
This applies to: UST owners and operators
Description of change: The California State Water Resources Control Board updated the underground storage tank (UST) construction, monitoring, and testing requirements. Significant changes include:
Related state info: Underground storage tanks (USTs) — California
Effective date: December 8, 2025
This applies to: Manufacturers of products with intentionally added PFAS
Description of change: The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency added rules that require manufacturers that sell, offer for sale, or distribute products in the state that contain intentionally added per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) to:
The initial report is due by July 1, 2026. Thereafter, annual reports will be due by February 1. Reports will be submitted electronically through the PFAS Reporting and Information System for Manufacturers (PRISM).
Effective date: January 14, 2026
This applies to: Entities required to obtain a Title V operating permit and owners or operators of sites subject to asbestos notifications
Description of change: The Iowa Environmental Protection Commission added a new annual base fee for Title V operating permit holders, due by July 1.
Additionally, the commission added a fee for revising asbestos notifications. It applies to sites required by the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants to submit asbestos demolition or renovation notifications.
Related state info: Clean air operating permits state comparison
Integrity matters, especially when it’s the one factor standing between your aboveground storage container and the accidental release of thousands of gallons of oil. Consistently checking the structural soundness of aboveground storage tanks (ASTs) is vital to preventing spills and the potential related consequences.
Facilities covered by the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) rule must inspect and test ASTs for integrity regularly. By comparing the test results, facilities can monitor changes in the condition of ASTs and determine whether it’s safe to keep using them.
Consider these FAQs about inspections and tests to help ensure your facility’s aboveground tanks are structurally sound.
The answer in one word is everything. EPA’s SPCC rule requires facilities to regularly inspect and test ASTs in accordance with industry standards (40 CFR 112.8(c)(6)). The standards are technical guidelines that serve as the minimum practices accepted for inspections and tests.
The regulations require facilities to develop and implement an SPCC Plan to prevent, prepare for, and respond to oil spills. In the plan, facilities establish how they’ll conduct integrity inspections and tests for ASTs (referred to as bulk storage containers in the regulations). If your SPCC Plan states that the facility will use a specific industry standard for integrity inspections and tests, it must comply with all relevant parts of that standard.
In EPA’s Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure Plan (SPCC) Program Bulk Storage Container Inspection Fact Sheet, the agency references two industry standards frequently used for integrity inspections and tests:
EPA requires facilities to inspect or test ASTs for integrity:
Your facility must use industry standards to determine the types and frequency of inspections and tests needed. These considerations have to be based on the AST’s size, configuration, and design.
Generally, industry standards mandate that certified individuals conduct integrity inspections and tests. The standards should describe the qualifications an individual must have to be considered certified. This may involve certifying individuals in your facility or hiring certified personnel.
The proper type of integrity inspection or test (which must be nondestructive) depends on the specific container and its configuration. Industry standards identify the type of inspection or test needed and may require using a combination of methods. Examples include:
Industry standards may require your facility to establish baseline conditions for ASTs that haven’t undergone integrity testing or where such information isn’t available (e.g., when a business purchases a facility with ASTs). The baseline evaluation determines the container’s metal thickness, corrosion rates, and likely remaining service. Facilities then compare the results of subsequent integrity inspections and tests with the baseline data.
The SPCC rule requires facilities to maintain integrity inspection and test records (namely, comparison records) for at least 3 years. These records must be signed by the supervisor or inspector and kept with the SPCC Plan. Consider maintaining these records for the life of the AST, especially since many industry standards recommend it.
Sometimes, an alternative inspection program may be more appropriate than using an industry standard. If your facility and a certified Professional Engineer (PE) determine this to be the case, you can implement an environmentally equivalent inspection program. The SPCC rule also allows some facilities to replace certain parts of an industry standard with environmentally equivalent approaches.
However, these hybrid (site-specific) programs have additional regulatory requirements. A facility with a hybrid inspection program must include in the SPCC Plan:
State and local AST regulations must be at least as stringent as EPA’s requirements. However, some may require additional or stricter compliance obligations. Verify AST rules with the state environmental agency.
Key to remember: Industry standards determine how a facility conducts integrity inspections and tests on aboveground storage tanks.
Let’s be honest, managing compliance is tough. But when it comes to Universal Waste (UW), items like fluorescent bulbs, used batteries, aerosol cans, and old thermostats can expose employers to fines without them even realizing it. Why? Because Universal Waste is the ultimate regulatory paradox. These items are still classified as hazardous waste, but the EPA created a streamlined rule set (40 CFR Part 273) to make recycling easier. The problem is that many employers assume "streamlined" means "ignorable." Fixing these problems is incredibly straightforward. By tackling the most common UW mistakes, you don’t just avoid penalties; you build a predictable, efficient, and cost-effective waste program.
Keys to remember: Universal waste compliance hinges on keeping containers closed, labeled, dated, and ensuring employees managing these materials are trained and documenting their actions. When your program is consistent, simple, and intentional, you eliminate preventable violations and turn UW management into a predictable, low-risk process.
The rapid growth of data centers creates new challenges for other regulated facilities. Expansion driven by artificial intelligence (AI) and cloud computing increases their impact on environmental compliance. Key areas include air permitting, attainment status, and regional power supply.
Data centers depend on backup power to stay online during outages. Most use natural gas or diesel generators. These units release pollutants such as nitrogen oxides and particulate matter. When many generators operate together, their potential emissions can push regions close to or beyond National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). This shift can threaten local attainment status and make it harder for nearby facilities to get new permits.
On December 11, 2025, the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA’s) Office of Air and Radiation launched the “Clean Air Act Resources for Data Centers” webpage. It provides regulatory guidance, permitting tools, and technical letters. The goal is to make air permitting for data centers faster and more transparent while protecting air quality.
Large data centers add cumulative emissions from multiple generators. Even permitted emissions from nearby plants can combine and push an area into nonattainment. That change triggers stricter air permitting rules for everyone.
Data centers use large amounts of electricity. They often need on-site generators or new grid connections. This can strain local power supplies. In some cases, grid operators give data centers priority during peak demand, leaving other facilities with less reliable power.
Some states now require detailed modeling for backup generators. For example, Illinois reviewed 34 generators for one data center before granting a permit. If modeling shows high emissions, regulators may limit operating hours or require extra controls.
EPA recently updated its interpretation of New Source Review (NSR) rules. In September 2025, the agency said construction can start before full air permits are issued, as long as emission-related work waits for approval. This speeds up projects but makes it harder for neighboring facilities to predict cumulative emissions early.
