
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).
Companies operating across multiple states, or internationally, face a growing challenge: staying compliant with a patchwork of environmental regulations. As federal agencies scale back certain environmental rules, states are stepping in to fill the gaps. But these state-level regulations aren’t always aligned. One state may impose strict air quality standards, while another may prioritize water discharge limits. This fragmented landscape creates a complex web of requirements that businesses must navigate to avoid fines, delays, or reputational harm.
In the U.S., environmental laws are enforced at both federal and state levels. While EPA sets national standards, states often go further. For example:
Internationally, U.S. companies face additional hurdles. The European Union’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) requires companies to identify and mitigate environmental risks across their global supply chains. This means a U.S. firm with operations or suppliers in Europe must meet stricter standards, even if those standards differ from U.S. law.
To manage this complexity, many companies adopt Environmental Management Systems such as ISO 14001. An EMS provides a structured framework to:
EMS tools help companies centralize oversight, reduce compliance gaps, and respond quickly to regulatory changes. For example, a company using EMS software can assign location-specific tasks, monitor progress, and generate reports tailored to each jurisdiction’s requirements.
Key to Remember: Multi-jurisdictional compliance isn’t just about knowing the rules—it’s about building systems that adapt to them. An Environmental Management System, paired with proactive planning and location-specific training, helps companies stay compliant, reduce risk, and operate confidently across borders.
Working with chemicals can be a risky business. What happens when information reveals that a chemical poses a substantial risk to human or environmental health? Those handling the chemical, including the organization and its employees, have a legal duty to report the risk to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Section 8(e) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) requires that anyone who receives information supporting the conclusion that a chemical substance or mixture poses a substantial risk of injury must immediately submit a Substantial Risk Notice (SRN) to EPA. SRNs aren’t uncommon; they can apply to any business that handles chemical substances. EPA announced in October 2025 that it had cleared a backlog of more than 3,000 SRNs!
If your facility handles any chemical substance, you’re subject to TSCA Section 8(e) reporting. Here’s how your facility can meet the SRN requirements based on EPA’s Statement of Interpretation and Enforcement Policy; Notification of Substantial Risk (SRN guide) published in the Federal Register.
TSCA Section 8(e) requirements apply to both organizations and individual employees engaged in manufacturing (including importing), processing, or distributing in commerce a chemical substance or mixture.
Tip: The statute offers no applicability exemptions for a facility’s size, production or import volumes, or commercial activities.
Those in the company who manage Section 8(e) obligations (“officers”) should ensure that the organization meets the requirements. Officers have personal civil and/or criminal liability to verify that SRNs are submitted.
Facilities may assume responsibility from employees and officials for reporting substantial risk information directly to EPA if they establish and implement internal procedures for employees to submit information to the company. The procedures should include:
If a business doesn’t have established SRN procedures, all of its employees and officials are individually responsible and liable for ensuring that substantial risk information is submitted directly to EPA.
Regardless of who submits the SRN to the agency, the report should be made within 30 calendar days of obtaining information about a substantial risk of injury.
The SRN guide defines substantial risk as “a risk of considerable concern” due to:
The type of health effect determines the weight of importance assigned to both factors. For instance, if the chemical’s health effect is severe (like causing birth defects), less weight is given to the level of exposure.
The types of health effects include:
You should submit SRNs electronically through the Chemical Information Submission System (CISS), which is accessed via the Chemical Safety and Pesticide Programs (CSPP) service on EPA’s Central Data Exchange (CDX).
Tip: Reference EPA’s CDX Chemical Safety and Pesticide Programs (CSPP) Registration User Guide for detailed registration instructions.
If your SRN includes confidential business information claims, you’re required to submit the notice electronically.
Key to remember: If your facility obtains information that a chemical you handle poses a substantial risk to human or environmental health, you must report the information to EPA immediately.
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 in the last month!
On October 7th, David Keeling was confirmed by the Senate as OSHA’s new Assistant Secretary of Labor. During his confirmation hearing, Keeling stated that “nothing is more beneficial than collaboration between employers and employees” and shared his three main goals for the agency. These are modernization in regulatory oversight and rulemaking, expanding OSHA’s cooperation and collaboration efforts, and transforming OSHA’s enforcement.
In a landmark opinion, an appeals court offers a framework to revive federal rulemakings, such as OSHA’s Ergonomics Program rule. The rule was previously struck down by the Congressional Review Act in 2001. The latest court decision loosens the grip that the Act has had for almost 25 years. This makes it feasible for agencies like OSHA, EPA, and others to give long-gone rules a second chance. It gives OSHA a path to publish a narrow or different ergonomics rule in the future.
OSHA quietly archived a memo from 2024 that had suggested its enforcement offices may refrain from grouping violations where those offenses are separate and distinct. In some cases, ungrouping raises the total penalty for an inspection. An OSHA spokesperson said the memo was determined to be unnecessary since agency policy in its Field Operations Manual provides clear guidance to OSHA field staff on when citation item grouping may be considered.
The NFPA’s Fire Prevention Week kicked off October 5th with a theme of lithium-ion battery safety in the home. Reports of fires and explosions involving lithium-ion batteries have been on the rise. NFPA provides information and guidance on how to safely use, handle, and recycle them.
And finally, turning to environmental news, the California Air Resources Board submitted comments opposing EPA’s proposal to overturn its 2009 Endangerment Finding. The Endangerment Finding has guided federal actions to address greenhouse gas pollution. CARB’s comments note that EPA’s proposal ignores more than 15 years of its own research and regulations and emphasizes that the agency is obligated to address greenhouse gas emissions and adopt strong standards to reduce them. EPA received over 15 thousand comments on its proposal.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
When we think of workplace safety and environmental compliance, we usually picture two different scenarios. With safety, we see hard hats, gloves, and fall protection. With environmental, we picture labels, manifests, and disposal paperwork. But the truth is, the two are deeply connected and every waste container on site represents both an environmental responsibility and safety risk. Handling waste often exposes employees to greater hazards than the production itself. A leaking drum, a poorly sealed container, or an unmarked bottle can release fumes or create flammable conditions. Physical strain from lifting or rolling heavy drums adds another layer of danger, and even universal wastes like lamps and batteries bring risk of mercury exposure, acid leaks, and electrical shock. Those examples are routine tasks that happen every day in maintenance shops, warehouses, and manufacturing plants and often they are managed by workers who are experienced but are rarely recognized as being on the front line of safety.
Several OSHA and EPA standards overlap, yet facilities often treat them as separate worlds. OSHA’s Hazard Communication standard requires clear labeling and training while EPA’s hazardous waste rules demand compatible labeling, containment, and emergency planning. Both sets of regulations aim for the same outcome, which is to prevent harm to people and the environment.
When environmental and safety programs coordinate using unified labels, joint inspections, and shared training, compliance becomes simpler and safer. The goal is not to double the paperwork; it is to eliminate the gaps between programs where accidents tend to happen.
Many facilities unintentionally create risk through small, everyday habits. A “temporary” container sits too long and becomes a forgotten storage drum. Workers mix incompatible residues, not realizing how reactive they can be. Gloves designed for a certain chemical do not protect against concentrated waste. All too often, basic housekeeping is overlooked like open funnels, overfilled containers, or clutter blocking access around drums. These issues rarely start with negligence; they start with assumptions. When waste handling feels routine, people stop seeing it as hazardous. That is when accidents occur. The solution is a unified, proactive approach. Waste areas should be treated as active work zones, not as storage closets. That means safety and environmental staff walking the same floor, inspecting the same containers, and addressing both compliance and ergonomics together. Training should connect the dots between RCRA waste management, hazard communication, and PPE; helping workers understand that residues can behave differently than the materials they started with.
Physical improvements also matter. Adding spill pallets, proper lighting, mechanical drum lifters, and ventilation can reduce both environmental violations and injuries. Like safety, when something goes wrong such as a leak, overfill, or a missing label, it should be handled as a near-miss. Treating these events with the same attention as a near-miss will prevent recurrence and reinforces accountability.
Waste prevention is not just an environmental initiative; it is one of the strongest safety strategies a company can adopt. Fewer materials used means fewer containers stored, moved, or disposed of. Choosing less hazardous chemicals, ordering smaller quantities, and tracking where waste originates all reduce exposure opportunities. Every gallon of solvent avoided is one less gallon that can leak, spill, or ignite.
Keys to remember: When OSHA and EPA priorities are treated as one, the workplace becomes not only more compliant, but genuinely safer for everyone.
Portable generator engines, rock crushers, and aggregate processing units are designed to move from site to site. However, under certain conditions, these mobile units may be reclassified as stationary sources of air pollution. This shift in classification can trigger regulatory requirements that operators may not anticipate, including permitting, emissions monitoring, and reporting obligations.
The Clean Air Act defines a stationary source as any building, structure, facility, or installation that emits (or has the potential to emit) air pollutants. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) further clarifies that portable equipment becomes stationary if it remains at a single location for more than 12 consecutive months. This rule applies regardless of whether the equipment was originally designed to be mobile.
For example, a portable diesel engine used to power a rock crusher may be considered stationary if it operates at the same site for over a year. Once reclassified, the equipment may be subject to federal standards such as New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) or National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP).
While EPA provides overarching guidance, individual states often implement their own rules and permitting frameworks. These can vary significantly depending on local air quality concerns, industrial activity, and enforcement priorities.
California’s Portable Equipment Registration Program allows certain engines and equipment to operate statewide without obtaining site-specific permits, provided they meet emission standards and are properly registered. In contrast, Texas requires a permit for rock crushers that operate at a site for more than 12 months, aligning closely with EPA’s definition of stationary sources. Maine uses a Crusher Identification Number system to track emissions from portable units and ensure compliance with state regulations.