Watch for new data center projects in your area. Their emissions could affect your permits.
Join public comment periods for data center permits. Push for full modeling of combined impacts.
Work with grid operators. Understand how demand-response programs and EPA’s “50-hour rule” for emergency generators affect your reliability.
Consider locating new projects in areas with robust infrastructure and cleaner attainment status. Data centers might compete for the same grid upgrades or site approvals.
Key to remember: Data centers are more than tech hubs. They influence air permitting and power allocation. Their growth can affect your ability to expand, or even operate, under current compliance rules.
Did you know that the federal government regulates the power sector’s impact on rain? The Acid Rain Program limits the amount of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) — the main causes of acid rain — that fossil fuel-fired electric generating units (EGUs) may emit. However, the SO2 and NOx reduction programs operate differently, and the ways that facilities can meet the SO2 and NOx limits are distinct.
It's essential to know the compliance options because facilities that don’t meet the SO2 and NOx standards must pay penalties for their excess emissions. And in November 2025, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) set higher penalties for the next two compliance years.
So, what are the differences?
The first thing to confirm is whether your facility is subject to the Acid Rain Program (40 CFR 72.6). The program regulates fossil fuel-fired power plants. It applies to:
Note that the NOx program applies to a specific subset of coal-fired boilers.
EPA operates the SO2 reduction program through an allowance trading system (Part 73). The agency sets a cap on the total SO2 emissions for the year and then allocates SO2 allowances to regulated units. One allowance represents 1 ton of SO2 emissions.
For each compliance year, a facility must show that it has enough allowances to cover its emissions of SO2. It’s similar to EPA’s hydrofluorocarbon allowance program.
There are multiple compliance options. Facilities may:
Facilities can purchase allowances from or sell allowances to individuals, companies, groups, or brokers. Additionally, facilities may bid on allowances at EPA’s annual Acid Rain Program SO2 Allowance Auction.
EPA sets annual emission limits for the NOx reduction program (Part 76), which applies to these types of boilers:
Like the SO2 program, the NOx program offers multiple compliance options. Facilities can:
Additional requirements apply to facilities that use options other than complying with the limits:
Excess emissions penalties can add up quickly. That’s why it’s vital to ensure your facility understands how to comply with the SO2 and NOx reduction programs properly.
The adjustment rates that EPA set for compliance years 2025 and 2026 (2.5265 and 2.6001, respectively) are used to calculate the total penalties a facility must pay if it exceeds SO2 or NOx limits during these compliance years.
Here are the formulas:
Let’s run through a couple of examples of what noncompliance could cost.
| Factors | Penalty Per Ton | Total Penalties |
|---|---|---|
| $2,000 x 2.5265 = $5,053 | $5,053 x 10 = $50,530 |
| $2,000 x 2.6001 = $5,200.20 | $5,200.20 x 5 = $26,001 |
As shown in the example above, excess emissions can cost facilities a lot in penalties. Just 1 ton of excess emissions will result in more than $5,000! Knowing your compliance options for the Acid Rain Program’s SO2 and NOx reduction programs can help your facility avoid steep fines.
Key to remember: The Acid Rain Program limits SO2 and NOx emissions from fossil fuel-fired power plants, but the compliance options for each type of emission differ. Understanding the distinct options can help facilities avoid penalties for excess emissions.
The clock is ticking for environmental teams. By 2026, several new EPA regulations will reshape compliance obligations for U.S. companies. Organizations that act now will avoid costly penalties and operational disruptions.
Although EPA has been deregulating or loosening some requirements, there are still some standards being tightened across multiple fronts in the coming year:
Failure to prepare could lead to fines, reputational damage, supply chain disruptions, and permit delays. Companies that weave compliance planning into their 2026 strategy will be positioned not just to meet legal deadlines but to sustain operations smoothly.
The EPA’s 2026 updates reflect a trend toward increased transparency and environmental accountability. Companies that treat compliance as strategic will not only avoid enforcement but also gain resilience and stakeholder trust.
Key to remember: Start planning now. Early action on EPA rule changes will save time, money, and headaches when enforcement begins.

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.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a final rule on December 31, 2025, that changes certain requirements for wastewater discharges from coal-fired steam electric power plants. It applies to regulations established by the preceding rule finalized in 2024.
The 2025 final rule:
Who’s affected?
The final rule impacts EGUs subject to the effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the steam electric power generating point source category (40 CFR Part 423).
What are the new deadlines?
The 2025 final rule delays the NOPP compliance date. It also extends the deadlines for zero-discharge limitations on FGD wastewater, BA transport water, and CRL. The delays apply to the best available economically achievable (BAT) limitations for direct dischargers and the pretreatment standards for existing sources (PSES) for indirect dischargers.
| Requirement(s) | Previous deadline | New deadline |
|---|---|---|
| December 31, 2025 | December 31, 2031 |
(Direct dischargers)
| No later than December 31, 2029 | No later than December 31, 2034 |
(Indirect dischargers)
| May 9, 2027 | January 1, 2029, or site-specific date for BAT |
What are the other changes?
EPA’s 2025 final rule sets tiered standards for indirect dischargers of FGD wastewater, BA transport water, and CRL:
The final rule also adds provisions that enable facilities to transfer into and out of the subcategory of regulated EGUs that will permanently cease coal combustion by 2034 until December 31, 2034. It allows EGUs to switch between complying with the zero-discharge limitations and the requirements that apply to the subcategory.
Key to remember: EPA has delayed certain compliance requirements for coal-fired steam electric power plants that discharge three types of wastewaters.
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.
In fiscal year 2025, the top three violations for non-construction small employers, those with under 100 employees, were hazard communication, respiratory protection, and powered industrial trucks. Three industries dominated these violations: fabricated metal product manufacturing, repair and maintenance, and non-metallic mineral product manufacturing.
OSHA issued several new letters of interpretation on a variety of workplace topics, including permit required confined spaces, recordkeeping, and powered industrial trucks. Letters of interpretation help ensure the consistent application of federal workplace safety and health standards, and provide regulatory clarification to employers, workers, and safety professionals.
California’s STOP Act took effect January 1. The law targets the state’s fabricated stone industry. It prohibits dry cutting of stone countertops, mandates employee training, and classifies silicosis and silica-related lung cancer from artificial stone as a serious injury or illness.
As of January 1, Washington state requires tower crane permits for all construction work involving tower crane operation, assembly, disassembly, and reconfiguration. Before issuing permits, Washington Department of Labor and Industries will conduct safety conferences to ensure all parties understand the safety requirements and related responsibilities.