Some states also impose thresholds based on horsepower, fuel type, or emission potential. Equipment that exceeds these thresholds may require a stationary source permit even if it's moved periodically.
Misunderstanding the distinction between portable and stationary sources can lead to significant compliance issues. Operators may assume that mobility exempts equipment from permitting, only to discover that prolonged use at a single site has triggered regulatory oversight. Failure to obtain the proper permits or meet emission standards can result in fines, enforcement actions, and operational delays.
Recordkeeping is another common challenge. Regulators often require documentation showing how long equipment has been at a site, its emission characteristics, and any relocations. Without accurate records, operators may struggle to prove that their equipment qualifies as portable.
To be compliant, operators should:
Proactive communication with regulators can help clarify requirements and avoid costly surprises. In some cases, applying for a general or portable permit may be the simplest way to ensure compliance.
Key to Remember: Portable equipment doesn’t stay exempt forever. If it remains at one site too long, it may be regulated as a stationary source, bringing new rules, responsibilities, and risks.
No matter what you call them, hazardous chemicals are regulated by OSHA, DOT, and EPA depending upon what you’re doing with those chemicals. Three of the most confusing sets of regulations related to chemicals include:
HazCom applies to “any chemical which is known to be present in the workplace in such a manner that employees may be exposed under normal conditions of use or in a foreseeable emergency.” The OSHA regulation has requirements for hazardous chemical manufacturers, importers, distributors, and employers.
HazCom-covered employers must ensure containers of non-exempt hazardous chemicals are labeled, SDSs are readily accessible to employees in their work areas, and effective information/training is provided for exposed employees. They must also prepare and implement a written HazCom program (which includes a chemical inventory), unless they only have exempted operations under 1910.1200(b)(3) and/or (b)(4).
Covered employees have a right to understand the chemical hazards in their workplace. Training is key to ensuring employees have that understanding. Employees must be trained prior to initial assignment with hazardous chemicals and whenever a new chemical hazard is introduced. Employers must cover the elements in 1910.1200(h).
The hazmat regulations apply to those involved in three primary types of activities: pre-transportation functions, transportation functions, and hazmat packaging. Pre-transportation functions include activities performed by the hazmat shipper and deal largely with paperwork. Transportation functions, on the other hand, include activities performed by those directly involved in transporting hazmat, including drivers.
“Hazmat employees” must be trained per 49 CFR 172.704 within 90 days of employment or job function assignment, and refresher training is mandated at least once every three years. Employees are considered hazmat employees if they directly affect hazmat transportation safety. See 49 CFR 171.8 for a detailed definition of hazmat employee.
The DOT says, “Training conducted by OSHA, EPA, and other Federal or international agencies may be used to satisfy the training requirements in 172.704(a) to the extent that such training addresses the components specified in paragraph (a) of this section (general awareness/familiarization; function-specific; safety; security awareness; in-depth security training, if a security plan is required; and driver training for each hazmat employee who will operate a motor vehicle).”
Every business deals with waste and must know how to properly dispose of it. Most states are authorized to run their own HazWaste programs, so a facility needs to be aware of state (and often local) HazWaste regulations. When waste is generated, the facility must identify the waste and determine if it is HazWaste by definition.
EPA’s HazWaste generator regulations at 40 CFR 262 apply differently depending upon the “generator category” (large quantity (LQG), small quantity (SQG), and very small quantity (VSQG)), which is determined by how much HazWaste a facility generates each month. Therefore, under Part 262, employee training requirements too are based on the generator category.
SQGs must train employees according to 40 CFR 262.16. SQGs have basic training requirements. They must ensure employees are thoroughly familiar with proper waste handling and emergency procedures relevant to their responsibilities during normal facility operations and emergencies. LQG personnel training requirements are found at 40 CFR 262.17. Being large, these generators are required to meet much more extensive training requirements. It’s a best practice for VSQGs to train employees to safely handle HazWaste, but it’s not specifically called out in EPA’s HazWaste generator regulations. However, other training regulations, such as those for OSHA and DOT may come into play.
Key to remember: No matter what you call them, hazardous chemicals are regulated by OSHA, DOT, and EPA depending what you’re doing with those chemicals. Employers must understand what regulations apply to their situation and train employees accordingly.
There have been 21 federal shutdowns since 1976, with an average duration of 8 days. The longest shutdown (in 2018–2019) lasted 35 days. Shutdowns aren't uncommon. When federal agencies shut down, inspections stall, enforcement actions pause, and regulatory oversight slows. For many companies, this might seem like a temporary reprieve from environmental scrutiny. But for professionals committed to environmental excellence, it’s an opportunity, not a loophole. The absence of enforcement doesn’t mean the absence of responsibility.
Environmental compliance isn’t just about avoiding fines. It’s about protecting worker health, community trust, and long-term operational stability. During a government shutdown, the temptation to defer environmental investments or relax internal standards can grow. But doing so risks more than future penalties; it undermines the credibility of your environmental program and can lead to reputational damage.
It’s also important to note that state programs are still typically operational and active during federal shutdowns, so inspections and compliance activities for state-authorized programs continue.
To convince management and stakeholders, frame environmental excellence as a strategic asset:
Use real-world examples or internal metrics to show how environmental investments have paid off — even when enforcement wasn’t the driver.
Environmental professionals can lead by example and keep the momentum going:
A shutdown can be a chance to strengthen internal systems:
These efforts demonstrate commitment and prepare your team for when oversight resumes.
Key to remember: Environmental excellence isn’t just about avoiding fines. It’s about building a resilient, responsible, and respected operation. Even when enforcement pauses, your commitment shouldn’t.
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 past month.
OSHA released its Spring 2025 regulatory agenda on September 4. Many rulemakings have been pushed into the fourth quarter of 2025 and the first half of 2026, while a few have been removed from the agenda altogether. These include Infectious Diseases, Blood Lead Level for Medical Removal, and the Musculoskeletal Disorders Column on the OSHA 300 log.
Three rules moved into the long-term actions category – Workplace Violence in Health Care and Social Assistance, Cranes and Derricks in Construction, and Process Safety Management and Prevention of Major Chemical Accidents. The proposed rule stage saw an influx of new entries, most of which were published in the July 1 Federal Register.
The Standards Improvement Project, slated for proposal in May 2026, intends to “remove, modernize, or narrow duplicative, unnecessary, or overly burdensome regulatory provisions.”
OSHA renewed its alliance with the National Waste and Recycling Association and the Solid Waste Association of North America. The partnership will focus on safety issues such as transportation hazards; slips, trips, and falls; needlestick and musculoskeletal injuries; and health issues associated with lithium battery hazards in waste/recycling collection and processing.
For the 15th year in a row, fall protection for construction topped OSHA’s list of top 10 violations. In fiscal year 2024, there were 5,914 recorded fall protection violations, down from 7,271 in fiscal year 2023. The standards that round out the top 10 remain unchanged, with a shift in some of the rankings.
Turning to environmental news, EPA proposes to eliminate the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program requirements for all source categories except the petroleum and natural gas systems category. The agency also proposes to suspend compliance obligations for covered facilities until 2034. A public hearing was held October 1 and stakeholders have until November 3 to comment on the proposal.
Hazardous waste handlers may continue to use 5-paper copy manifest forms. EPA announced it will accept these forms from entities regulated by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, or RCRA, until further notice. The agency will give a 90-day notice before it plans to stop accepting the 5-copy forms.
And finally, EPA published its Spring 2025 regulatory agenda on September 4. The agenda outlines the agency’s upcoming regulatory actions and their status in the rulemaking process. Major updates on the docket include those for greenhouse gases, risk management rules, and the Renewable Fuel Standards for 2026 and 2027.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
Industrial and commercial facilities produce significant amounts of pollutant-containing wastewater. Sending these waste streams to public wastewater and sewage treatment facilities as-is can cause major problems since these facilities usually aren’t designed to handle toxic or unexpected industrial pollutants. That’s why facilities have to pretreat wastewater before sending it to the treatment facility.
Industrial and commercial sources that discharge pollutant-containing wastewater to a publicly owned treatment works (POTW) facility are called industrial users (IUs). You may also see them referred to as “nonpoint sources” and “indirect dischargers.” These facilities are subject to the National Pretreatment Program, which is part of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit Program.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) National Pretreatment Program mandates IUs to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local standards to discharge wastewater to a POTW. The federal program has three types of pretreatment requirements:
Understanding the differences between the types of pretreatment program standards is essential, especially since your facility may have to comply with all three.
IUs must obtain permits or comply with other control mechanisms to discharge wastewater to a POTW. Let’s look at the three kinds of pretreatment standards that may apply.
Prohibited discharge standards are national standards consisting of general and specific prohibitions that forbid facilities from discharging certain pollutants.
Categorical pretreatment standards are national limits that apply to wastewater discharged by facilities in specific industrial categories.
EPA sets effluent limitations guidelines and standards (ELGs) for the covered industrial categories to prevent discharges from IUs that can pass through or interfere with the works or otherwise disrupt POTW operations. ELGs give numerical, technology-based limits for the quantity, concentration, or properties of a pollutant that IUs can discharge to a POTW.
Local limits are established by POTWs and are specific to each site, so requirements vary across different POTW pretreatment programs. Local limits prevent pollutant discharges from IUs that can pass through or interfere with the works, contaminate sludge, and/or endanger worker health and safety.
POTWs set effluent discharge limits, which can be numerical or narrative (for example, no discharging toxics in toxic amounts). Standards may also include best management practices, such as taking actions to control plant site runoff.
Generally, POTWs implement the NPDES National Pretreatment Program at the local level. EPA requires large POTWs and smaller POTWs with significant industrial discharges to develop local pretreatment programs. Through EPA-approved local programs, POTWs enforce the national standards and requirements in addition to any stricter local regulations that apply.
Where EPA hasn’t approved a POTW’s local pretreatment program, it's administered by the state (if approved to do so) or EPA regional office.
If your facility is subject to the NPDES National Pretreatment Program, first identify the kind of IU your facility is: an IU, a significant IU, or a categorical IU. The category determines the requirements that may apply.
Keep in mind that all IUs must comply with the applicable federal pretreatment program requirements:
Significant IUs (defined at 403.3(v)) and categorical IUs (i.e., facilities subject to one of the categorical standards in Parts 405–471) have additional federal requirements. Generally, these facilities must also meet local limits.
Key to remember: Industrial and commercial facilities must comply with the National Pretreatment Program before discharging pollutant-containing wastewater to a publicly owned treatment works facility.
On October 1, the federal government shut down. As a result, private employers and employees, as well as federal contractors and government employees, will likely face delays in services and programs until a resolution is reached.
Below is a recap of how the shutdown impacts several key federal agencies and what to expect.
It’s generally business as usual for the FMCSA. Roadside inspections are considered an essential safety function. Both federal and state enforcement partners perform these inspections, and most weigh stations are run by state Department of Transportation (DOT) agencies, which aren’t directly affected by a federal shutdown.
Drivers should assume inspections will continue as normal. Violations will still result in citations, out-of-service orders, and compliance reviews.
While the day-to-day enforcement likely won’t change, some aspects of the FMCSA and DOT operations may slow down, such as:
New registrations and filings, such as new USDOT numbers, new authority, and Unified Carrier Registration filings, will likely experience delays until the shutdown is resolved.
The picture is more complex at PHMSA. The DOT plan says about one-third of the agency's 580 employees are expected to be furloughed. Inspections of hazardous materials shippers, carriers, and other entities will continue, as will enforcement of the hazardous materials safety regulations. However, a variety of administrative functions are expected to be impacted, including non-emergency approvals and permits, rulemaking activities, research, grants, outreach, and the hazmat registration and fee-collection program.
OSHA will continue only its essential functions, including:
All other agency activities such as rulemaking, programmed inspections, compliance assistance, website updates, and outreach programs are suspended. Only employees designated as essential may continue working, and the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission halts all operations for the duration of the shutdown.
EPA has implemented its contingency plan, resulting in a significant reduction in operations. Approximately 90 percent of EPA staff have been furloughed, leaving around 1,700 personnel to continue essential functions, including emergency response operations, law enforcement, criminal investigations, maintenance of critical laboratory assets, and Superfund site work only if halting it poses an imminent threat to human life.
Most routine EPA functions have been suspended (like issuing permits and regulations). The agency has also paused work on climate-related regulations and restructuring efforts unless deemed essential or funded through exempted sources (e.g., Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act or specific fee-based programs).
The EEOC, which investigates discrimination claims, is closed during the shutdown. The agency won’t be responding to inquiries during this time, but a limited number of services will still be available. If employees want to file a discrimination charge, they should be aware that time limits for filing a charge won’t be extended due to the shutdown.
Additional information on filing new charges, the status of pending charges, or other existing business with the EEOC, etc., will likely be delayed. During the shutdown, information on the EEOC website won’t be updated. In addition, transactions submitted via the website won’t be processed, and EEOC staff won’t be able to respond to requests or questions submitted to the EEOC, including those submitted by email or through its website, until the shutdown is over.
Members of the public who call the EEOC during the government shutdown will be able to access the pre-recorded information available on the EEOC's Interactive Voice Response System, but EEOC staff will not be available to assist them. Email inquiries sent to the agency will be monitored for urgent matters but generally not addressed during the shutdown.
NLRB offices are closed during the shutdown, and hearings are postponed. Because documents may not be filed on the NLRB website during the shutdown, due dates for filing documents will be extended.
As the 6-month statute of limitations for filing unfair labor practice charges remains in effect, the agency recommends mailing or faxing a copy of the charge to the regional office during the shutdown.
The DOL is also shut down, except for activities such as those needed to protect life and property. All regulatory work has ceased, including the final rules on independent contractors and joint employers.
The Wage and Hour Division (WHD), which enforces laws such as the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Family and Medical Leave Act, dropped from 1,270 employees to 7. Employees won’t be able to file claims under such laws.
The agency will monitor and respond to child labor investigations and will pursue and address legal cases or investigations in jeopardy of being lost due to a statute of limitations or as otherwise ordered by the court. It will also continue to process certain benefits payments and support federal and state unemployment programs.
The Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA) generally stopped its research activities, audits, compliance assistance, and IT support.
The Veterans’ Employment and Training Service (VETS) stopped conducting investigations of the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act.
Employers must continue to use the Form I-9 during the shutdown to verify that an employee is eligible to work in the United States. The form must be completed within 3 business days after the employee’s first day of employment.
The form may be downloaded from the USCIS website. The agency expects to retain the majority of its employees during the shutdown.
Employers who use the online E-Verify system to confirm an employee’s eligibility to work in the United States may experience a system shutdown, however. In the event of an E-Verify shutdown, employers won’t be able to create E-Verify cases, run reports, or resolve tentative non-confirmations.
E-Verify employers should continue to complete a Form I-9 for each new employee. After the shutdown ends and the E-Verify system is operational, employers should create E-Verify cases for employees who were hired when the website was not available.
In the event of an E-Verify system shutdown, it’s likely that the USCIS will extend deadlines for creating E-Verify cases and resolving tentative non-confirmations. The agency is expected to provide further guidance.
Federal contractors and government employees from shut-down agencies are either furloughed — prohibited from work and unpaid — or required to work without pay if their roles are deemed essential to public safety.
Payments to companies with a federal contract may be delayed, and they may receive a stop-work order. Contracts will not be issued or extended during the shutdown.
The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs website is not being updated during the shutdown.
Just like blueprints, hard hats, and scaffolding, permits are synonymous with construction. Most businesses have to get permits before breaking ground on a project. However, recent federal guidance on preconstruction permits for air emissions indicates that some construction activities may be able to start without a permit.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires businesses to obtain a preconstruction permit for a new facility or major modifications to an existing facility before starting construction. It ensures that new or modified facilities will be able to comply with air emissions requirements. In September 2025, the agency published guidance (in the form of a response letter), determining that a company may start construction activities on parts of a new facility unrelated to air emissions before obtaining a permit.
Let’s take a look at the preconstruction permit regulations, the facts of the case in the guidance, and EPA’s plans to clarify which construction activities can begin before obtaining a preconstruction permit.
Under the New Source Review (NSR) regulations (40 CFR Part 51 Subpart I and Part 52 Subpart A), businesses that build a new facility or make major modifications to an existing one have to obtain a preconstruction permit to “begin actual construction.” EPA defines “begin actual construction” as “physical on-site construction activities on an emissions unit which are of a permanent nature.” It covers activities including (but not limited to) installing building supports and foundations, laying underground pipework, and constructing permanent storage structures.
There are three types of preconstruction permits: Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permits, nonattainment NSR permits, and minor source permits. The permits define:
It’s important to note that most preconstruction permits are issued at the state or local levels. The requirements must be at least as stringent as EPA’s.
A county air quality district in Arizona asked EPA to assess whether it may allow a company to start the first phase of construction on a semiconductor manufacturing facility before obtaining an NSR permit if no emissions units are involved.
EPA answered the request with TSMC Arizona Begin Actual Construction — EPA Response Letter (September 2, 2025) and published the letter as new guidance.
Facts of the case
The company builds its facilities in three phases and doesn’t install the semiconductor manufacturing equipment until all phases are complete.
The first phase of construction consists of building the core and shell of the facility, which includes the foundation, a steel superstructure, and external walls. The building will eventually house emissions units (semiconductor manufacturing equipment). However, the company stated that the first phase of construction doesn’t involve any air pollution control devices, emissions units, or foundations for emissions units.
The county air quality district agreed that if a structure contains no emissions unit, it’s not subject to NSR permitting because it doesn’t emit or have the potential to emit pollutants.
EPA response to the case
In the September 2025 response letter, EPA recognized that the definition of “begin actual construction” prohibits on-site construction of an emissions unit without a permit, but it doesn’t prohibit on-site construction of the parts of a facility that don’t qualify as an emissions unit.
The agency determined that the county air quality district may allow the company to start the first phase of construction (even if it’s of a permanent nature) before it obtains an NSR permit as long as it doesn’t involve construction on an emissions unit.
The agency will conduct rulemaking to clarify what construction activities need an NSR permit and what construction activities can proceed without one. It plans to amend the NSR regulations in 2026 by:
Until then, EPA will address preconstruction permitting issues on a case-by-case basis.
If you’re planning to build a new facility or make a major modification to one, consider these tips to help you comply with the NSR regulations:
Key to remember: EPA plans to conduct rulemaking to help distinguish which construction activities need a preconstruction permit for air emissions and which activities don’t.
A stunning 17-minute video from the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) animates the turn of events at a Texas terminal facility over six years ago. A broken pump led to a massive fire and significant environmental damage. Despite the process weaknesses at the facility, the video underscores a breach in OSHA and EPA regulations that CSB warns may lead to other incidents in the U.S.
Picture an 80,000-barrel aboveground storage tank. On March 17, 2019, the circulation pump on the tank failed, allowing the release of a flammable butane-enriched naphtha blend. The release was undetected, as vapor accumulated in the area for 30 minutes. The vapor then ignited, resulting in a large-scale fire that spread to 14 other tanks. Fire crews were unable to extinguish it for three days. Black smoke cascaded into the community that was sheltering in place.