Turning to environmental news, EPA issued compliance deadline extensions for certain emissions standards. The delays affect the New Source Performance Standards for crude oil and natural gas facilities and the emissions guidelines for such facilities. Compliance timelines have been pushed into mid- to late-2026 and early 2027.
And finally, although EPA has been deregulating or loosening some environmental requirements, there are still some standards being tightened. These include renewable fuel standards, stormwater management, and PFAS disclosure. Changes to these requirements will reshape compliance obligations for U.S. companies in 2026, and reflect a trend toward increased transparency and environmental accountability.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
Effective date: January 1, 2026
This applies to: UST owners and operators
Description of change: The California State Water Resources Control Board updated the underground storage tank (UST) construction, monitoring, and testing requirements. Significant changes include:
Related state info: Underground storage tanks (USTs) — California
Let’s be honest, managing compliance is tough. But when it comes to Universal Waste (UW), items like fluorescent bulbs, used batteries, aerosol cans, and old thermostats can expose employers to fines without them even realizing it. Why? Because Universal Waste is the ultimate regulatory paradox. These items are still classified as hazardous waste, but the EPA created a streamlined rule set (40 CFR Part 273) to make recycling easier. The problem is that many employers assume "streamlined" means "ignorable." Fixing these problems is incredibly straightforward. By tackling the most common UW mistakes, you don’t just avoid penalties; you build a predictable, efficient, and cost-effective waste program.
Keys to remember: Universal waste compliance hinges on keeping containers closed, labeled, dated, and ensuring employees managing these materials are trained and documenting their actions. When your program is consistent, simple, and intentional, you eliminate preventable violations and turn UW management into a predictable, low-risk process.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a rule on December 3, 2025, that finalizes compliance deadline extensions for certain emissions standards applicable to crude oil and natural gas facilities. The final rule also further delays compliance timelines for two requirements.
EPA’s delays affect:
EPA’s December 2025 final rule is a direct response to the interim final rule (IFR) it issued in July 2025.
The July 2025 IFR extended the compliance deadline for net heating value (NHV) monitoring of flares and enclosed combustion devices (ECDs) to November 28, 2025. The IFR moved the rest of the compliance deadlines to January 22, 2027, for:
What’s the same?
EPA’s December 2025 final rule maintains the same compliance deadlines for all requirements delayed to January 22, 2027.
What’s different?
The agency’s December 2025 final rule sets a new compliance date of June 1, 2026, for the NHV monitoring requirements. This includes an alternative performance test (sampling demonstration) option for flares and ECDs.
Additionally, the rule moves the compliance date for annual reporting, establishing that no annual report is due before November 30, 2026. It gives owners and operators until November 30, 2026, to submit any reports that were originally due before this date. Note that the final rule specifies that annual reports due after November 30, 2026, must be submitted within 90 days of the end of each annual compliance period.
Key to remember: EPA’s final rule confirms deadline extensions for certain emissions standards that apply to crude oil and natural gas facilities. It also further delays a couple of the requirements.
Used oil disposal is a critical issue for safety managers and shop supervisors in industrial settings. Whether your facility generates used oil from machinery, vehicles, or hydraulic systems, you must understand the regulatory requirements to ensure compliance and avoid hefty fines.
Used oil is not always considered hazardous waste, but improper handling, storage, or disposal can lead to regulatory violations and environmental hazards. Understanding how used oil is classified, when it is considered hazardous, and how to manage it in compliance with 40 CFR Part 279 is essential.
Let’s uncover the regulatory framework for used oil disposal, including storage requirements, transportation rules, and best practices to ensure compliance at both the federal and state levels.
The EPA defines used oil as any petroleum-based or synthetic oil that has been used and is contaminated by physical or chemical impurities. Common sources of used oil in industrial operations include:
According to EPA regulations (40 CFR Part 279), used oil is presumed to be managed under the less stringent used oil management standards unless it meets hazardous waste criteria.
Used oil becomes hazardous waste if:
If used oil is classified as hazardous waste, it must be managed in accordance with the applicable solid and hazardous waste requirements.
The EPA requirements for used oil consist of three different aspects, as outlined below.
1. Storage Requirements
Use leak-proof tanks and containers made of durable, non-earthen materials (e.g., steel, plastic, or concrete). Label all used oil containers with the words "Used Oil" to prevent misidentification. Prevent leaks and spills by using secondary containment systems and regularly inspecting tanks. Never mix used oil with hazardous waste unless authorized.
2. Transportation and Disposal
Used oil generators may transport up to 55 gallons of used oil to a registered collection center without an EPA ID number. If contracting a used oil transporter, ensure they have an EPA Identification Number.
Used oil must be:
3. Spill Prevention and Cleanup
Facilities storing large amounts of used oil must have a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan. SPCC plans establish procedures, methods, and equipment requirements to prevent oil from reaching waterways, and to contain discharges of oil.
Any spills must be cleaned up immediately, and absorbent materials must be disposed of properly. Rags and shop towels contaminated with hazardous materials may be classified as hazardous waste.
While the EPA focuses on environmental compliance, OSHA (29 CFR Part 1910) regulates worker safety when handling used oil. Key OSHA requirements include:
1. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)
Workers handling used oil must wear gloves and protective clothing to prevent skin exposure. Safety goggles or face shields are also important to avoid eye contact.
2. Hazard communication (HazCom) program
Employers must label all used oil containers with appropriate hazard information and train employees on safe handling procedures and emergency response.
3. Fire and Explosion Safety
Always store used oil away from ignition sources to prevent fire hazards. Ensure storage areas are ventilated to avoid vapor buildup.
Many states have stricter used oil regulations than federal laws. For example:
To ensure compliance, check with your state’s environmental agency for state-specific used oil disposal rules and whether used oil is considered hazardous. Additional permits for transporting or processing used oil may be necessary.
Ensuring compliance with EPA, OSHA, and state laws is essential for safety managers and shop supervisors handling used oil. By following proper storage, transportation, and disposal practices, businesses can reduce environmental risks, improve workplace safety, and avoid costly fines.
Key to remember: By staying informed and proactive, your facility can maintain safe, sustainable, and compliant used oil management practices.
FMCSA amends the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations to allow States to waive the hazardous materials (HM) endorsement requirement for holders of Class A commercial driver's licenses (CDL) who transport no more than 1,000 gallons of aviation grade jet fuel in support of seasonal agricultural aircraft operations.
DATES: Effective March 10, 2026. Petitions for reconsideration of this final rule must be submitted to the FMCSA Administrator no later than February 9, 2026. Published in the Federal Register January 9, 2026, page 918.
View final rule.
| Part 383-Commercial driver's license standards; requirements and penalties | ||
| Authority | Revised | View text |
| §383.3 Applicability. | ||
| (i) | Revised | View text |
| §383.5 Definitions. | ||
| Definition for “Jet fuel” | Added | View text |
Previous Text
Part 383-Commercial driver's license standards; requirements and penalties
Authority: 49 U.S.C. 521, 31136, 31301 et seq., and 31502; secs. 214 and 215 of Pub. L. 106-159, 113 Stat. 1748, 1766, 1767; sec. 1012(b) of Pub. L. 107-56, 115 Stat. 272, 297, sec. 4140 of Pub. L. 109-59, 119 Stat. 1144, 1746; sec. 32934 of Pub. L. 112-141, 126 Stat. 405, 830; sec. 23019 of Pub. L. 117-58, 135 Stat. 429, 777; and 49 CFR 1.87.
§383.3 Applicability.
(i) Hazardous materials endorsement exemption for certain drivers transporting diesel. A State may waive the requirement for a holder of a Class A commercial driver’s license to obtain a hazardous materials endorsement under this part, if the license holder is:
(1) Acting within the scope of the license holder’s employment, and within the State of domicile (or another State with a hazardous materials endorsement exemption) as an employee of a custom harvester operation, agrichemical business, farm retail outlet and supplier, or livestock feeder; and
(2) Operating a service vehicle that is:
(i) Transporting diesel in a quantity of 3,785 liters (1,000 gallons) or less; and
(ii) Clearly marked with a “flammable” or “combustible” placard, as appropriate.
Many people use the new year as an opportunity to start fresh. This looks different for everyone and can include setting new goals, changing habits, and more. These goals often include things like health and fitness goals, personal finance goals, and more. This year, consider asking your drivers to reflect on their habits and identify what they can improve upon. Here are a few common items for drivers to work on.
Are your drivers planning their trips ahead of time? Do they check the route for potential adverse weather conditions, construction, and changes to traffic patterns? Do they look for truck stops along their route and plan their breaks out? If not, this is a great time to work some of those items into their daily routines.
Do your drivers complete a thorough pretrip inspection before every shift? Are they continuing to inspect throughout the day, as well as upon finishing their days? Do they do the bare minimum to mark it as completed, or are they going above and beyond to ensure the vehicle is safe to drive?
Ask your drivers to reflect on their driving habits. Do they drive defensively? Are they maintaining a good following distance, eliminating distractions, and staying alert and ready to respond to the actions of other drivers?
Health and wellness goals such as increased activity levels, prioritized sleep schedules, improved hygiene, and healthier diets can help drivers stay more alert while behind the wheel.
Oftentimes, being away from home and on the road can get lonely and boring. Encourage your drivers to find new ways to entertain themselves during their free time. Hobbies and leisure activities help relieve stress and allow drivers to start the next day of driving feeling fresh and alert.
Key to remember: The new year brings new opportunities for your drivers to check in on their existing habits, as well as form new ones.
Guidance issued this week urges states to begin enforcement January 1 for the Unified Carrier Registration (UCR) 2026 registration year.
Enforcement officials verify compliance with UCR during roadside inspections. A violation appears on the Driver/Vehicle Examination Report as “392.2 UCR - Failure to pay UCR fees.” Officials verify compliance via CVIEW, SAFER, or www.ucr.gov/enforcement. No UCR credential must be carried in the commercial motor vehicle.
During roadside inspections, enforcement officials may look for evidence of interstate or international operations during the past registration year. Proof may include:
The program applies to all motor carriers that operate in interstate and international commerce. This includes:
Carriers based in Canada or Mexico that operate in the U.S. must also register under the program.
Carriers not subject to UCR include:
Key to remember: Carriers subject to UCR must register and pay by January 1. There is no grace period for compliance.
Unsafe driving, medical certification issues, and log violations dominated the list of reasons commercial drivers were cited during roadside inspections last year.
Over 3 million such inspections took place in 2025, about the same number as in each of the prior 2 years . Being familiar with the most common violations can help drivers and motor carriers take steps to avoid them.
The following table lists the top 20 driver safety violations cited during roadside inspections in 2025, including:
| Rank | Code | Description | Violations | OOS | CSA |
| 1 | 392.2 | Speeding | 133,465 | 0% | 1-10 |
| 2 | 391.41(a) | Invalid/no medical certification | 104,010 | 68% | 1 |
| 3 | 395.8(e) | Log falsification | 98,292 | 20% | 7 |
| 4 | 395.8(a) | No/wrong type of log when required | 82,616 | 59% | 5 |
| 5 | 395.24 | ELD form/manner violation | 76,623 | 0% | 1 |
| 6 | 392.2 | Failure to obey traffic control device | 74,560 | 0% | 5 |
| 7 | 383.23(a), 383.51 | No/improper/invalid/suspended license (CDL) | 71,479 | 94% | 8 |
| 8 | 395.30 | Failure to review and certify logs | 65,809 | 0% | 1 |
| 9 | 395.3(a) | 8-, 11-, or 14-hour violation | 57,571 | 17% | 1-7 |
| 10 | 392.16 | Failure to use seat belt | 54,273 | 0% | 7 |
| 11 | 391.11(b) | English proficiency violation | 48,176 | 26%* | 4 |
| 12 | 392.2 | Lane restriction violation | 44,809 | 0% | 3 |
| 13 | 395.22(h) | Failure to carry ELD instructions or blank logs | 31,659 | 0% | 1 |
| 14 | 392.80, .82 | Using cell phone or texting | 22,203 | 0% | 10 |
| 15 | 395.22(g) | ELD mounting violation | 16,125 | 0% | 1 |
| 16 | 391.11(b)(5) | No/improper/invalid license (non-CDL) | 14,252 | 92% | 8 |
| 17 | 395.24 | Failure to transfer ELD records | 12,341 | 0% | 3 |
| 18 | 392.2 | Failure to maintain lane | 10,756 | 0% | 5 |
| 19 | 395.32 | Failure to review/assign unassigned time | 9,112 | 0% | 5 |
| 20 | 395.8(k) | No logs for prior 7 days | 8,266 | 86% | 5 |
Key to remember: Review the top driver violations of 2025 and take steps to prevent them in 2026 and beyond.
For carriers operating in New York, registration and decals expire December 31, 2024, for the Highway Use Tax (HUT) and Automotive Fuel Carrier (AFC) programs. Take steps now to make sure you receive your new decals before the current ones expire. You need a new certificate of registration and decal for each vehicle. And you must place the new decals on your vehicles before January 1, 2025.