Then the petrochemicals, firefighting foams, and contaminated water broke past the secondary containment wall. An estimated 500,000 barrels of the materials then entered an adjacent bayou and reached a shipping channel contaminating a seven-mile stretch.
The CSB investigation found technical failures. The video identifies three important but missing things:
Outdated tank farm design was also a factor. Tanks were spaced close together and did not have subdivided containment systems.
Despite the process issues, regulatory shortfalls played a prominent role in the board’s findings. CSB Chairperson Steve Owens remarks, “A serious gap in federal regulations also contributed to the severity of this event.”
The CSB video, "Terminal Faiure," points out that 29 CFR 1910.119, the OSHA Process Safety Management (PSM) standard, does not cover all flammable liquids. Those stored in atmospheric tanks and kept below their normal boiling point without chilling or refrigeration are not subject to the standard. This is referred to in industry as the “flammable liquid atmospheric storage tank exemption.” See 1910.119(a)(1)(ii)(B).
The terminal facility company took the position that the storage of the butane-enriched naphtha product in the tank was excluded from PSM coverage. It based this stance on the exemption. According to CSB, had the OSHA PSM standard applied to the tank and its equipment, the terminal facility would have been required to implement a formal PSM system.
That system would have given the company a better chance to identify and control hazards for the tank and its equipment. Had the terminal facility put a comprehensive PSM system in place that effectively identified and controlled the tank/equipment hazards, the company could have prevented this incident, argues CSB.
Unlike the PSM standard, the Risk Management Program (RMP) standard at 40 CFR 68 does not include an exemption for atmospheric storage of flammable liquids. However, CSB highlights that 68.115(b)(2)(i) has a significant loophole. It reads, “[I]f the concentration of the substance is one percent or greater by weight of the mixture, then, for purposes of determining whether a threshold quantity is present at the stationary source, the entire weight of the mixture shall be treated as the regulated substance unless the owner or operator can demonstrate that the mixture itself does not have a National Fire Protection Association [NFPA] flammability hazard rating of 4.”
The terminal facility determined that the butane-enriched naphtha product contained in the tank was not subject to RMP because it was an NFPA-3a rated material. While the CSB is not validating the terminal’s NFPA “3” finding, the board speculates that had the EPA RMP standard applied to the tank and its pump, this incident likely would not have occurred.
In the recently released video, CSB recommends that:
Owens emphasizes, “We believe that our recommendations, particularly to OSHA and EPA, to expand regulatory oversight of these kinds of chemicals and facilities will help ensure that a similar incident does not occur in the future.”
A new CSB video recounts the events involved in a massive storage tank fire. At the same time, the video warns of blind spots in OSHA PSM and EPA RMP regulations that may lead to other incidents in the U.S.
In 2025, sweeping changes to waste laws across the U.S. are forcing companies to rethink packaging, disposal, and reporting practices. From statewide bans on single-use plastics to expanded Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) programs and chemical recycling reclassification, these updates carry significant compliance implications for corporate environmental health and safety (EHS) teams.
Several states have enacted new bans on polystyrene foam containers, plastic straws, and produce bags:
Compliance tip: Audit your packaging inventory and supplier certifications. Ensure alternatives meet compostability or recyclability standards.
EPR laws now apply in several states. These laws require companies to help pay for recycling and report packaging data:
Compliance tip: Register with your state’s PRO, submit packaging data, and prepare for fee schedules. Track deadlines and exemptions closely.
States like Texas and Pennsylvania now classify chemical recycling as manufacturing, not waste management. This shift encourages investment but also changes permitting and emissions reporting obligations.
Compliance tip: If your facility uses or contracts chemical recycling, review air and water permits. Ensure alignment with manufacturing regulations.
More states are banning PFAS in packaging, cookware, and more:
Compliance tip: Update product Safety Data Sheets and conduct PFAS audits. Prepare for new reporting under TSCA Section 8(a)(7), including data on manufacture, use, and disposal.
States are setting zero-waste goals and requiring composting:
Compliance tip: Evaluate organics diversion programs and infrastructure. Consider partnerships with composting facilities.
Key to remember: Staying compliant in 2025 means more than avoiding fines. EHS teams must lead efforts to meet new waste laws and support sustainability goals.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a significant proposed rule on September 16, 2025. The agency proposes to eliminate the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) requirements for nearly all regulated entities except for petroleum and natural gas systems. EPA also plans to suspend compliance requirements for covered facilities until reporting year (RY) 2034.
Further, the proposed rule notes that Congress amended the Clean Air Act in July 2025 to start the Waste Emissions Charge (WEC) program in 2034. The changes essentially reinstate the WEC program that was previously disapproved.
The GHGRP requires covered entities to submit annual reports of GHG emissions. The regulation applies to 47 source categories, including:
What are the possible changes?
EPA proposes to:
How could this impact facilities?
If finalized, EPA’s proposed rule would have major effects:
About the WEC program
Amendments to Section 136 of the Clean Air Act in 2022 required EPA to start collecting a WEC from facilities in the Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems source category (except those in the natural gas distribution industry segment) that exceed waste emissions thresholds.
In March 2025, a joint congressional resolution disapproved the regulation implementing the WEC program, making the rule ineffective. Further, EPA issued a final rule in May 2025 that removed the WEC regulations from the Code of Federal Regulations.
However, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (signed into law in July 2025) amended Section 136(g) of the Clean Air Act to begin imposing and collecting a WEC from the Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems source category (except for natural gas distributors) for emissions reported for calendar year 2034 and later.
How can I participate in the rulemaking?
You can register for and attend EPA’s virtual public hearing for the proposed rule on October 1, 2025. Additionally, you may submit public comments on the proposed rule (Docket Id. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2025-0186) through November 3, 2025.
Key to remember: EPA proposes to eliminate the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program requirements for all source categories except the petroleum and natural gas systems category and to suspend compliance obligations until 2034.
As we continue to navigate the evolving landscape of regulatory changes, one truth remains constant: environmental compliance isn’t just a regulatory requirement; it must be a priority for leadership. Every facility, regardless of size or sector, can lead by example, not only through innovation but also through the lessons learned from challenges.
One such lesson came from a chemical manufacturing facility we worked with in the Midwest. They experienced a near-miss incident involving a wastewater neutralization tank. During a routine transfer, an operator noticed a sudden pH spike in the effluent stream. Quick thinking and immediate shutdown procedures prevented a potential discharge violation. Upon investigation, they discovered that a mislabeled tote of caustic solution was mistakenly added to the neutralization system.
The root causes? There was a breakdown in labeling protocols and a lack of crosschecking during chemical transfers. The facility responded swiftly by:
Since then, the facility has reported zero chemical handling errors and has shared the lessons across the corporate network.
This incident serves as a powerful reminder that environmental compliance isn’t just about systems and sensors. It’s about people, processes, and a culture of vigilance. Mistakes can happen, but how we respond defines our commitment to continuous improvement.
We encourage you to reflect on your own facility’s “teachable moments.” Share them. Learn from them. Every lesson learned is a step toward a safer and more compliant operation.
The date of December 1 often evokes thoughts of colder weather, the start of the Christmas season, and … waste manifests?! That’s certainly the case this year for hazardous waste handlers. On December 1, 2025, the rest of the Third Rule’s compliance requirements for electronic manifests take effect.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) final Third Rule, established under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), amends the Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System (e-Manifest system) standards. Many of the requirements began in January 2025. The Third Rule’s remaining regulatory changes start on December 1, 2025. Are you prepared to comply?
Use this checklist to help you ensure that your business is set to comply with the rest of the Third Rule’s requirements that take effect in December.
Under the Third Rule, EPA replaced the 5-copy paper manifests and continuation sheets with 4-copy paper manifests (EPA Form 8700-22) and continuation sheets (EPA Form 8700-22A). However, the agency allows hazardous waste handlers to continue using the 5-copy paper forms until further notice. EPA will provide a 90-day notice before it intends to stop accepting the 5-copy forms.
Note: At the time of the publication of this article, EPA has not yet given any authorized printer approval to print the new 4-copy manifest forms. As an authorized printer of the hazardous waste manifest forms, J. J. Keller & Associates, Inc. is working closely with EPA for approval to print the new 4-copy forms.
Users need Certifier permission on the e-Manifest module or Site Manager permission on the RCRA Information (RCRAInfo) Industry Application to submit manifests.
Compliance check:
☑ Begin to use the 4-copy manifests and continuation sheets as soon as they’re made available.
☑ Ensure that at least one user has Certifier or Site Manager permission.
As of December 1, 2025, domestic hazardous waste exporters must submit all export manifests and continuation sheets (paper and electronic) to the e-Manifest system and pay the associated user fees.
An exporter is considered any entity that originates a manifest to export a hazardous waste shipment. This includes generators; transporters; treatment, storage, and disposal facilities; and recognized traders.
EPA will invoice exporters monthly for the manifest activities conducted during the previous month. The agency applies a fee per manifest, and the amount varies based on the type of submission (scanned image upload, data and image upload, or fully/hybrid electronic manifest).
Only individuals with Site Manager permission on RCRAInfo can pay manifest fees.
Compliance check:
☑ Prepare to use the e-Manifest system for export manifests and pay user fees.
☑ Verify that at least one person has Site Manager permission.
The Third Rule requires hazardous waste handlers to submit all Discrepancy, Exception, and Unmanifested Waste Reports to the e-Manifest system starting on December 1, 2025.
Generators submit Exception Reports, and receiving facilities submit Discrepancy and Unmanifested Waste Reports. No fees apply.
To submit the manifest-related reports to the e-Manifest system, users require Certifier permission for the module.
Compliance check:
☑ Be ready to submit manifest-related reports to the e-Manifest system.
☑ Confirm that at least one user has Certifier permission.