The period to renew your 24th series HUT and AFC certificates of registration begins October 1, 2024. Act now to avoid delays and keep your highway use tax credentials active.
Get ready for renewal by taking the following steps now:
Once the renewal period opens, renew your credentials and pay your renewal fees online with One Stop Credentialing and Registration (OSCAR).
Submit your renewal application by November 30, 2024, to make sure you receive your decals in time to place them on your vehicles before January 1, 2025.
If you are already enrolled in OSCAR, use your current OSCAR password to renew online.
If you are not enrolled, visit OSCAR, and select Enroll Now. You must have a United States Department of Transportation (USDOT) number and an employer identification number (EIN).
To renew your registration:
If you are unable to renew electronically, you may file Form TMT-1.2, Renewal Application for Highway Use Tax (HUT) and Automotive Fuel Carrier (AFC) Certificates of Registrations and Decals – 25th Series.
Key to remember: Take steps now to renew your NY HUT and ensure you receive your new decals before the current ones expire.
J. J. Keller® Center for Market Insights is currently working on its sixth annual study, 2026 State of Fleet Management Survey. The research covers a wide range of topics, including regulatory compliance, safety, driver knowledge and skill, and leadership buy-in.
The survey runs from January 7 through January 19, 2026, and results will be shared with the public through several platforms.
Share your experiences by accessing the survey.
The challenges that more motor carriers experienced in 2024 were reflected in the J.J. Keller Center for Market Insights’ fifth annual survey on the state of fleet management.
Conducted in early 2025, the survey gauged the industry’s top challenges and priorities around the operation of a commercial vehicle fleet, including:
The survey results show that respondents continue to see a need for well-trained, high-quality drivers engaged in continuous learning, a robust safety and compliance program with strong backing from leadership, new vehicle technology that works, and a solid preventive maintenance program. Our research also shows, however, that fleet managers face some common hurdles in reaching these goals.
Click to view the results of the 2025 survey: Transportation Pain Points: Overcoming Top Fleet-Management Challenges.
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.
On October 6, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) decided not to take up a case involving an employer that didn’t pay an employee for time spent driving between job sites. The circuit court ruling, therefore, stands and serves as a good reminder that the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) requires employers to pay employees for travel time between job sites, even if those job sites are personal residences.
In this case, a home health care service provider didn’t pay its employees for time spent traveling between clients’ homes.
The SCOTUS points to the FLSA’s requirement that employers must pay for work-related travel time during the workday. Pay is required when:
• The employee is on duty and when entering or exiting a period of off-duty rest.
• The travel is necessary and constitutes “part of” the employee’s “principal activity.”
In other words, although employers don’t have to pay for off-duty time, the travel time necessary to go between job sites is integral to a principal work activity and must be paid.
The FLSA doesn’t define “work.” The SCOTUS has explained that an employee “works” within the meaning of the FLSA when the employee is engaged in some kind of activity that is “controlled or required by the employer and pursued necessarily and primarily for the benefit of the employer and his business.”
In the case, the employer argued that the Portal-to-Portal Act (PPA) says that employers don’t have to pay employees for time spent “walking, riding, or traveling to and from the actual place of performance of the [employee’s] principal activity or activities” and doing “activities which are preliminary to or postliminary to said principal activity or activities.”
But the PPA covers only travel to the job site that occurs either before the time the work begins or after the principal work activities end. The PPA doesn’t apply to the time between the workday’s start and end
Once the workday has begun, employees are entitled to be paid even if they’re not working at every moment of the day.
For example, a messenger who works on a crossword puzzle while awaiting assignments and a factory worker who talks to his fellow employees while waiting for machinery to be repaired are working during their periods of inactivity.
Employers must pay employees for travel time when employees lack the time to go off duty. Employers can’t claim that the travel period between job sites is part of an employee’s break. They must pay employees for time spent traveling before or after an off-duty period/break.
Employees go off duty when they’re completely relieved from duty long enough to enable them to use the time effectively for their own purposes.
This employer said the situation was a challenge because off-duty employees could go wherever they wanted and begin their travel to a client’s home from wherever they wanted, so it was harder to say when they would return to on-duty status.
The employer argued that this theory of compensation was “unworkable” and “would require estimation of the compensable portion of travel” in a manner that would violate the FLSA.
The court said that the employer simply had to make a record so that it and employees had “the most probative facts concerning the nature and amount of work performed.”
The employer also tried to argue that travel wasn’t closely related to the productive work, such as feeding, bathing, providing medication, and dressing their clients. The court disagreed.
An activity doesn’t need to be predominant in some way over all other activities to qualify as principal. The employees were hired to travel and provide care to clients where they reside, rather than meeting them in hospitals or clinics. So, travel was part of their principal activities.
U.S. Department of Labor v. Nursing Home Care Management Inc., Third Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 23-2284, March 5, 2025.
Key to remember: As the SCOTUS makes clear, employers must pay employees for time spent travelling during the workday.
An employee reported sexual harassment to HR. The accusation was investigated and found to have merit. The harasser was disciplined. The victim can move on.
Or can they?
Workplace sexual harassment isn’t just a violation of personal boundaries; it can have lasting psychological effects. Recent research, including a study by the Scandinavian Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, has found a connection between exposure to workplace sexual harassment and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
PTSD is a mental health condition that can develop after a traumatic event, such as being harassed, especially if the harassment was severe or ongoing. The Scandinavian study showed that frequent harassment increases the risk and severity of PTSD symptoms.
In addition, harassment from a colleague or leader was associated with slightly higher levels of PTSD symptoms than if the harassment was from a customer.
Symptoms of PTSD that a victim of harassment might experience include:
The impact of sexual harassment may lead to profound anxiety, depression, diminished sense of self-worth, self-blame, and negative self-esteem. Additionally, the trauma of sexual harassment can cause panic attacks and poor sleep, further exacerbating the toll on a victim’s mental well-being.
These mental health effects highlight the need for support and comprehensive care for individuals who have experienced workplace sexual harassment.
Chronic stress and anxiety resulting from the experience can lead to physical ailments, including high blood pressure and cardiovascular problems. These conditions may cause attendance problems and scheduling issues.
In addition, fear of retaliation and emotional turmoil often leads to decreased job satisfaction and reduced productivity.
Employers are responsible for creating safe, supportive environments and providing adequate mental health resources for their employees.