Beginning on December 1, 2025, entities that transport hazardous waste export shipments out of the U.S. (i.e., last transporters) have to send a signed copy of the manifest and continuation sheet to the exporter instead of the generator.
Further, the Third Rule clarifies that starting on December 1, 2025, transporters can use the e-Manifest system to export hazardous waste and send exporters copies of the signed manifest and continuation sheet. Transporters planning to do so need to set up a RCRAInfo account to use the e-Manifest system and assign Certifier permission to the user(s) who will submit the manifests.
Compliance check:
☑ Plan to send signed copies of the manifest and continuation sheet to the exporter.
☑ If applicable, register an account on RCRAInfo, and ensure at least one user has Certifier permission.
EPA has multiple resources to help regulated hazardous waste handlers comply with e-Manifest regulations, including the upcoming Third Rule’s requirements that take effect on December 1, 2025. Consider using the resources the agency provides on “The Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest (e-Manifest) System” website, such as:
The compliance checklist and e-Manifest resources can help you ensure that your facility will be ready to comply with the rest of the Third Rule’s requirements by December.
Key to remember: The remaining e-Manifest Third Rule requirements take effect on December 1, 2025. Facilities should confirm that they’re prepared to comply.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that it will accept 5-copy paper manifest forms from entities regulated by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous waste manifest program until further notice.
What changed?
The final Third Rule (effective on January 22, 2025) made multiple changes to the hazardous waste manifest regulations, one of which requires regulated entities to use 4-copy manifests (EPA Form 8700-22) and continuation sheets (EPA Form 8700-22A) instead of the previous 5-copy forms.
Initially, EPA stated that it would no longer accept 5-copy forms starting on December 1, 2025. However, the agency has removed the limit and will accept the 5-copy forms until further notice. Additionally, EPA will give a 90-day notice before the agency plans to stop accepting the 5-copy forms.
As an authorized printer of the hazardous waste manifest forms, J. J. Keller & Associates, Inc. is working closely with EPA for approval to print the new 4-copy forms. At the time of publication of this news article, the federal agency hasn’t yet approved any authorized printer to print the new forms.
Exporter and importer requirements
Hazardous waste exporters and importers that use the 5-copy manifest forms are required to put the consent numbers for their wastes in the Special Handling Instructions and Additional Information Field (Item 14) of the 5-copy manifest. If applicable, exporters must also enter their EPA Identification (ID) numbers in Item 14. The agency recommends using this format: “Exporter EPA ID #AAANNNNNNNNN."
Please note that we will monitor any additional changes that result from EPA's decision to continue accepting 5-copy paper manifest forms and provide updates accordingly.
Key to remember: EPA will accept 5-copy manifests and continuation sheets beyond the initial deadline of December 1, 2025, until further notice.
Starting January 1, 2026, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will enforce sweeping changes under the American Innovation and Manufacturing (AIM) Act, targeting the use and management of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs)—potent greenhouse gases used in refrigeration, air conditioning, and fire suppression.
These rules apply to all businesses with equipment containing 15 pounds or more of refrigerant with a Global Warming Potential (GWP) over 53, including but not limited to grocery stores, refrigerated transport fleets, repair shops, and small businesses.
1. Leak detection and repair
2. Refrigerant reclamation
3. Recordkeeping and reporting
4. Disposal and recycling
Grocery retailers
Refrigerated transport
Repair shops
All end users: what you must do now
States like California, Washington, and New York are implementing stricter refrigerant rules that may exceed federal AIM Act standards. Businesses operating across state lines must monitor local regulations and prepare for additional reporting and inspections.
Key to remember: If your business uses refrigerants, the AIM Act likely applies to you. Start preparing now to avoid penalties and ensure compliance by 2026.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published the Spring 2025 Semiannual Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions on September 4, 2025. The agenda outlines the agency’s upcoming regulatory actions and their status in the rulemaking process.
EPA has major updates on the docket, such as:
Additionally, the agency intends to address per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) across multiple media. For example, EPA plans to:
This article highlights some of the major rules we’re monitoring closely. You can review the entire agenda to learn about all the rulemakings on EPA’s docket. Please note that the agenda dates are tentative, indicating when the agency seeks to publish the rulemakings in the Federal Register.
| Final Rule Stage | |
| Projected publication date | Title |
| December 2025 | Phasedown of Hydrofluorocarbons: Reconsideration of Certain Regulatory Requirements Under the Technology Transitions Provisions of the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act of 2020 |
| January 2026 | Accidental Release Prevention Requirements: Risk Management Programs Under the Clean Air Act; Common Sense Approach to Chemical Accident Prevention |
| February 2026 | Addition of Certain Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) to the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) |
| February 2026 | Initial Air Quality Designations for the 2024 Revised Primary Annual Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) |
| April 2026 | Listing of Specific PFAS as Hazardous Constituents |
| Proposed Rule Stage | |
| Projected publication date of notice of proposed rulemaking | |
| October 2025 | Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Oil and Gas Extraction Category (40 CFR 435 Subpart E) |
| October 2025 | New Source Performance Standards for the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry |
| November 2025 | Additional Reconsideration of Standards of Performance for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources and Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil and Natural Gas Sector Climate Review |
| November 2025 | PFAS Requirements in NPDES Permit Applications |
| November 2025 | Steam Electric Effluent Limitations Guideline Reconsideration Rule |
| December 2025 | Updates to the RCRA Hazardous Waste Regulations and Related Technical Corrections — Permitting Updates Rule |
| January 2026 | Paper Manifest Sunset Rule; Modification of the Hazardous Waste Manifest System |
| January 2026 | Revision to “Begin Actual Construction” in the New Source Review Preconstruction Permitting Program |
| April 2026 | Reconsideration of National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Gasoline Distribution Technology Reviews and New Source Performance Standards Review for Bulk Gasoline Terminals |
| May 2026 | Formaldehyde; Regulation Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) |
| Pre-Rule Stage | |
| Projected publication date or other action | Title |
| September 2025 (advanced notice of proposed rulemaking) | Visibility Protection: Regional Haze State Plan Requirements Rule Revision |
| December 2025 (end review) | National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Brick and Structural Clay Products Manufacturing; and Clay Ceramics Manufacturing |
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 past month!
OSHA extended the comment period for multiple proposed rules it published on July 1. Stakeholders now have an extra 60 days, until November 1, to comment. Impacted rules include those for respiratory protection, construction illumination, COVID-19, and the General Duty Clause.
OSHA is expanding its Voluntary Protection Programs to help employers develop strong safety programs and lower injury rates. To participate, employers must submit an application to OSHA and undergo an onsite evaluation by a team of safety and health professionals.
Following a series of recent trench collapses, OSHA urges employers to take steps to protect workers. Trench collapses can be prevented by sloping or benching trench walls at an angle, shoring trench walls with supports, and shielding walls with trench boxes. More information can be found on OSHA’s website.
The Mine Safety and Health Administration launched a webpage for its new Compliance Assistance in Safety and Health, or CASH, program. The agency anticipates a surge in domestic mining productivity and seeks to proactively provide miners and mine operators with compliance assistance materials.
Turning to environmental news, EPA proposes challenges to California’s Clean Truck Check program. The program aims to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides and particulate matter for heavy-duty vehicles. EPA supports the regulation as it applies to California-registered vehicles but disapproves the regulation as it applies to out of state and out of country vehicles. Stakeholders have until September 25 to comment on the proposal.
On August 14, EPA released the July 2025 nonconfidential TSCA Inventory of chemical substances manufactured, processed, or imported in the U.S. The Inventory contains over 86 thousand chemicals, nearly half of which are in active use. The next inventory update is planned for late 2026.
And finally, EPA proposes to rescind the 2009 Endangerment Finding and repeal greenhouse gas emissions for new motor vehicles and vehicle engines. The agency will accept comments on the proposal through September 15.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!

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 the Spring 2025 Semiannual Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions on September 4, 2025. The agenda outlines the agency’s upcoming regulatory actions and their status in the rulemaking process.
EPA has major updates on the docket, such as:
Additionally, the agency intends to address per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) across multiple media. For example, EPA plans to:
This article highlights some of the major rules we’re monitoring closely. You can review the entire agenda to learn about all the rulemakings on EPA’s docket. Please note that the agenda dates are tentative, indicating when the agency seeks to publish the rulemakings in the Federal Register.
| Final Rule Stage | |
| Projected publication date | Title |
| December 2025 | Phasedown of Hydrofluorocarbons: Reconsideration of Certain Regulatory Requirements Under the Technology Transitions Provisions of the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act of 2020 |
| January 2026 | Accidental Release Prevention Requirements: Risk Management Programs Under the Clean Air Act; Common Sense Approach to Chemical Accident Prevention |
| February 2026 | Addition of Certain Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) to the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) |
| February 2026 | Initial Air Quality Designations for the 2024 Revised Primary Annual Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) |
| April 2026 | Listing of Specific PFAS as Hazardous Constituents |
| Proposed Rule Stage | |
| Projected publication date of notice of proposed rulemaking | |
| October 2025 | Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Oil and Gas Extraction Category (40 CFR 435 Subpart E) |
| October 2025 | New Source Performance Standards for the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturing Industry |
| November 2025 | Additional Reconsideration of Standards of Performance for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources and Emissions Guidelines for Existing Sources: Oil and Natural Gas Sector Climate Review |
| November 2025 | PFAS Requirements in NPDES Permit Applications |
| November 2025 | Steam Electric Effluent Limitations Guideline Reconsideration Rule |
| December 2025 | Updates to the RCRA Hazardous Waste Regulations and Related Technical Corrections — Permitting Updates Rule |
| January 2026 | Paper Manifest Sunset Rule; Modification of the Hazardous Waste Manifest System |
| January 2026 | Revision to “Begin Actual Construction” in the New Source Review Preconstruction Permitting Program |
| April 2026 | Reconsideration of National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Gasoline Distribution Technology Reviews and New Source Performance Standards Review for Bulk Gasoline Terminals |
| May 2026 | Formaldehyde; Regulation Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) |
| Pre-Rule Stage | |
| Projected publication date or other action | Title |
| September 2025 (advanced notice of proposed rulemaking) | Visibility Protection: Regional Haze State Plan Requirements Rule Revision |
| December 2025 (end review) | National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Brick and Structural Clay Products Manufacturing; and Clay Ceramics Manufacturing |
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed a rule to rescind the 2009 Endangerment Finding and repeal all greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions standards for:
What’s the Endangerment Finding?