Someone who is suffering from PTSD should seek professional counseling as soon as it’s evident that the trauma is interfering with day-to-day life.
An Employee assistance program (EAP) can offer counseling, support groups, and resources for both employees and their families.
Share information about your workplace EAP with sexual harassment victims and explain how counselors can help. If you don’t have a workplace EAP, share information about support groups and other resources in the community.
It's also important to know that PTSD will easily be concluded to be a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) thus qualifying the employee for an accommodation. An accommodation might be as simple as a scheduling change that would allow the employee to attend counseling sessions.
By understanding an employee’s need for support, employers can help them cope during a painful time.
Key to remember: Studies have shown a link between sexual harassment and PTSD. Employers should be aware of this and provide support to victims.
The U.S. Bureau of Labor statistics reported in July 2024 that there are 8.2 million job openings in the U.S., but only 7.2 million unemployed workers.
With that in mind, employers might choose to hang onto employees even if they’re under performing. But what about when complaints are rolling in from different angles? Take, for example, a lackluster supervisor who’s annoying employees and disappointing customers.
An employer could be hesitant to let the supervisor go, especially if there’s no documentation backing up claims of misconduct. The employer must weigh their options to decide if putting the supervisor on a performance improvement plan (PIP) or moving right to termination is the ideal choice.
At-will employment
For starters, in most states employers may terminate an employee at-will, meaning they can fire employees for pretty much any reason as long as it doesn’t discriminate against someone in a protected class based on sex, age, race, religion, etc. Employers also cannot terminate in retaliation for an employee making a claim of harassment, discrimination, or safety concerns.
Aside from these limits, employers can terminate employees for good cause, bad cause, or no cause at all.
PIP or terminate
Deciding whether to put an employee on a PIP or terminate must be decided on a case-by-case basis.
A PIP is usually for job performance issues (hence, performance improvement plan). This could mean anything from not making enough sales to being inept at the job’s essential functions. If job performance doesn’t improve under the PIP, termination may be the end result depending on company policies and practices.
Even if an employee has job performance issues, the employer can terminate without going through the PIP process first, unless the usual process is to implement a PIP with employees who have had similar problems. In that case, not doing a PIP could be seen as discrimination against an employee, especially if the person falls into a protected class.
Workplace misconduct, however, is another situation altogether. This could be anything from a one-off poor joke to pervasive harassment. Snapping at customers or coworkers (or worse), for example, is a conduct issue. An employer could issue a warning or move right to termination if the behavior is clearly illegal or a serious threat to workplace safety.
| Read more: ezExplanation on discharging employees |
Termination tips
If an employer decides to terminate, they should treat the employee as respectfully as possible during the termination process. Also, an employer should carefully and clearly communicate the job-related reasons for the termination to avoid any hint of discrimination. Lastly, an employer should document the reasons and reiterate the steps taken leading up to the termination and keep those records handy in case the employee files a wrongful termination lawsuit.
Key to remember: Employers sometimes struggle when making termination decisions. Having a process in place and documenting steps along the way can help if a case lands in court.
One of the most common questions involving the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) that we see is: “Can ________ fill out the medical certification?”
This question stumps a lot of HR people and can be a little confusing.
It might be easier to start with who CAN’T fill out an FMLA certification. That includes your coworker, best friend, neighbor, or pet.
Jokes aside, often (but not always) a doctor fills out the FMLA certification, and since March 30 is “Doctors’ Day,” this is a great time to discuss this topic.
Employers aren’t required to use certifications, but if they do, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has five different certification forms to use for various FMLA leave situations.
The forms are as follows:
Let’s focus on the first two, as these are the most common ones HR administrators use.
The FMLA regulations describe the person who has the authority to fill out a certification as a “health care provider.” The good news is, the regulations include a lengthy list of medical professionals who fit this role.
Under the FMLA, a health care provider includes:
To be qualified to fill out FMLA forms, medical professionals must be authorized to practice in the state and perform within the scope of their practice. This means that the provider must be authorized to diagnose and treat physical or mental health conditions.
If an employee or an employee's family member is visiting another country, or a family member resides in another country, and a serious health condition develops, the employer must accept a medical certification from a health care provider who practices in that country. This includes second and third opinions.
If a medical certification from a foreign health care provider is not in English, the employee may be required to provide a written translation of the certification.
Key to remember: The FMLA regulations spell out which medical professionals can fill out certification forms.
Employees may take leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) for several reasons, and one of those reasons is to care for their own or a family member’s medical condition. There’s no list of qualifying medical conditions, so employers have to gather all the facts to see if FMLA applies.
FMLA-related medical conditions can be short- or long-term. Some employers believe that their FMLA obligations aren’t triggered unless and until an employee misses three days of work. That’s just not true in many situations, and here’s why.
The FMLA defines a serious health condition as an illness, injury, impairment, or physical or mental condition that involves inpatient care or continuing treatment by a health care provider.
Inpatient care is an overnight stay in a health care facility. If the employee or family member had an overnight stay, it’s an FMLA serious health condition regardless of how many days of work the employee missed.
If the employee or family member did not have an overnight stay, employers move on to the continuing treatment part of the definition.
A serious health condition involving continuing treatment includes the following:
Not all parts of the definition above will apply to a particular situation. The only part of the continuing treatment segment that involves three days, for example, falls under the first bullet. For all the other parts, any period of incapacity would be FMLA leave. An employee doesn’t need to miss three days of work.
The period of more than three days applies to how long the individual is incapacitated, not how many days of work the employee missed. If, for example, an employee who normally works Monday through Friday suffers a serious health condition on Friday evening and is incapacitated until Wednesday, the period of incapacity is more than three days. The employee missed only two days of work, but those two days would be FMLA leave.
Failure to designate an absence as FMLA leave when it is called for risks a claim that the employer interfered with the employee’s FMLA rights.
Key to remember: Employees don’t have to miss three days of work to trigger an employer’s FMLA obligations.
OSHA is correcting several inadvertent errors in its Hazard Communication Standard (HCS). Most errors relate to the HCS final rule published in the Federal Register on May 20, 2024. On October 9, 2024, the agency issued a corrections notification and technical amendment to correct errors in that final rule which the agency believed could lead to confusion during the classification process or errors on labels and Safety Data Sheets (SDSs) if not expeditiously corrected. Following publication of the October 9, 2024 corrections notification and technical amendment, OSHA continued its review of the regulatory text and identified additional minor and typographical errors in the regulatory text and appendices to the HCS. OSHA is issuing this correction document to address these additional minor errors. OSHA is also making one technical amendment to an appendix of the HCS unrelated to the May 20, 2024 final rule.
DATES: The corrections in this document are effective January 8, 2026. Published in the Federal Register January 8, 2026, page 562.
View final rule.
As the January frost settles in, the primary mission for any workplace becomes a simple one: stay warm. Whether it’s a drafty warehouse or a corner office with a chill, employees instinctively reach for tools to turn up the heat. However, in the pursuit of comfort, two silent and often overlooked hazards creep into the workplace, Carbon Monoxide (CO) poisoning and space heater fire hazards.
While these hazards appear different, they do share a dangerous commonality; they are often the result of small, well-intentioned adjustments to our environment that go unnoticed until it is too late. To protect your team this Winter Safety Month, it is essential to understand how these risks intersect and how to manage the "invisible" side of winter safety.
The danger begins with the air we breathe. Carbon monoxide is frequently called the “silent killer” because it is colorless, odorless, and tasteless. In the winter, the risk spikes as buildings are sealed tight to keep the cold out, inadvertently trapping any gases produced by fuel-burning equipment.
In industrial settings, this might be a propane-powered forklift running in a closed loading dock. In an office setting, it could be a malfunctioning furnace or the improper use of a kerosene heater. Because CO mimics the symptoms of common winter ailments, it is easy to ignore. Employees might complain of a "dull headache," "winter fatigue," or "nausea," assuming they are just coming down with a cold. However, a key red flag for employers is this "cluster effect." If multiple people in the same area begin feeling lethargic or dizzy simultaneously, it is probably not a virus—more than likely it is an environmental emergency. Protecting your team starts with the installation of CO detectors, but it continues with a culture where employees feel empowered to speak up the moment the air feels off.
Where fuel-burning equipment creates a chemical hazard, electric heating creates a structural one. When the central HVAC system can’t keep up with a January cold snap, the "personal space heater" becomes the most popular tool in the building. While these devices provide immediate relief, they are responsible for a staggering percentage of workplace fires because they are often treated as "plug-and-play" appliances rather than high-powered industrial tools.
The transition from a cozy workstation to a fire hazard often happens through simple proximity. This is where the "Three-Foot Rule" becomes non-negotiable. Whether it is a stack of paper, a plastic trash can, or a winter coat draped over a chair, combustible materials must be kept at a distance. A heater doesn't need to touch an object to ignite it; the constant radiant heat can raise the temperature of nearby materials to their ignition point over several hours.
Beyond the physical placement of the heater lies the electrical strain. A common mistake in office environments is "daisy-chaining” or plugging a space heater into a power strip or an extension cord. Most power strips are designed for low-draw electronics like monitors and phone chargers. A space heater draws a large amount of electricity, which can cause the internal wiring of a power strip to melt or ignite long before a circuit breaker ever trips. To bridge this gap, employers should enforce a "Direct-to-Wall" policy. If a heater cannot reach a wall outlet, it should not be used. This ensures the building’s heavy-duty wiring handles the load, rather than a thin plastic extension cord hidden under a rug.
Protecting employees during the winter months requires a much broader view of indoor safety. It isn’t just about checking the furnace or just banning heaters; it’s about managing how we modify our environment. A few winter safety strategies should include:
Keys to remember: By addressing the air we breathe and the equipment we plug in as two parts of the same winter safety goal, employers can ensure that the workplace remains a sanctuary from the cold, rather than a source of danger.
Winter weather creates unique challenges for workplace safety, particularly when it comes to emergency preparedness. Snow, ice, and freezing temperatures can obstruct exits, create slip hazards, and complicate evacuation plans. Taking proactive steps is essential to maintain compliance with OSHA and NFPA standards and keep your workers safe.
OSHA regulations (29 CFR 1910.37) require that all exit routes remain free and unobstructed at all times. NFPA 101 Life Safety Code reinforces this by emphasizing clear egress paths and proper door operation during emergencies. In winter, snow and ice can quickly compromise these requirements, making it critical to plan ahead.
OSHA’s minimum width requirement of 28 inches applies to the structural component of a permanent exit route. This means the physical design of the exit must meet that standard. However, OSHA also states that exit routes must be “free and unobstructed,” which is where snow and ice become a compliance issue. Even if the structure meets the 28-inch requirement, accumulated snow or ice that narrows the path or blocks access violates OSHA’s intent for safe egress.
NFPA often requires wider exit route dimensions than OSHA’s minimum, especially in facilities with higher occupancy or specific hazards. Because local building codes or municipal regulations may adopt NFPA standards or even stricter rules, it is recommended to verify with your Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) to ensure compliance with any additional requirements.
Exit doors must open easily without special tools or excessive force, as required by OSHA and NFPA standards. Winter conditions can also compromise this requirement. Snow plowed against exterior doors, frozen gates or crash bars, narrowed sidewalks, and temporary storage of salt bags or heaters near exits can obstruct pathways and delay evacuation. Slippery outdoor stairways and walkways add further risk to safe workplace exiting.
Lighting is equally important. Emergency lights and exit signs must remain visible and functional, but snowbanks, ice buildup, or temporary coverings can block them, creating unsafe conditions and violating regulations. Recommended actions to minimize these hazards can include:
OSHA requires in 29 CFR 1910.38 that workplaces with 10 or more employees maintain a written Emergency Action Plan (EAP). The EAP should clearly outline procedures for reporting emergencies, evacuation routes, and employee responsibilities including cold weather emergencies for organizations exposed to winter weather climates.
To prepare for winter weather emergencies, start by reviewing your existing plan and adding contingencies for snow and ice. Identify primary and secondary evacuation routes and ensure they remain accessible even during severe storms. Include procedures for clearing snow from exits and walkways and assign specific personnel to each task. Backup lighting should be addressed in case of power outages, and emergency communication systems should be tested regularly to ensure functionality in cold conditions.
Consider adding steps for shelter-in-place situations caused by blizzards or extreme cold. Provide guidance on maintaining indoor heat safely and ventilation for preventing carbon monoxide exposure from temporary heating devices.
OSHA also emphasizes the importance of training and communication as part of an effective emergency preparedness program. Employees must understand evacuation procedures, know their roles during an emergency, and be familiar with winter-specific hazards. This includes recognizing slip hazards, practicing safe walking techniques, and proper use of personal protective equipment.
Supervisors should go beyond basic instruction by conducting seasonal safety meetings that cover winter-specific risks. Training should explain the importance of maintaining clear exits, snow and ice removal priorities, and what steps employees should take if they notice blocked exit routes. Communication tools such as signage, email alerts, and mobile notifications can reinforce these messages during severe weather events. Effective communication ensures employees remain aware of changing conditions and know how to respond quickly and safely.