In 2009, EPA issued two findings: the Endangerment Finding and the Cause or Contribute Finding, generally referred to as the 2009 Endangerment Finding. The agency uses the findings as the foundation for statutory authority to regulate GHG emissions under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act. In other words, the 2009 Endangerment Finding is the legal basis the agency uses to regulate GHG emissions from new motor vehicles and vehicle engines.
Under the 2009 Endangerment Finding, EPA regulates new motor vehicles and vehicle engines through:
How does this impact vehicle regulations?
If EPA rescinds the 2009 Endangerment Finding, it will no longer have the statutory authority to regulate emissions from new motor vehicles and vehicle engines. As a result, EPA would remove all GHG emissions regulations that apply to new motor vehicle and vehicle engine manufacturers in 40 CFR:
Affected compliance requirements include:
Manufacturers would no longer have to measure, control, or report GHG emissions for any vehicle or vehicle engine, including previously manufactured model years.
What won’t change?
The proposed rule doesn’t affect:
What’s next?
EPA will accept public comments on the rule through September 15, 2025. Additionally, the agency will hold a virtual public hearing on August 19 and 20, 2025. EPA will use the feedback to inform how it will proceed in the rulemaking process.
Key to remember: EPA has proposed a rule to rescind the 2009 Endangerment Finding and repeal GHG emissions standards for new motor vehicles and vehicle engines.
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.
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.
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 in the last month!
On October 7th, David Keeling was confirmed by the Senate as OSHA’s new Assistant Secretary of Labor. During his confirmation hearing, Keeling stated that “nothing is more beneficial than collaboration between employers and employees” and shared his three main goals for the agency. These are modernization in regulatory oversight and rulemaking, expanding OSHA’s cooperation and collaboration efforts, and transforming OSHA’s enforcement.
In a landmark opinion, an appeals court offers a framework to revive federal rulemakings, such as OSHA’s Ergonomics Program rule. The rule was previously struck down by the Congressional Review Act in 2001. The latest court decision loosens the grip that the Act has had for almost 25 years. This makes it feasible for agencies like OSHA, EPA, and others to give long-gone rules a second chance. It gives OSHA a path to publish a narrow or different ergonomics rule in the future.
OSHA quietly archived a memo from 2024 that had suggested its enforcement offices may refrain from grouping violations where those offenses are separate and distinct. In some cases, ungrouping raises the total penalty for an inspection. An OSHA spokesperson said the memo was determined to be unnecessary since agency policy in its Field Operations Manual provides clear guidance to OSHA field staff on when citation item grouping may be considered.
The NFPA’s Fire Prevention Week kicked off October 5th with a theme of lithium-ion battery safety in the home. Reports of fires and explosions involving lithium-ion batteries have been on the rise. NFPA provides information and guidance on how to safely use, handle, and recycle them.
And finally, turning to environmental news, the California Air Resources Board submitted comments opposing EPA’s proposal to overturn its 2009 Endangerment Finding. The Endangerment Finding has guided federal actions to address greenhouse gas pollution. CARB’s comments note that EPA’s proposal ignores more than 15 years of its own research and regulations and emphasizes that the agency is obligated to address greenhouse gas emissions and adopt strong standards to reduce them. EPA received over 15 thousand comments on its proposal.
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!
Under a new Executive Order, federal agencies must eliminate 10 regulations for each new one they introduce. This applies to all new rules, regulations, or guidance issued by government agencies such as the Department of Labor, which includes OSHA, and the Environmental Protection Agency.
A new OSHA fact sheet outlines employee rights and protections when filing a whistleblower complaint. Employers may not retaliate against employees who exercise their rights under the Occupational Safety and Health Act.
OSHA will not cite employers for COVID-19 recordkeeping violations under its Healthcare Emergency Temporary Standard. These regulations are specific to healthcare settings. The provisions remain in effect, but until further notice, OSHA will not enforce them.
New guidance from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health recommends that employers use individual, quantitative fit-testing for hearing protection. This helps evaluate how well workers’ hearing protection reduces noise levels and ensures a proper fit.
And finally, turning to environmental news, states across the country continue to consider and implement regulations related to PFAS. These “forever chemicals” are long-lasting chemicals that may pose risks to human and environmental health. A recent study anticipates that more than half of the states in the U.S. are likely to consider PFAS-related policies this year.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
What’s the formula for success when it comes to DOT drug and alcohol testing? Part 40 is your constant, agency rules are your variables, and compliance is the sum. This is true whether you’re subject to highway, rail, air, pipeline, transit, or maritime testing requirements.
If your operation spans multiple agencies, don’t assume A = B when it comes to DOT drug and alcohol testing. Use the following to aid in balancing your compliance equation.
Several constants are built into 49 CFR Part 40, which contains the procedures for drug and alcohol testing of transportation workers. These constants ensure consistency, fairness, and privacy.
To sum up Part 40, it specifies:
To create this uniformity between modes, Part 40 is referenced by all agencies subject to DOT testing:
This means each covered employee will experience the same procedures no matter what agency they operate under, including specimen collection, lab analysis, handling of drug test results, and alcohol testing procedures. Those who violate DOT testing rules are subject to the same evaluation, treatment, and testing requirements.
Part 40 also requires employers to investigate the DOT drug and alcohol history of those applying to or transferring into a safety-sensitive position.
In addition to Part 40, DOT employers and employees must factor in agency-specific rules. For example, FMCSA-regulated employers must follow 49 CFR Part 382, while PHMSA-regulated employers follow 49 CFR Part 199.
Agency rules lay out:
When an agency rule conflicts with Part 40, the company must go with the more stringent of the two. For example, FMCSA requires employers to investigate the past three years of DOT testing history, while Part 40 requires just two. So, FMCSA-regulated employers must pursue three years.
And, of course, many agency-specific requirements must be followed. For instance:
When the same employer is subject to testing for more than one DOT mode, it’s important that the two remain separate. This means each program must have its own chain of custody forms, alcohol testing forms, lab accounts, and so forth.
Forms. When an employee is sent to a clinic, these dual-mode employers must ensure the clinic personnel know which testing form to use and the appropriate agency box to check. This is especially important when a violation needs to be reported to the Clearinghouse. The MRO will only report those checked as FMCSA.
Policies. Dual-mode employers must have a testing policy for each agency. A single policy does not communicate the modal-specific requirements and definitions. An investigator only wants to see what applies to their agency.
Random testing. If an employer is subject to more than one DOT agency for testing, they have the option of creating separate selections or combining them into a single pool (similar to a consortium). They would test at the highest minimum testing rate represented
Employees who are subject to more than one mode under the same employer must be in both agency programs.
These employees are subject to all aspects of each respective agency (e.g., background checks, issuance of each policy, post-accident testing, etc.).
The only exception is random testing. These employees are placed in the random pool for the agency where they perform at least 51 percent of their job functions.
Key to remember: Make sure your DOT testing program adds up. Part 40 plus your agency-specific rules equals total compliance.
Winter driving can be stressful for anyone. The season can be overwhelming whether you’re dealing with a brand-new commercial driver experiencing their very first winter or a veteran driver with years under their belt.
Whether experienced or not, it never hurts to revisit winter driving regulations and best practices.
When trip planning during the winter months, it’s extra important to check the weather conditions for the day and ensure that your drivers won’t be driving into a winter storm. If there’s any adverse weather on the radar, drivers should be creating a plan that includes:
Additionally, drivers should have extra supplies during the wintertime in case they do end up being stranded. Examples of items to keep on hand include warm clothing, blankets, nonperishable foods, water bottles, a shovel, candles, and flashlights.
Tire chain requirements can start as early as September and last through May in some states. Check on the chain laws in each state in which you operate, and ensure your drivers are compliant with the local regulations. To do this, verify that drivers who need tire chains have them and know how to use them.
Slippery conditions lead to increased chances of skids. There are a few things you can do to minimize the risk of skids and jackknife incidents.
According to the hours-of-service adverse-conditions exception under 395.1(b), CMV drivers are permitted to exceed the normal driving and on-duty limits when they encounter unexpected adverse weather or traffic conditions. This exemption allows drivers to exceed the 10- or 11-hour driving limit and the 14- or 15-hour duty limit by up to 2 hours. However, this exemption only applies if there are unforeseen circumstances that the driver could not have known prior to the beginning of their trip.
Make sure your drivers, dispatchers, and leaders understand the adverse driving conditions of exemption, as well as when it can and cannot be used.
Key to remember: The safety of your drivers and those they share the roads with should be top priority this winter. Make sure they know and understand the challenges of winter driving.
Fleet safety is more than meeting regulatory requirements—it’s about creating a culture where safety is an unwavering value. Compliance is the baseline, not the finish line. To achieve best-in-class results, carriers must go beyond regulations and invest in proactive strategies that protect drivers, reduce risk, and strengthen operational performance.
A strong safety culture begins with leadership buy-in and accountability for a safe operation across all departments.