Key to remember: Winter weather can delay evacuations, so planning ahead is essential. Proactive inspections, updated emergency plans, and training are your best defense against winter hazards like blocked exits and frozen doors.
Employers that must electronically file their injury data with OSHA might engage in business activities that fall under more than one North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code. Fortunately, OSHA recognized that more than one NAICS code could apply to a single establishment.
OSHA’s Injury Tracking Application (ITA) website includes a frequently asked question regarding multiple NAICS codes. OSHA advises, “Choose the code that represents the activity that generates the most revenue for your establishment and/or has the most employees, whichever is more applicable to your business.” If more than one NAICS code could apply, employers can choose which code to use for ITA reporting.
OSHA does not assign NAICS codes. Employers know their operations best and must select the most applicable code. For example, suppose a company engages in both plastics manufacturing and chemical manufacturing. The plastics division has the most employees, but the chemical division generates the most revenue. Which NAICS code should the company use? The company could use either, but might consider the electronic filing obligations.
Plastics manufacturers must file the 300A, 300 Log, and 301 Forms if the establishment has 100 or more employees. However, chemical manufacturers file only the 300A regardless of employee count. This company might choose the NAICS code for chemical manufacturing since that generates the most revenue and would only have to file the 300A.
Normally, a single physical location counts as one “establishment” for injury recordkeeping. In rare cases, a single location with more than one business operation might be divided into more than one establishment. If this happens, each establishment (operation) would maintain a separate 300 Log and could even have different electronic reporting obligations.
The previous example of a chemical and plastics manufacturer probably doesn’t qualify as two separate establishments. OSHA offers an example where two separate business establishments operate from the same physical address. The agency noted, “if an employer operates a construction company at the same location as a lumber yard, the employer may consider each business to be a separate establishment.”
According to the regulation at 1904.46, an employer might consider two or more separate businesses that share a single location to be separate establishments only when:
If these criteria do not apply, the employer must choose one NAICS code for the entire operation.
When preparing for electronic submission of injury records, employers also need to include their Employer Identification Number, or EIN. This is a tax identification number for a company, similar to a Social Security Number, but for a business.
Some locations might have more than one EIN. That does not automatically mean the location constitutes two or more “establishments” for OSHA recordkeeping and reporting. However, if each operation meets the criteria for separate businesses, the employer might maintain separate 300 Logs (and potentially have different e-reporting obligations) for each business operation.
Key to remember: If more than one NAICS could apply, the employer chooses which code to use for electronic filing of injury data. Though unusual, a single location might be divided into separate business operations and treated as two establishments.
There’s nothing worse than driving at night through a work zone and having some glaring aqua headlights coming right at you, right? At times, we are left wondering if the lights are meant for work zone safety, emergency vehicles, or if they are even legal. So, let’s explore which vehicle lights are required according to regulators and why they matter.
Understanding which vehicle lights are required and why they are necessary is more than a regulatory checkbox; it's a cornerstone of safety. These lights aren't just for visibility but are intended to communicate intent, type of vehicle, guide traffic, and protect both workers and drivers. When properly used, they reduce confusion, prevent collisions, and reinforce the presence of a temporary but high-risk zone. The ultimate goal is to reduce traffic incidents and deaths by providing appropriate, noticeable vehicle lighting on public roads.
OSHA regulations for vehicle light colors are primarily governed by the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) standard number 108. The standard establishes requirements for motor vehicle lighting equipment, including light colors and brightness.
The color in all lamps and reflective devices must follow Table I in FMVSS No. 108, which includes:
FMVSS isn’t the only regulator having a say in work vehicle lighting. Additional regulations designed to keep work zones safe include:
While OSHA doesn’t regulate vehicle lights directly, it mandates safe working conditions, and proper visibility in work zones. That being said, there are some OSHA standards for work vehicle lighting. Construction motor vehicles that operate within an off-highway jobsite (not open to public traffic) are covered by 29 CFR 1926.601 and must:
Compliance with all of these regulations is vital to incident prevention and roadway safety.
Each state sets its own color patterns for emergency and service vehicles to ensure visibility and safety. Here are just a few examples:
Regardless of the state, the bottom line is that flashing lights in work zones mean slow down and stay alert—lives depend on it.
Key to remember: Vehicle lighting is essential for reducing the risk of accidents in high-risk or low-visibility environments. Specific lights communicate intent and are designed to protect both workers and the public in and around work zones.
It is a common sight in many workplaces to see employees using compressed air to clean parts, equipment, and even clothing. What many workers and some employers do not realize is that compressed air can be deadly. That is why OSHA has a regulation prohibiting the use of compressed air for cleaning unless the dead-end pressure is reduced to below 30 psi, and then only with effective chip guarding and PPE.
The regulation Federal OSHA’s requirement for cleaning with compressed air is in 1910.242(b):
“Effective chip guarding” means any method or equipment which will prevent a chip or particle (of whatever size) from being blown into the eyes or unbroken skin of the operator or other workers.
Effective chip guarding may be separate from the air nozzle as in the case where screens or barriers are used. The use of protective cone air nozzles are acceptable in general for protection of the operator, but barriers, baffles or screens may be required to protect other workers if they are exposed to flying chips or particles.
The regulation requires the psi at the nozzle to be less than 30 when using compressed air for cleaning.
However, OSHA has said in interpretive guidance that the use of compressed air for cleaning purposes at pressures at or greater than 30 psi is permissible if the outlet or source is fitted with a relief device or air ports that drop the pressure to less than 30 psi if the flow is dead-ended.
While the regulation does not specifically address the issue, in a letter of interpretation OSHA said that employers should not allow employees to use compressed air for cleaning themselves or their clothing in general industry situations. The eyes and other body parts, such as the respiratory system, may be damaged as the result of inadequate personal protective equipment, lack of chip guards, and/or uncontrolled release of compressed air.
There are numerous dangers of improperly using compressed air:
Workers must be trained that even extremely low pressures, such as 5 or 10 psi, can still cause severe damage if pointed toward the body, particularly the mouth, eyes, ears, or open areas in the skin.
Employers should train employees on the dangers of compressed air, and ensure the equipment is equipped with the necessary safety features and is properly maintained.
Supervisors should watch for improper use, particularly horseplay, and initiate corrective action. In addition, for many applications, a broom or shop vacuum may be just as effective at cleaning, and much safer. Compressed air may seem harmless, but if strict safeguards and practices are not utilized it can be deadly.