Drivers want to work for companies that prioritize their well-being, and that starts with clear policies, consistent enforcement, and a shared commitment to safety. Progressive discipline policies, equitable treatment, and empowering drivers to refuse unsafe tasks without fear of retaliation are essential steps.
Legal is not always safe. Carriers must adopt practices that exceed minimum standards to truly safeguard their workforce.
Keeping up with Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) is critical, but carriers should view compliance as the foundation—not the goal. Outdated policies and inadequate training can expose companies to litigation and reputational damage.
Regularly review and update safety manuals, train staff before implementing changes, and document every step. Policies should reflect real-world operations and be adaptable as technology and regulations evolve.
Video-based coaching has become a cornerstone of modern fleet safety programs. Dash cams paired with corrective-action training can significantly reduce crashes and violations. A study by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute found that when carriers use cameras for behavior management, they can achieve up to a 35 percent reduction in injury crashes and 20 percent reduction in fatal crashes.
Beyond compliance, these tools help exonerate drivers in litigation and provide actionable insights for coaching. However, technology should complement—not replace—human interaction. Artificial intelligence (AI)-powered alerts can flag risky behaviors, but personal engagement remains key to building trust and improving performance.
Change management is critical when introducing new safety initiatives. Drivers need to understand the “why” behind changes and feel their input matters. Strategies include town hall meetings, open feedback channels, and visible leadership support.
Recognition programs also play a vital role in sustaining engagement. Scorecards, gamification, and public acknowledgment of safe behaviors foster a competitive spirit and reinforce positive habits. When drivers see that safety leads to better pay and recognition, buy-in becomes easier.
Industry-leading safety programs integrate some or all the following best practices:
Taking these steps lowers risk and improves Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) scores—key factors that drive profitability, improve driver retention, and make hiring easier. Strong CSA scores positively influence insurance rates and they matter to drivers when choosing where to work.
Keys to remember: Safety is not a one-time initiative, it’s a continuous journey. Carriers that invest in culture, technology, and driver engagement will not only meet regulatory standards but also create safer roads, stronger teams, and a more resilient business.
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.
A “yard move” (YM) is an electronic logging device (ELD) special driving category, which carriers have the option to authorize. Putting an ELD in the YM status can give a yard or road driver added flexibility or another avenue for falsification.
To avoid violations and increased risk, ensure that your drivers, dispatchers, and safety personnel know the answers to these frequently asked questions (FAQs).
1. What falls under the definition of a “yard”?
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) does not officially define a yard. Still, it is generally accepted an area that is not open to public travel due to being restricted by signs or gates.
A carrier’s terminal, a customer’s facility, or a rail yard can be a yard if the area cannot be defined as a highway per 390.5. A driver may also cross a public road to reach another part of private property under yard-move time if traffic controls (i.e., flagger) for the public are in place.
Malls, truck stops, and parking lots the public can access, however, are all examples of places that cannot be a yard for ELD and on-duty (not driving) purposes.
2. Is a yard driver subject to federal regulations?
Commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) are federally regulated at 10,001 pounds or greater — rated or actual, alone or in combination with a trailer. State definitions of a CMV vary.
Suppose a yard truck met the definition of a CMV and operates in an area open to public travel in interstate commerce. In that case, the yard driver must be qualified under Part 391 and is subject to all other applicable federal regulations. If the yard truck and trailer meet the definition of a CDL vehicle in 383.5 as most do, the driver is also subject to drug and alcohol testing and CDL requirements.
Yard drivers might not be required by their carrier to use an ELD to create a log. They are stillsubject to the hours-of-service limits in 395.3 and the same rules for on-duty (not driving) time in a yard or on-duty driving (Line-3) on a public roadway.
A carrier may allow the use of a time record instead of an ELD to track a yard driver’s time under the 150 air-mile exception in 395.1(e). If the yard driver uses an ELD, the carrier can designate the driver as “Exempt” (exempt from grid logs only) in the ELD back-office system.
3. How is a yard move recorded on an ELD?
YM time is visible in the ELD grid as driving time with a dashed or dotted line. Before using YM time, the driver must select the “YM” special driving category and annotate the ELD record describing the reason for the activity.
According to federal hours-of-service rules, a driver cannot use “Line-3” or on-duty driving time after 14 consecutive hours from the start of on-duty time for the day. However, yard moves are recorded as “Line-4 time” or on-duty not (driving) time. Therefore, YM time doesn’t stop the 14-hour clock, but can be appropriately used beyond the 14-hour or other driving limits.
4. Does a yard move count toward the 30-minute break from eight total hours of on-duty driving?
Yes. Because a YM is on-duty (not driving), it counts toward the 30-consecutive minute break from on-duty driving required after eight total hours of on-duty driving. (see 395.3(a)(3))However, if a driver is involved in a fatigue-related crash, driving in a yard to satisfy a break from driving requirement will not look prudent to a jury.
5. What if a driver forgets to change the driving status, and the ELD remains in YM-status after they leave the yard?
The time will be incorrectly captured as Yard Move (on-duty yard time rather than on-duty driving time) and could be considered a false log. To address this, the driver should attach a comment to the log explaining the error as soon as safely possible.
The driver’s log must be manually edited to the correct driving time if the ELD system allows the off-yard time to be changed to on-duty driving time. Otherwise, an annotation must be made noting the correct on-duty (not driving) and on-duty driving time.
6. How are yard moves audited?
Verify the location at the time of the YM with the location description or the longitude and latitude data from the ELD or vehicle tracking device. If the driver was not in a yard at the time of the YM, the driver falsified the record.
A driver using a public road in YM status to get fuel or take the truck in for maintenance is considered falsification. If the driver was over the 11-hour driving limit, 14-consecutive on-duty period, or the 60- or 70-hour limit, they now have an out-of-service violation and a false log.
Carriers can define a geo-fence or virtual boundary of the yard if the system allows that feature to indicate a departure from the yard.
Keys to remember:
Carriers must train their team to understand when the Yard Move status or on-duty (not driving) can and can’t be used when operating a CMV. Audit yard moves to ensure this ELD special driving category, or duty status for drivers on time records, is not used to falsify logs.
For truck and bus drivers, having too much to drink can be problematic in several ways — even if the drink is just water.
Staying hydrated is normally a good thing, but drinking too much water can cause a driver’s urine to become so diluted that testing it for drugs becomes difficult. There can be multiple (and legitimate) reasons for dilute urine, but so far this year, over 1,000 drivers have tested positive but dilute, according to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA).
If your medical review officer (MRO) reports that a driver’s urine was dilute, do you know what to do next? The actions you need to take will depend on a few specifics.
If a test result is positive but dilute, you’ll need to treat it the same as a positive test result. You must:
The MRO will report the test result to the Drug & Alcohol Clearinghouse, the same as any other positive test.
| Learn more about Clearinghouse reporting in our ez Explanation! |
For results that are negative but dilute, your actions will depend on the creatinine level (creatinine is a waste product found in urine), as follows:
2 to 5 mg/dL — The MRO will contact you to request an immediate re-collection under direct observation.
Over 5 mg/dL — No retest required. However, you can have a company policy requiring a retest, as long as you communicate it to drivers and enforce it uniformly. If you do retests in this situation, be aware that:
A positive, adulterated, or substituted test result on any retest becomes the result of record, and all the consequences of a drug testing violation apply.
Key to Remember: If a driver’s drug test result comes back as dilute, be sure you know what to do next.
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.
Headlines report that the number of organizations that are downsizing is increasing. When headcount changes, private employers must determine whether they continue to be covered by the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and whether employees are eligible to take leave.
Under the FMLA, all public employers are covered, no matter how many employees they have. Private employers, however, are covered by the FMLA if they have at least 50 employees in the U.S. who have worked at least 20 workweeks in the current or previous calendar year. Coverage doesn’t end the moment employers drop below the 50-employee level. Once employers meet that threshold, they remain covered until they no longer have 50 employees for 20 workweeks in the current or previous calendar year. The 20 workweeks don’t have to be consecutive.
If, for example, Employer A met the threshold on June 1, 2025, but dropped below 50 employees on December 2, 2025, and continued to have fewer than 50 employees throughout 2026, Employer A would continue to be covered in 2026 because it met the coverage criteria for 20 workweeks of the previous calendar year.
As long as employers remain covered by the law, employees are entitled to take FMLA leave for a qualifying reason if they meet three criteria:
Employers must determine whether employees meet the first two criteria based on when the leave will begin. They determine whether employees meet the third criterion based on when the employee gave notice of the need for leave.
Once an employee meets the eligibility criteria for a particular reason, their eligibility remains intact for the duration of the 12-month leave year period.
Employers may not terminate an employee’s leave once it’s begun if the employee count drops below 50. If, for example, Employer A has 60 employees in August, but expects that the number of employees will drop to 40 in December, the employer must grant FMLA leave to an eligible employee who gives notice of the need for leave in August for a period of leave to begin in December.
Key to remember: Downsizing decreases the number of employees, but employers need to understand the nuances of the FMLA regarding employer coverage and employee eligibility.
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.
The U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) on November 13 announced that the annual contribution limits for certain retirement plans will be higher in 2026.
The annual contribution limit for employees participating in what the IRS calls “qualified defined contribution” plans, such as 401(k) and 403(b) plans, will increase to $24,500. This is up from $23,500 in 2025. The IRS calls the $1,000 bump a “cost-of-living" adjustment.
The limit on total employer-plus-employee contributions to defined contribution plans will increase to $72,000 in 2026, up from $70,000 in 2025.
The catch-up contribution limit for employees aged 50 and older who are enrolled in qualified retirement plans will increase to $8,000 from $7,500. However, the super catch-up contribution provision in the SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022, which took effect in 2025, is still in effect. This allows those between the ages of 60 through 63 to contribute $11,250 instead of $8,000 in 2026, unchanged from last year. A catch-up contribution is an added amount that employees aged 50 or older can contribute to their plan beyond the standard annual contribution limit. This helps older workers “catch up” on retirement savings as they approach retirement age.
Employers should share this information with employees of all ages to help them plan financially for the upcoming year, and for the years ahead. This could be done at the same time other benefits information is communicated, since many employers are in the middle of their open enrollment periods. These new IRS limits could also be announced in separate employee communication methods, such as posting fliers around work or on the company intranet.
Key to remember: The IRS increased the amounts employees can contribute to retirement savings accounts in 2026. This information should be shared with employees to help them plan their financial futures.
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.
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.
OSHA’s updated Hazard Communication standard took effect July 19, 2024, and included staggered compliance dates stretching into 2028. The first of these compliance dates is just around the corner.
By January 19, 2026, manufacturers, importers, and distributors evaluating substances must be in compliance with all modified provisions of 29 CFR 1910.1200. (Substance is defined in 1910.1200(c).) Such manufacturers and importers must reclassify aerosols, desensitized explosives, and flammable gases under the new criteria in Appendix B to 1910.1200 and make corresponding updates to safety data sheets (SDSs) and labels.
In addition, these manufacturers, importers, and distributors must comply with the following changes, as applicable:
Downstream users of substances that are aerosols, desensitized explosives, or flammable gases will start to see updated SDSs and labels on shipped containers of hazardous chemicals (if they haven’t already).
By July 20, 2026, impacted employers, as necessary, must update any alternative (in-house) labeling, update their HazCom training program, and provide additional employee training for newly identified physical, health, or other hazards covered. OSHA says that because the updated HazCom standard contains only limited revisions of the hazard classification rules, it does not anticipate that most employers will need to complete these additional requirements.
Electrical safety violations are among the most-cited General Industry standards. The combined total citations under 1910.303 and 1910.305 exceeded the machine guarding violations last year. Neither standard requires training, but training could help avoid citations and injuries.
The industries most often cited under those two standards include manufacturing, retail, wholesale, lodging and food service, and transportation and warehousing. OSHA commonly issues citations for things like:
Paragraph 1910.303(b) covers examination, installation, and use of equipment. It includes a kind of a “general duty clause” that states, “Electric equipment shall be free from recognized hazards that are likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees.”
Since electricity could cause serious harm, OSHA can cite that paragraph for a number of hazards. Citations include things like damaged insulation on wiring or exposed electrical parts of equipment motors. However, that isn’t the most frequently cited paragraph.
Sub-paragraph 1910.303(b)(2) gets cited most often. It states, “Listed or labeled equipment shall be installed and used in accordance with any instructions included in the listing or labeling.” Essentially, this tells employers to follow manufacturer instructions when using electrical equipment. OSHA uses this for violations like improperly using power strips or allowing employees to use outlets that were not correctly installed.
For related information, see our article, Five things to know before letting employees work with electricity.
Another frequently cited issue is failing to maintain access and working space around electrical equipment. Paragraph 1910.303(g)(1) requires sufficient access and space to allow safe operation and maintenance, describes specific distances, prohibits using the working space for storage, and requires guarding when live parts are exposed for inspection or service.
The other commonly-cited electrical standard is 1910.305, covering wiring methods and more. These violations include issues such as outlets or switches without covers, or improperly using flexible cords (such as extension cords) where permanent wiring should be used.
One of the most-cited paragraphs is 1910.305(b)(1)(ii) which says, “Unused openings in cabinets, boxes, and fittings shall be effectively closed.” For example, if a circuit breaker panel has an unused breaker space, it must be filled with a blank. It cannot be left open, and placing tape over the empty slot is not sufficient.
Another frequently-cited paragraph is (g)(2)(iii), which says: “Flexible cords and cables shall be connected to devices and fittings so that strain relief is provided that will prevent pull from being directly transmitted to joints or terminal screws.” OSHA uses this when saws or other equipment gets power through flexible cables coming from an electrical panel.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics lists more than 2,000 injuries from exposure to electricity each year and around 150 deaths per year. Neither of the above standards specifically requires training workers on electrical safety, but employers should provide training on properly using (and not improperly using) electrical equipment and tools. For related information, see our article, What is the difference between qualified and unqualified electrical workers?
Key to remember: Electrical hazards from exposed electrical lines and improperly using equipment could be mitigated by training employees.
October is fire prevention month, a time dedicated to raising awareness about fire safety in homes, workplaces, and communities. Each year, the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) designates one week in October as Fire Prevention Week™, focusing on a specific theme to promote fire prevention efforts.
This year’s theme is “Charge into Fire Safety™,” which highlights the safe use, charging, and disposal of lithium-ion batteries. These devices are increasingly linked to fire incidents.
Provide fire safety training: Organize sessions on general fire prevention and lithium-ion battery safety. Cover topics like safe charging, storage, inspection, disposal, and emergency response.
Share resources: Distribute materials and safety posters throughout the workplace. Highlight key fire risks, including electrical hazards, clutter, and battery safety.
Review policies: Update fire safety policies and ensure all battery-powered equipment is used and maintained according to manufacturer guidelines.
Promote safe disposal: Set up battery recycling stations and educate employees on proper disposal methods for batteries and other fire hazards.
Conduct fire drills: Practice evacuation plans and ensure all employees know escape routes and assembly points.
How can workers stay safe with lithium-ion batteries at work and home? Workplaces often rely on rechargeable batteries and electrical equipment, which if mishandled, can pose serious fire hazards. To help prevent incidents, employees should:
Battery-related fires can happen at home just as easily as they can at work, especially with the growing number of personal devices such as smartphones, laptops, e-bikes, power tools, and electric vehicles. Here are some strategies to include:
Lithium-ion battery fires are an escalating concern across the United States. These batteries pose serious fire risks when damaged, improperly charged, or disposed of incorrectly. Fires involving lithium-ion batteries burn hotter and spread faster than traditional fires, making them especially dangerous.
Since 2017, incidents have increased by approximately 20% annually. According to the NFPA, urban areas face the highest risk. In New York City alone, 268 lithium-ion battery fires were recorded in 2023, resulting in 18 deaths. As the use of rechargeable devices and electric vehicles continues to grow, these fire incidents are expected to rise nationwide.
Key to remember: Lithium-ion batteries are becoming more popular and essential, but they must be handled responsibly. October’s annual focus on fire prevention is a great time to reinforce safety practices, educate workers, and take steps to prevent fires at work and at home.
Employers often struggle to determine if a workplace injury must be recorded on the OSHA 300 Log. To help employers make these decisions, J. J. Keller & Associates, Inc. hosted a virtual conference titled, “Are these incidents recordable? You decide.” A recording of the event is available here.
The one-hour event began by outlining the criteria that determine whether an incident is work-related and recordable. The introduction also offered tips on filling out the 300 Log and completing the 300A Annual Summary.
The presenters then described several workplace incidents and asked attendees for feedback. Most scenarios involved whether the case would be work-related or recordable, but one involved how to record the case. After each scenario, the presenters offered variations to illustrate how minor changes in circumstances could affect the answer.
The five scenarios were as follows:
Along with the answers to the scenarios presented, the event described some variables that could change the outcome. In the same order above, the event covered the following:
The event was presented by Edwin Zalewski and Joe Proulx. They also responded to many audience questions during the event.
Key to remember: Any event that occurs at work is presumed to be work-related for the OSHA 300 Log, unless an exception applies. Those exceptions are narrow and depend on the circumstances.
Often truck drivers handle transfers of oil, gas, and other process fluids in oil/gas extraction operations. However, NIOSH says there may be hazards and risks involved, and workers have died making transfers at well sites. To learn more, check out the agency’s new 11-minute video, “You’ve Got This! Understanding Hazards, Risks, and Controls for Safer Fluid Transfers in Oil and Gas Extraction” (NIOSH 2023-122).
Process fluids that truckers often deal with include wastewater, flowback fluids, condensate, brines, process water, crude oil, and basic sediment and water (BS&W). Produced water is NOT just water, cautions the video.
These truckers are also often alone onsite, making it difficult to get help if needed. According to the video, fluid transfer hazards like flammable atmospheres, exposure to toxic hydrocarbon gas and vapors, low oxygen, and hydrogen sulfide are real. In fact, an infrared camera scene depicts an “invisible” gas and vapor plume that surrounds a worker, when process fluids are transferred, especially when the fluids are under pressure. Vehicle incidents and heat stress are also common for truckers.
The video emphasizes that exposure to the hazards can lead to injury, hospitalization, long-term health effects, and even death. Yet, the hazards are known, understood, and preventable, NIOSH explains.
However, the video — intended for oil and gas extraction companies, supervisors, managers, and workers — explains that the hazards can be removed or controlled, and these control methods are discussed.
The recommendations for employers and workers are consistent with the hierarchy of controls but eliminating or substituting the hazardous fluid during transfer (the most effective control methods) is not always possible. Therefore, the video focuses on engineering controls, administrative controls, and the proper and consistent use of personal protective equipment (PPE) when making transfers:
If multi-gas monitor alarms go off at any time, workers should immediately exit to a safe location.
NIOSH offers a new 11-minute video on the hazards, risks, and controls of fluid transfers in oil and gas extraction sites. The video is aimed at oil and gas extraction companies, supervisors, managers, and workers.
OSHA has revised its Safe Forklift Operation QuickCard to include more tips for safe operation. The card describes ways to mitigate the risks associated with operating and working around forklifts. Hazards to employees include collisions, falls, tip-overs, and struck-by conditions.
In addition to guidance on safety training and forklift maintenance, the QuickCard offers basic forklift operator safety tips, including: