
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).
Several questions we receive from our customers use the terms “hazardous waste” and “hazardous materials” interchangeably. At a recent event, a few attendees admitted that they didn’t think there was a difference between the two. This is a common point of confusion and we want to ensure that our readers know the difference. Let’s dive into it!
The term hazardous material is defined by the Department of Transportation and refers to any substance or material that poses an unreasonable risk to health, safety, and property during transportation. Hazardous materials include hazardous substances, hazardous wastes, marine pollutants, and elevated-temperature materials. Essentially, if it’s dangerous and transported, it’s considered a hazardous material.
On the other hand, hazardous waste is defined by the Environmental Protection Agency. It refers to contaminated chemicals or by-products that no longer serve their purpose and need to be disposed of. Hazardous wastes are either listed or exhibit characteristics like ignitability, corrosivity, toxicity, or reactivity. It’s essentially waste that poses a danger to health or the environment and requires special handling and disposal.
To put it simply, hazardous material is a broad term that includes various dangerous substances during transportation, while hazardous waste specifically refers to dangerous by-products that need disposal. Understanding these terms is crucial for compliance with environmental and safety regulations.
If you ever find yourself unsure, remember that hazardous materials are about transportation risks, and hazardous wastes are about disposal risks.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued an interim final rule that further delays the submission period for the one-time reporting requirement for manufacturers of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). It pushes the starting submission period to April 2026.
Under Section 8(a)(7) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), EPA requires any business that manufactured (including imported) any PFAS or PFAS-containing article between 2011 and 2022 to submit the report.
What’s the new timeline?
The Section 8(a)(7) PFAS report’s opening submission period was moved from July 11, 2025, to April 13, 2026. Most manufacturers have six months to submit the report. Small manufacturers reporting only as importers of PFAS-containing articles have one year.
TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS report submission period | |
---|---|
Most manufacturers | April 13, 2026–October 13, 2026 |
Small manufacturers reporting solely as PFAS article importers | April 13, 2026–April 13, 2027 |
About the report
Manufacturers (including importers) covered by the TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS reporting rule (40 CFR Part 705) must provide information about:
It’s the second time EPA has postponed the reporting period. In September 2024, the agency moved the beginning submission period from November 2024 to July 2025. This latest interim rule pushes the starting period from July 2025 to April 2026.
Why the delay?
EPA needs more time to prepare the online reporting tool on the Central Data Exchange that businesses will use to submit the data. The agency will conduct tests to ensure that the application can accept submissions and that reporters don’t encounter technical issues.
Key to remember: EPA further delayed TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS reporting. The submission period now begins on April 13, 2026.
Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news. Let’s take a look at what’s happened over the last month!
On April 17, OSHA released 2024 injury and illness data. This includes information from more than 370,000 establishments that submitted Form 300A, as well as partial data from more than 732,000 Form 300 and Form 301 records. OSHA provides public access to the data in an effort to identify unsafe conditions and workplace hazards that may lead to occupational injuries and illnesses.
This year’s National Stand-Down to Prevent Struck-by Incidents took place the week of April 21. Struck-by incidents are the second leading cause of death among construction workers and the leading cause of nonfatal injuries in the construction industry. The stand-down emphasized the importance of training and prevention on worksites.
A safety alert from the Mine Safety and Health Administration urges the mining community to implement effective safety and health programs, with a focus on identifying and eliminating health and safety hazards. The alert was issued due to a high number of mining fatalities in the first quarter of 2025.
The Mine Safety and Health Administration temporarily paused its silica enforcement for coal mine operators until August 18, four months from its original compliance date of April 14. Under the agency’s silica rule, mine operators must update their respiratory protection programs. This may require them to obtain additional respirators and sampling devices. The agency says this four-month pause provides time for operators to come into compliance.
And finally, turning to environmental news, EPA updated the process for making data corrections to hazardous waste manifests. Waste handlers must correct errors on the manifest within 30 days of a request from EPA or a state agency. They also must submit corrections electronically.
And finally, EPA streamlined its pesticide registration process. The agency updated its MyPest app and made policy changes regarding how to submit two of its registration forms.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
You’ve likely never thought of “staying in touch” as a legal obligation, but that’s exactly what it is for facilities that generate small quantities of hazardous waste. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) mandates that small quantity generators (SQGs) give updates on their hazardous waste activities every four years. The next re-notification is right around the corner; it’s due by September 1, 2025.
Here's what SQGs need to know to stay in touch — and in compliance — with EPA.
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) enables EPA to control hazardous waste from generation to disposal. The agency keeps tabs on SQGs through the re-notification regulation at 40 CFR 262.18(d). It requires SQGs to re-notify EPA or the state environmental agency of their generator status and activities every four years by submitting the:
Regulated SQGs must submit the Site ID Form. EPA and many states use the myRCRAid module on RCRA Information (RCRAInfo) for re-notifications.
Here’s how to submit the Site ID Form on myRCRAid:
Once you submit the Site ID Form, its status on myRCRAid will display “Pending.” EPA or the state regulator will approve or reject the re-notification submission.
Consider these tips when preparing your SQG re-notification:
Submitting the SQG re-notification properly keeps EPA updated and your facility compliant.
Key to remember: Small quantity generators of hazardous waste must re-notify EPA or the state agency by September 1, 2025.
The next time you’re at a service station, consider the fact that you’re standing above underground tanks holding the fuel that you’re pumping into your vehicle. This brings up an important question about any underground tank: Since you can’t see the tank, how do you know if it starts to leak? The answer is a release detection system.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires that all regulated underground storage tanks (USTs) have release detection systems and that owners and operators of USTs test the equipment annually to ensure it operates correctly.
Let’s look at three aspects of release detection equipment testing: how to conduct testing, what to test for, and what to record.
UST owners and operators may conduct release detection equipment testing according to:
Manufacturer’s instructions
Each piece of release detection equipment should have an associated manual or guide for owners to reference. The manual or guide will explain how to test the equipment.
Tip: Most equipment manufacturers provide online versions of their product manuals and guides, which you can likely find on the manufacturer’s website. If you can’t find guidance, contact the manufacturer directly.
Industry codes and standards
EPA’s regulations stipulate that UST owners and operators who follow industry codes and standards must choose ones developed by a nationally recognized association (like ASTM International or the Petroleum Equipment Institute (PEI)) or an independent testing laboratory.
For instance, the agency states at 280.40(a)(3) that UST owners and operators may use PEI/RP1200, Recommended Practices for the Testing and Verification of Spill, Overfill, Leak Detection and Secondary Containment Equipment at UST Facilities, to comply.
Implementing agency requirements
EPA’s rules for testing release detection equipment serve as the minimum standards. Most state regulatory agencies implement UST programs and may impose stricter or additional requirements. Plus, local regulations may apply.
Check state and local rules to ensure your UST complies with the right requirements.
At a minimum, UST owners and operators must test the following factors that apply to their release detection systems.
The regulation at 280.45(b)(1) mandates that UST owners and operators keep records of the annual release detection equipment testing results for at least three years.
For each annual testing record, list:
Petroleum and other hazardous substances that leak from USTs can endanger human and environmental health. A leaking UST’s primary threat is groundwater contamination. Groundwater supplies drinking water for almost half of Americans.
A release detection system enables a facility to respond sooner to accidental releases and, therefore, limit potential harmful impacts — only if the equipment used for the system operates properly.
Testing your UST’s release detection equipment is vital because it allows you to identify which components function accurately and which parts have problems that need correction. A well-functioning release detection system can help your facility:
Key to remember: EPA requires facilities to test the release detection equipment used on underground storage tanks each year to make sure it operates properly.
Pesticide registrations just became simpler, more modern, and more transparent! EPA recently updated an app and made policy changes regarding how to submit two forms. All these changes result in a streamlined pesticide registration process.
On April 18, EPA made enhancements to its MyPest app, which sources say was initially launched in mid-January. EPA is proud to say that MyPest already boasts over 1,200 registrants. The new app allows registrants of pesticide products to:
Updates to MyPest include an enhanced dashboard page. The page offers information about the registrant’s cases and products. More updates are planned later this year.
On April 4, EPA announced in the Federal Register the issuance of Pesticide Registration (PR) Notice 2025-1. The notice itself is dated effective March 27, 2025. Its subject line reads, “Revised Procedures for Citing Data to Support Pesticide Registrations (EPA Forms No. 8570-34 and 8570-35).”
The latest PR notice supersedes PR Notice 98-5, dated June 12, 1998. While the revisions were proposed last June, the agency only finalized them now. According to PR Notice 2025-1:
The two forms — EPA Forms 8570-34 and 8570-35 — have not been modified. Only policies regarding the submission of the two forms have changed. The agency:
EPA contends that none of the information on Form 8570-35 is confidential. Put another way, none of the information on the Data Matrix is protected from public release. Therefore, the agency claims there is no reason to submit two versions of the form.
According to EPA, entities potentially affected by the policy changes include, but are not limited to:
Using electronic reporting for EPA Forms 8570-34 and 8570-35 brings efficient data transmittal, argues EPA. A bonus is that electronic reporting will also reduce errors. That’s because of automated validation tools in the portal. Submitters should experience lower costs and faster review and transmission of data, the agency adds.
In 2024, EPA received a total of 3,309 Data Matrices. Moving from two versions to just one for the Data Matrix form should save registrants and EPA time. Specifically, completing, submitting, and processing the Data Matrix should be quicker. EPA will also experience time savings when providing the public access to the information. Extra steps under the Freedom of Information Act would not be needed.
The MyPest app update is a step forward in efficiency and transparency, concludes EPA. The app enhancements are part of the agency’s overall move toward digital and streamlined processes. EPA projects that the app will improve the timeliness of pesticide registration decisions.
Recent actions streamline the pesticide registration process and make it more transparent. These actions relate to the MyPest app and EPA Forms 8570-34 and 8570-35.
Think recycling at work is just tossing paper in a blue bin? Think again. In 2025, workplace recycling is being redefined — from a basic office task to a strategic initiative that impacts your company’s bottom line, brand reputation, and environmental footprint.
From cardboard and plastics to e-waste and food scraps, today’s leading businesses are building smarter, circular systems that turn trash into opportunity — one department at a time.
Here are five reasons why recycling matters now more than ever.
Sustainability is no longer just a corporate social responsibility (CSR) talking point. It’s a core business differentiator. As a management or EHS leader, you’re often on the frontlines of implementing the visible changes that shape public perception. Recycling programs are a low-barrier, high-impact initiative that sends a clear message to customers, investors, and employees: We walk the talk.
Failing to prioritize environmental responsibility puts your company’s reputation at risk — especially in industries with public visibility or regulatory scrutiny. Forward-thinking competitors are already using circular economy models and zero-waste initiatives to win market share.
Champion a program that reflects your company’s values and positions you as a sustainability leader in your field.
Recycling is no longer a “nice-to-have.” Many jurisdictions now require commercial recycling, especially for packaging waste, e-waste, and food scraps. Increasingly, regulations also demand data transparency, such as tracking waste volumes, diversion rates, and sustainability goals.
Supervisors in environmental and safety roles are responsible for ensuring compliance and minimizing risk. Violations can result in hefty fines, bad press, or loss of contracts.
Stay ahead of compliance trends and implement a recycling program that satisfies current and future requirements while keeping auditreadiness top of mind.
Landfill disposal is becoming more expensive due to tipping fees and transportation costs. By diverting materials through recycling or reuse programs, companies can reduce both their environmental footprint and their operational spend.
In addition, smart material handling and waste segregation can lead to process improvements — less clutter, fewer hauling pickups, and even opportunities to monetize recyclable materials like scrap metal, cardboard, or used electronics.
Use data from your waste audits and vendor reporting to identify high-volume waste streams and optimize for both cost reduction and resource efficiency.
Today’s workforce, particularly younger employees, is drawn to employers who align with their values. A clean, green workplace that visibly supports recycling and sustainability reinforces a positive culture, boosts morale, and improves engagement — especially when employees feel like they’re contributing to something bigger.
Recycling initiatives are also an easy win for cross-departmental engagement. Whether through green teams, signage campaigns, or employee challenges, these programs offer hands-on ways to involve everyone.
Build internal buy-in by showing how your initiatives support company values, employee wellness, and sustainability goals through shared responsibility.
In 2025, companies are under increasing pressure from stakeholders to report measurable progress on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) initiatives. Waste reduction, recycling rates, and landfill diversion metrics are among the top data points requested in annual sustainability reports and RFPs.
Supervisors and EHS leaders are often the owners of the data. You're tasked with tracking, verifying, and reporting on these outcomes. Without a structured recycling program in place, those metrics are impossible to capture, and your ESG report falls flat.
Establish a system for measuring, improving, and communicating progress toward zero-waste or landfill diversion targets, and support leadership in meeting ESG benchmarks.
Key to remember: Embracing workplace recycling in 2025 isn’t just good for the planet — it’s a smart move that drives innovation, saves money, and positions your company as a leader in sustainability.
Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news. Let’s get started!
Ladders were the cause of over 22,000 workplace injuries and 161 deaths in 2020. Each March, the American Ladder Institute promotes ladder safety awareness with the goal of reducing ladder-related injuries and fatalities. Every Step Matters was the theme of this year’s National Ladder Safety Month.
Stand Up 4 Grain Safety Week kicked off on March 24. This annual event brings attention to preventable grain handling hazards and promotes safety in this high-hazard industry.
Federal agencies must review their regulations and report back to the White House by April 20. The priority is on “significant” rules, generally considered to be those with an annual effect on the economy of 100 million dollars or more. Once the regulations have been identified, the Office of Management and Budget and the Department of Government Efficiency will work with agency leaders to create a plan for rescinding or modifying the regulations and begin winding down their enforcement.
A highwall fatality at a surface mine prompted the Mine Safety and Health Administration to issue a safety alert. It outlines what miners should do to prevent similar incidents, including looking for hazards such as loose rocks and overhangs before beginning work.
The American Society of Safety Professionals revised its construction training standard. It outlines training requirements for new hires in construction and demolition operations, site procedures, regulatory compliance, and more.
And finally, turning to environmental news, EPA will reconsider a number of major rulemakings that may impact a variety of industries. This is in response to an executive order that federal agencies review their regulations. Among the rules under consideration include those related to clean power, oil and gas emission limits, greenhouse gas reporting, and risk management.
EPA’s Waste Emissions Charge on petroleum and natural gas facilities with high methane emissions is no longer in effect. The rule initially took effect in January and was then disapproved by Congress on March 14.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
Hazardous waste manifests are like travel logs. They track the entire journey of regulated hazardous waste, from the starting point (the generator’s facility) to the final destination (the off-site waste management facility). Like travel logs, a manifest is only as accurate as the information provided. Thankfully, you can correct manifest errors.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized the Third Rule under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), which took effect in January 2025. It made noteworthy changes to the manifest corrections process. Here’s what hazardous waste generators, transporters, and treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs) need to know.
The Third Rule impacts entities subject to RCRA’s manifest regulations. This article focuses on the manifest correction rules that apply to these waste handlers:
Note that the final rule amends post-manifest correction regulations for other entities, such as exporters, that are beyond the scope of this article.
EPA’s final rule maintains most of the post-receipt manifest data corrections process.
What’s the same?
Specifically:
What’s different?
Previously, when EPA or a state regulatory agency requested corrections to data on a manifest, waste handlers weren’t required to make them. The Third Rule now mandates that waste handlers:
Post-receipt corrections are made via the Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System (e-Manifest) on the RCRA Information (RCRAInfo) system.
The Third Rule also clarifies that receiving facilities (TSDFs) can make corrections only after the manifest is completed (i.e., signed and submitted to the e-Manifest system).
Waste handlers submitting voluntary or mandatory post-receipt corrections to hazardous waste manifests must follow the process established at 40 CFR 264.71(l).
Follow this general process on the e-Manifest System:
Check out some top questions and answers about post-receipt manifest corrections.
What manifest information can I correct?
The type of waste handler your facility is determines which items on the manifest you can change for voluntary corrections or must change for mandatory corrections. Typically:
What user role do I need on RCRAInfo to submit manifest corrections?
You must be registered in RCRAInfo as a user with the e-Manifest Certifier or Site Manager role for the facility’s site to submit manifest corrections.
What’s the CROMERR certification?
EPA requires manifest correction submitters to use a CROMERR-compliant electronic signature, which requires a higher level of identity proofing than the Quick Sign signature.
Can I revert to a previous manifest version?
Once the corrected manifest has been signed, you can’t revert it to a previous version. The e-Manifest system does, however, let you view all versions of the manifest.
Can brokers sign corrected manifests?
Although brokers can initiate a manifest correction for generators, they may not sign a corrected manifest unless they (a) operate at the generator’s facility and (b) can sign the manifest as an offeror of the waste shipment.
Key to remember: EPA’s Third Rule updates the process for making data corrections to RCRA hazardous waste manifests.
Are you storing and disposing of hazardous waste correctly or sitting on disaster? Hazardous waste storage is not just a regulatory headache – it is a time bomb for the environment and your company’s bottom line. A disaster in east London, England, is an ongoing issue for nearby residents that highlights the importance of hazardous waste management and why employers must take it seriously.
Originally intended for construction waste disposal, the site eventually turned into a dumping ground for hazardous industrial materials. Investigations found plastics, asbestos, industrial chemicals, and carcinogenic substances illegally dumped, creating an environmental and public health hazard. These materials fuel the fires, continuously releasing toxic smoke into the air. Residents have reported respiratory problems, skin irritation, and other health issues while authorities struggle to contain the situation. Even though this incident occurred in London, we can learn plenty of valuable lessons from the incident. Here’s how employers can take proactive measures to ensure compliance, protect workers, and prevent environmental harm:
A hazardous waste management plan should:
Train personnel on their roles and responsibilities when handling hazardous waste. Training should include:
The primary reason behind illegal waste dumping is financial. We all know it is not cheap to dispose of hazardous waste, but waste generators are responsible for their waste from “cradle to grave.”
One of the most effective ways to prevent hazardous waste incidents is to reduce reliance on them in the first place. By switching to safer alternatives, employers can lower their risk of exposure. Industries now offer eco-friendly coatings, adhesives, and cleaning agents that perform well without all the side effects. Safer alternatives also reduce compliance costs by lowering the burdens for hazardous waste disposal.
The disaster near London is a stark reminder of the consequences of negligent hazardous waste management. Businesses that cut corners on waste disposal risk legal penalties and contribute to long-term environmental and public health damage.
Keys to remember: Employers can protect their workforce, comply with regulations, and prevent environmental disasters by adopting proactive waste management strategies.
A joint Congressional resolution disapproved the 2024 Final Waste Emissions Charge (WEC) Rule on oil and gas facilities with high methane emissions. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that the regulation, which initially took effect on January 17, 2025, is now no longer in effect.
Who’s impacted?
The WEC rule applied to facilities in the Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems category that:
Facilities that were subject to the rule are no longer required to comply (i.e., submit WEC filings by September 2, 2025).
What’s next?
EPA stated it’s “currently evaluating options and obligations for implementing Clean Air Act Section 136(c–g) and will provide additional information to the regulated community at an appropriate time."
Section 136, added by the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, mandates that EPA implement a methane reduction incentive program for petroleum and natural gas systems, including imposing and collecting a WEC on methane emissions above waste emissions limits.
The disapproval occurred on March 14, 2025, just two days after the agency announced 31 deregulatory actions it plans to take.
Key to remember: EPA’s Waste Emissions Charge on petroleum and natural gas facilities for excess methane is no longer in effect.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced on March 12, 2025, that it’s taking 31 actions to advance President Trump’s Day One executive orders and the new “Powering the Great American Comeback” Initiative. The agency’s actions will likely impact environmental regulations across various industries.
Rules under review
EPA will reconsider an assortment of rulemakings, including:
The agency will also take other actions, such as:
About EPA’s new initiative
In February 2025, the agency announced the Powering the Great American Comeback Initiative, which outlines EPA’s priorities. The initiative consists of five pillars:
EPA’s 31 actions will primarily address the first three pillars.
Key to remember: EPA will reconsider major rulemakings that may impact a variety of industries.
Another riveting video is posted by the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB)! The animated video covers a massive explosion at a Texas machine shop. Two workers and a member of the public were killed. Over 450 neighboring homes/businesses were damaged.
The 14-minute video, “No Detection: Explosion …,” follows a June 2023 investigation report. When the 56-page report came out, CSB Chairperson Steve Owens said, “Our investigation found that [the company] did not have an effective program in place to assess potential hazards in its propylene process and did not have a mechanical integrity program or written operating procedures.”
The incident was compounded by emergency planning failures, says CSB. Owens argued, “This tragic incident was made even worse due to the lack of emergency response training for employees at the facility.”
CSB explains that a degraded and poorly crimped rubber welding hose disconnected from its fitting inside a coating booth. That prompted a release of propylene, a flammable vapor.
By the time workers arrived at the facility the early morning of January 24, 2020, an explosive concentration of propylene had formed inside the building. As workers entered and turned on the lights, the vapor ignited, triggering an explosion. It:
The board’s investigation later found that the company had:
OSHA cited the company 12 years earlier for failing to inspect gas system equipment for signs of deterioration or leaks. The 2008 OSHA visit was prompted by another explosion of propylene gas.
Following the later 2020 incident, OSHA issued citations for failing to:
CSB explains that the shop’s propylene amount was below the threshold for OSHA’s Process Safety Management (PSM) standard at 29 CFR 1910.119 or EPA’s Risk Management Plan (RMP) standard at 40 CFR 68. Still, the CSB investigation identified these safety issues:
Owens concludes that the deadly incident could have been mitigated if the company had implemented an effective PSM system for the hazards of its coating operation. Even if a leak occurred, Owens believes an emergency response plan could have prevented the tragic loss of life.
OSHA chemical emergency preparedness may include an emergency action plan and/or an emergency response plan.
To prevent chemical incidents, CSB urges you to:
Have questions about chemical safety or emergency planning? Pose them to our J. J. Keller® experts! Visit our Expert Help page today! |
The latest video comes after the board received a “Silver Play Button” award. The CSB’s video channel boasts 364K subscribers and nearly 100 safety videos. The channel has had over 65M combined views since 2007. What’s more, CSB claims that the chemical industry itself and engineering schools use the videos for chemical safety training.
A new CSB video covers the 2020 massive explosion at a Texas machine shop. The board urges you to implement PSM systems even if not required. CSB also presses you to ensure that workers are trained in emergency response plans.
During a recent discussion about the persistent challenges of maintaining air quality standards within heavy industrial operations, one colleague in the field shared about a large Midwestern industrial facility that faced allegations of significant Clean Air Act violations. Our casual lunch meeting turned into a case study on uncontrolled emissions of particulate matter (PM).
An investigation identified the facility’s clinker cooler and raw mill operations as primary sources of excess PM. Monitoring data revealed the facility consistently exceeded permitted emission limits, suggesting systemic deficiencies in pollution control systems. Further inspection pointed to potential inadequate maintenance and operation of existing baghouse filters, a critical technology for capturing airborne particles. The facility also appeared to struggle with fugitive dust emissions from material handling and storage areas, indicating a need for improved dust suppression measures.
The case clarifies the importance of rigorous, proactive environmental management within heavy industrial operations. To prevent similar violations, facilities should prioritize comprehensive monitoring and reporting. Continuous emission monitoring systems provide real-time data, enabling early detection of deviations from permitted limits. Regular inspections and preventative maintenance of pollution control equipment are essential. This includes ensuring baghouse filters operate within their design parameters and promptly replacing damaged or worn components.
Additionally, robust fugitive dust control plans are vital. They should address all potential sources of fugitive dust, encompassing material handling, storage, and transport. Implementing strategies such as water spraying, enclosure of conveyors, and optimized material stockpiling can significantly reduce emissions.
Beyond technology, a strong environmental compliance culture is crucial. It involves employee training on environmental regulations, operational procedures, and the importance of adhering to pollution control measures. Regular audits and internal assessments can help identify potential weaknesses and ensure ongoing compliance.
Industrial facilities can minimize their environmental impact and avoid costly enforcement actions by focusing on:
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!
A group of substances called “forever chemicals” lasts long in the environment, but the submission period for its one-time reporting requirement doesn’t. And it starts in just a few months. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires covered entities to report data about per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) they manufactured between 2011 and 2022.
Required by Section 8(a)(7) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the report covers PFAS production volumes, disposal, exposures, and hazards. The submission period opens on April 13, 2026. Here are answers to five common questions about the TSCA Section 8(a)(7) report.
The TSCA Section 8(a)(7) reporting requirements apply to any person who manufactured (including imported) a PFAS or PFAS-containing article between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2022, for commercial purposes.
EPA defines terms for this reporting requirement at 40 CFR 705.3.
One vital thing to note is that the TSCA Section 8(a)(7) reporting requirement allows for no exemptions. The rule even covers PFAS manufactured as a byproduct, impurity, or non-isolated intermediate. The only activity that doesn’t require reporting is importing municipal solid waste streams to dispose of or destroy the waste.
The information required depends on whether you use the standard or streamlined TSCA Section 8(a)(7) reporting form.
The standard form contains:
The streamlined form requires less information than the standard form. Two types of reporters qualify to use streamlined reporting:
Importers may choose to use the streamlined “PFAS in Imported Article” form. If you imported a PFAS-containing article and manufactured (including imported) the same PFAS (not in an article), you can either:
Manufacturers of qualifying R&D PFAS can use the “Research & Development PFAS” form. However, you cannot use the streamlined form if you manufactured a PFAS in small quantities for R&D and otherwise manufactured (including imported) the same PFAS.
The TSCA Section 8(a)(7) report submission period runs from April 13, 2026, to October 13, 2026, for most manufacturers. Small manufacturers who solely imported PFAS-containing articles have a longer submission period, from April 13, 2026, to April 13, 2027.
Reports must be submitted electronically through EPA’s Central Data Exchange (CDX). Go to the Chemical Information Submission System and choose the “TSCA Section 8(a)(7)” application.
Note that you must have a registered account on EPA’s CDX to submit the report, and the facility for which you’re submitting the report must also be registered on the platform.
TSCA Section 8(a)(7), as amended by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, required EPA to develop a rule to gather data about PFAS from entities that manufacture or have manufactured PFAS and PFAS-containing articles. The agency finalized the rule in October 2023 for this one-time reporting requirement.
The TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS reports will give EPA a more complete picture of PFAS manufactured in the U.S. The agency will use the data to further its understanding of the forever chemicals and inform future regulatory actions.
Key to remember: The submission period for the one-time PFAS reporting requirement opens April 13, 2026. It applies to anyone who manufactured (including imported) PFAS or PFAS-containing articles between 2011 and 2022.
Used oil disposal is a critical issue for safety managers and shop supervisors in industrial settings. Whether your facility generates used oil from machinery, vehicles, or hydraulic systems, you must understand the regulatory requirements to ensure compliance and avoid hefty fines.
Used oil is not always considered hazardous waste, but improper handling, storage, or disposal can lead to regulatory violations and environmental hazards. Understanding how used oil is classified, when it is considered hazardous, and how to manage it in compliance with 40 CFR Part 279 is essential.
Let’s uncover the regulatory framework for used oil disposal, including storage requirements, transportation rules, and best practices to ensure compliance at both the federal and state levels.
The EPA defines used oil as any petroleum-based or synthetic oil that has been used and is contaminated by physical or chemical impurities. Common sources of used oil in industrial operations include:
According to EPA regulations (40 CFR Part 279), used oil is presumed to be managed under the less stringent used oil management standards unless it meets hazardous waste criteria.
Used oil becomes hazardous waste if:
If used oil is classified as hazardous waste, it must be managed in accordance with the applicable solid and hazardous waste requirements.
The EPA requirements for used oil consist of three different aspects, as outlined below.
1. Storage Requirements
Use leak-proof tanks and containers made of durable, non-earthen materials (e.g., steel, plastic, or concrete). Label all used oil containers with the words "Used Oil" to prevent misidentification. Prevent leaks and spills by using secondary containment systems and regularly inspecting tanks. Never mix used oil with hazardous waste unless authorized.
2. Transportation and Disposal
Used oil generators may transport up to 55 gallons of used oil to a registered collection center without an EPA ID number. If contracting a used oil transporter, ensure they have an EPA Identification Number.
Used oil must be:
3. Spill Prevention and Cleanup
Facilities storing large amounts of used oil must have a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan. SPCC plans establish procedures, methods, and equipment requirements to prevent oil from reaching waterways, and to contain discharges of oil.
Any spills must be cleaned up immediately, and absorbent materials must be disposed of properly. Rags and shop towels contaminated with hazardous materials may be classified as hazardous waste.
While the EPA focuses on environmental compliance, OSHA (29 CFR Part 1910) regulates worker safety when handling used oil. Key OSHA requirements include:
1. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)
Workers handling used oil must wear gloves and protective clothing to prevent skin exposure. Safety goggles or face shields are also important to avoid eye contact.
2. Hazard communication (HazCom) program
Employers must label all used oil containers with appropriate hazard information and train employees on safe handling procedures and emergency response.
3. Fire and Explosion Safety
Always store used oil away from ignition sources to prevent fire hazards. Ensure storage areas are ventilated to avoid vapor buildup.
Many states have stricter used oil regulations than federal laws. For example:
To ensure compliance, check with your state’s environmental agency for state-specific used oil disposal rules and whether used oil is considered hazardous. Additional permits for transporting or processing used oil may be necessary.
Ensuring compliance with EPA, OSHA, and state laws is essential for safety managers and shop supervisors handling used oil. By following proper storage, transportation, and disposal practices, businesses can reduce environmental risks, improve workplace safety, and avoid costly fines.
Key to remember: By staying informed and proactive, your facility can maintain safe, sustainable, and compliant used oil management practices.
You might argue that warehouses have always posed challenges to fire service crews. However, today’s warehouses are pushing the boundaries on what firefighters can handle. Modern warehouses have far more square feet, sky-high storage racks, and compacted arrangements making it tougher for crews to reach a fire quickly. Commodities with lithium-ion batteries add another danger layer in a fire. Plus, robots can get in the way.
To sort this out, the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) released back-to-back reports and a podcast that give warehouse owners/operators and fire crews a lot to think about:
Over 1,500 warehouse fires happen annually on average, NFPA estimates. That means warehouse fires are not rare. The first time that fire crews lay eyes on your warehouse should not be when there’s a roaring fire there in the middle of the night.
Ideally, fire service members should be involved before a warehouse is built. That way, things like water supplies and crew access can be part of the drawing board. If your warehouse is already in operation, it’s still critical for fire services to check out your warehouse. They can get familiar with your warehouse configuration, its fire suppression systems, and its stored commodities.
While the two reports detail challenges and trends for warehouse fires, one overarching takeaway prevails — pre-planning between the warehouse owner/operator and the fire service is a must. The concept is covered in the podcast too. Pre-incident planning inevitably helps fire crews to efficiently control and suppress an actual fire. It also informs the owner/operator about fire crew capabilities for the site.
OSHA’s Emergency Action Plan standard calls for covered employers to implement a plan to protect employees during fire emergencies. This requirement is found at 29 CFR 1910.38, 1915.502, 1917.30, 1918.100, and 1926.35, depending on your industry. However, the pre-incident planning that NFPA is talking about is pre-planning WITH the fire department so that there are better outcomes for people and property, in the event of a fire.
The 125-page NFPA report, “Identifying Challenges to Fire Service Response in Storage Facilities,” emphasizes that warehouses are evolving to meet greater demand. The report:
One recommendation suggests that future study needs to focus on ways fire departments can improve communication with warehouse owners/operators about pre-planning. The idea is that more communication should happen not only for existing warehouses but before constructing them. It’s also vital when warehouses are about to experience a change. Similarly, fire departments and warehouse owners/operators need to work out how employees will be head counted during a fire incident.
Another NFPA report, “Warehouse Structure Fires,” chronicles thousands of warehouse fires that happened between 2018 to 2022. In some cases, the 8-page report reflects on fires going back to 1980. It offers 13 charts that cover the:
The report concludes that four components are essential to protecting warehouses from fire: proper sprinkler systems, automatic alarms, pre-fire inspections, and pre-planning.
Finally, NFPA sat down with two fire protection professionals for 42 minutes to talk about “Big Storage, Bigger Questions.” The podcast sunk its teeth into some of the deeper concepts found in the new “Identifying Challenges” report, including:
Again, pre-planning was reiterated. The pros explained that warehouses have many variables, so getting crews into these facilities before any fire happens is important for better outcomes if a fire were to occur.
NFPA released two reports and a podcast related to the challenges of combating warehouse fires and the history of fires in U.S. warehouses. Pre-planning is an overarching theme in all three.
When you think of workers getting stuck by a contaminated needlestick, you think of healthcare. Right? Well, a recent NIOSH fact sheet argues that you also need to picture law enforcement officers. That’s because they’re at risk of these incidents when they search people, property, vehicles, or homes!
Syringes and needles are not the only sharps to worry about, however. Other sharps include lancets, scalpels, and auto-injectors. The thing is, contaminated needlesticks/sharps injuries can infect officers with viruses. These include hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), HIV, and others.
Is it reasonably anticipated that your law enforcement officers will have contact with blood or other potentially infectious materials (OPIM) as part of their jobs? If so, they have what OSHA calls “occupational exposure.” That includes reasonably anticipated incidents involving contaminated needlesticks or other contaminated sharps as part of the duties of an officer, the subject of the latest fact sheet.
That's a trick question! The Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act) only covers the private sector. There’s a gap in coverage for the public sector workers like law enforcement officers employed by a municipality or state agency. That means federal OSHA does not regulate the Bloodborne Pathogens (BBP) standard at 29 CFR 1910.1030 for these officers.
However, many states have filled that gap in one of two ways:
If your state has bloodborne pathogens laws and regulations, it’s important to meet them if you have officers (or any workers) with occupational exposure. Note that occupational exposure is not the same thing as an exposure incident. An exposure incident is actual contact with blood or OPIM. Whereas occupational exposure is reasonably anticipated contact as part of the job duties.
Regardless whether your officers are protected by bloodborne pathogens laws and regulations, NIOSH’s fact sheet (DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2025-101) provides tips and best practices specific to the risks to law enforcement. For example, NIOSH suggests that officers complete training on:
Some ways officers can keep safe include, but are not limited to:
When handling sharps, NIOSH recommends:
If an officer suffers an exposure incident involving a contaminated needlestick/sharp, the fact sheet urges the officer to:
Treatment should be sought from a healthcare provider immediately. That provider may offer medication or a vaccine to prevent infection.
The latest fact sheet comes on the heels of an 8-page guidance document from NIOSH — DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2022-154. Learn more about that in our J. J. Keller® Compliance Network article, “NIOSH report points at sharps injuries in law enforcement,” from September 7, 2022.
A recent NIOSH fact sheet argues that law enforcement officers who do searches are at risk of needlestick/sharps incidents! The agency offers tips about how to stay safe and how to handle and dispose of sharps safely. It also explains what to do if there’s an exposure incident.
Over the past few years, federal environmental regulations have targeted a specific group of chemicals: per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). However, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) isn’t the only entity taking action to control PFAS; state agencies are too.
So, how should businesses respond? Stay alert to the PFAS regulations at the state level.
PFAS, called “forever chemicals,” are long-lasting manufactured chemicals that may pose risks to human and environmental health. With thousands of PFAS chemicals, however, controlling their use to reduce the risks is no easy task.
Additionally, PFAS appear in nearly every sector. They’re used in a wide range of products (like food packaging, cleaning products, and textiles) and for commercial and industrial applications.
Multiple states already have PFAS rules on the books. Check out these examples:
Many states also have proposed PFAS rules under consideration.
If your facility uses PFAS, it’s essential to know whether the state has regulations that apply to your operations. Plus, knowing the state’s potential future PFAS rules coming down the pipeline can help you better prepare to comply.
Consider these general tips to support your facility’s efforts to track state PFAS actions:
Staying alert to state PFAS regulations can help your organization maintain compliance.
Key to remember: States across the country continue to consider and implement regulations related to PFAS. Staying alert to state PFAS actions is key for businesses to stay compliant.
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.
Pesticide registrations just became simpler, more modern, and more transparent! EPA recently updated an app and made policy changes regarding how to submit two forms. All these changes result in a streamlined pesticide registration process.
On April 18, EPA made enhancements to its MyPest app, which sources say was initially launched in mid-January. EPA is proud to say that MyPest already boasts over 1,200 registrants. The new app allows registrants of pesticide products to:
Updates to MyPest include an enhanced dashboard page. The page offers information about the registrant’s cases and products. More updates are planned later this year.
On April 4, EPA announced in the Federal Register the issuance of Pesticide Registration (PR) Notice 2025-1. The notice itself is dated effective March 27, 2025. Its subject line reads, “Revised Procedures for Citing Data to Support Pesticide Registrations (EPA Forms No. 8570-34 and 8570-35).”
The latest PR notice supersedes PR Notice 98-5, dated June 12, 1998. While the revisions were proposed last June, the agency only finalized them now. According to PR Notice 2025-1:
The two forms — EPA Forms 8570-34 and 8570-35 — have not been modified. Only policies regarding the submission of the two forms have changed. The agency:
EPA contends that none of the information on Form 8570-35 is confidential. Put another way, none of the information on the Data Matrix is protected from public release. Therefore, the agency claims there is no reason to submit two versions of the form.
According to EPA, entities potentially affected by the policy changes include, but are not limited to:
Using electronic reporting for EPA Forms 8570-34 and 8570-35 brings efficient data transmittal, argues EPA. A bonus is that electronic reporting will also reduce errors. That’s because of automated validation tools in the portal. Submitters should experience lower costs and faster review and transmission of data, the agency adds.
In 2024, EPA received a total of 3,309 Data Matrices. Moving from two versions to just one for the Data Matrix form should save registrants and EPA time. Specifically, completing, submitting, and processing the Data Matrix should be quicker. EPA will also experience time savings when providing the public access to the information. Extra steps under the Freedom of Information Act would not be needed.
The MyPest app update is a step forward in efficiency and transparency, concludes EPA. The app enhancements are part of the agency’s overall move toward digital and streamlined processes. EPA projects that the app will improve the timeliness of pesticide registration decisions.
Recent actions streamline the pesticide registration process and make it more transparent. These actions relate to the MyPest app and EPA Forms 8570-34 and 8570-35.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued an interim final rule that further delays the submission period for the one-time reporting requirement for manufacturers of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). It pushes the starting submission period to April 2026.
Under Section 8(a)(7) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), EPA requires any business that manufactured (including imported) any PFAS or PFAS-containing article between 2011 and 2022 to submit the report.
What’s the new timeline?
The Section 8(a)(7) PFAS report’s opening submission period was moved from July 11, 2025, to April 13, 2026. Most manufacturers have six months to submit the report. Small manufacturers reporting only as importers of PFAS-containing articles have one year.
TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS report submission period | |
---|---|
Most manufacturers | April 13, 2026–October 13, 2026 |
Small manufacturers reporting solely as PFAS article importers | April 13, 2026–April 13, 2027 |
About the report
Manufacturers (including importers) covered by the TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS reporting rule (40 CFR Part 705) must provide information about:
It’s the second time EPA has postponed the reporting period. In September 2024, the agency moved the beginning submission period from November 2024 to July 2025. This latest interim rule pushes the starting period from July 2025 to April 2026.
Why the delay?
EPA needs more time to prepare the online reporting tool on the Central Data Exchange that businesses will use to submit the data. The agency will conduct tests to ensure that the application can accept submissions and that reporters don’t encounter technical issues.
Key to remember: EPA further delayed TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS reporting. The submission period now begins on April 13, 2026.
Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news. Let’s take a look at what’s happened over the last month!
On April 17, OSHA released 2024 injury and illness data. This includes information from more than 370,000 establishments that submitted Form 300A, as well as partial data from more than 732,000 Form 300 and Form 301 records. OSHA provides public access to the data in an effort to identify unsafe conditions and workplace hazards that may lead to occupational injuries and illnesses.
This year’s National Stand-Down to Prevent Struck-by Incidents took place the week of April 21. Struck-by incidents are the second leading cause of death among construction workers and the leading cause of nonfatal injuries in the construction industry. The stand-down emphasized the importance of training and prevention on worksites.
A safety alert from the Mine Safety and Health Administration urges the mining community to implement effective safety and health programs, with a focus on identifying and eliminating health and safety hazards. The alert was issued due to a high number of mining fatalities in the first quarter of 2025.
The Mine Safety and Health Administration temporarily paused its silica enforcement for coal mine operators until August 18, four months from its original compliance date of April 14. Under the agency’s silica rule, mine operators must update their respiratory protection programs. This may require them to obtain additional respirators and sampling devices. The agency says this four-month pause provides time for operators to come into compliance.
And finally, turning to environmental news, EPA updated the process for making data corrections to hazardous waste manifests. Waste handlers must correct errors on the manifest within 30 days of a request from EPA or a state agency. They also must submit corrections electronically.
And finally, EPA streamlined its pesticide registration process. The agency updated its MyPest app and made policy changes regarding how to submit two of its registration forms.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
Quick action using cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and automated external defibrillators(AEDs) can save the lives of the nearly 350,000 cardiac event victims each year outside of a hospital setting. But what does OSHA require for the workplace? What you didn’t know about OSHA regulations regarding AEDs may surprise you.
For every minute a patient is in cardiac arrest, their chances of survival decrease dramatically. When a patient doesn’t have a pulse and isn’t breathing, CPR should be performed until an AED is available. It’s important to note that CPR alone does not restart the heart. CPR is an oxygen circulation procedure. AEDs, on the other hand, are meant for lifesaving intervention.
CPR and early defibrillation are vital components of the emergency medical services (EMS) chain of survival that increases the odds of cardiac patient survival. However, according to the American Heart Association (AHA), even the best CPR can’t provide enough circulation of oxygen to the brain and heart for more than a few minutes. In fact, a patient whose brain is deprived of oxygen for 10 minutes or more seldom recovers.
Just like a reliable vehicle, the circulatory system is the human body’s blood transportation system, and the heart is the engine. Amazingly, the heart generates its own electrical impulses, pumping in a regular, rhythmic manner. As with any engine, the heart requires a certain amount of pressure to function and doesn’t work well when clogged with grease or debris. The most common causes of sudden cardiac arrest include a heart attack, electrocution, and asphyxiation — all of which could occur in the workplace. Common signs and symptoms include:
CPR provides the pressure for the body’s “engine” to oxygen circulating, while an AED provides the electrical impulses to keep the engine pumping.
OSHA 1910.151 requires first aid treatment be provided in the absence of an infirmary, clinic, or hospital in near proximity to the workplace used to treat injured employees. This may include assisting a victim of cardiac arrest using CPR or defibrillation.
OSHA requirements for CPR and defibrillation differ considerably. Standards requiring CPR include:
OSHA recommends basic adult CPR refresher training and retesting every year, and first aid training at least once every three years. CPR training include facilitated discussion along with ’hands-on’ skills training that uses mannequins and partner practice.
Though OSHA recognizes AEDs as important lifesaving technology that plays a role in treating cardiac arrest, the agency doesn’t currently require their use in the workplace. Instead, OSHA wants employers to assess their own requirements for AEDs as part of their first aid response.
AEDs are considered Class III medical devices which means the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has some oversight on their use. Almost all AEDs require the purchaser to obtain a prescription from a physician under FDA regulations. The prescription process is meant as a quality control mechanism to ensure AEDs are properly maintained, that all designated responders are properly trained, and assist employers with establishing an emergency response plan for their workplace AED program.
The AHA requires AED operators to also receive CPR training as an “integral part of providing lifesaving aid to people suffering sudden cardiac arrest.” Though easy to use, each AED is slightly different, so training helps users understand the unique traits and supplies for the individual units at their workplace. Additionally, AED users must be trained to understand the signs of a sudden cardiac arrest, when to activate the EMS system, and how to perform CPR.
AEDs are light, portable, easy to use, and inexpensive. They’re best placed near high-hazard areas such as confined spaces, near electrical energy, or in remote work areas. Response time to reach AEDs should be kept within 3–5-minutes.
Need more information on defibrillators in the workplace? See our ezExplanation on AEDs. |
Many states require or encourage CPR and AED training from nationally recognized organizations. Any AED training should include CPR training. OSHA doesn’t offer first aid or CPR training, nor certify trainers. Training by a nationally recognized organization, such as AHA, the American Red Cross, or National Safety Council is recommended.
While OSHA doesn’t currently require the use of AEDs in the workplace, they do expect employers to assess their own AED requirements as part of their first aid response. AED training is required by most states and should include CPR with a hands-on practical component.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced on March 12, 2025, that it’s taking 31 actions to advance President Trump’s Day One executive orders and the new “Powering the Great American Comeback” Initiative. The agency’s actions will likely impact environmental regulations across various industries.
Rules under review
EPA will reconsider an assortment of rulemakings, including:
The agency will also take other actions, such as:
About EPA’s new initiative
In February 2025, the agency announced the Powering the Great American Comeback Initiative, which outlines EPA’s priorities. The initiative consists of five pillars:
EPA’s 31 actions will primarily address the first three pillars.
Key to remember: EPA will reconsider major rulemakings that may impact a variety of industries.
Used oil disposal is a critical issue for safety managers and shop supervisors in industrial settings. Whether your facility generates used oil from machinery, vehicles, or hydraulic systems, you must understand the regulatory requirements to ensure compliance and avoid hefty fines.
Used oil is not always considered hazardous waste, but improper handling, storage, or disposal can lead to regulatory violations and environmental hazards. Understanding how used oil is classified, when it is considered hazardous, and how to manage it in compliance with 40 CFR Part 279 is essential.
Let’s uncover the regulatory framework for used oil disposal, including storage requirements, transportation rules, and best practices to ensure compliance at both the federal and state levels.
The EPA defines used oil as any petroleum-based or synthetic oil that has been used and is contaminated by physical or chemical impurities. Common sources of used oil in industrial operations include:
According to EPA regulations (40 CFR Part 279), used oil is presumed to be managed under the less stringent used oil management standards unless it meets hazardous waste criteria.
Used oil becomes hazardous waste if:
If used oil is classified as hazardous waste, it must be managed in accordance with the applicable solid and hazardous waste requirements.
The EPA requirements for used oil consist of three different aspects, as outlined below.
1. Storage Requirements
Use leak-proof tanks and containers made of durable, non-earthen materials (e.g., steel, plastic, or concrete). Label all used oil containers with the words "Used Oil" to prevent misidentification. Prevent leaks and spills by using secondary containment systems and regularly inspecting tanks. Never mix used oil with hazardous waste unless authorized.
2. Transportation and Disposal
Used oil generators may transport up to 55 gallons of used oil to a registered collection center without an EPA ID number. If contracting a used oil transporter, ensure they have an EPA Identification Number.
Used oil must be:
3. Spill Prevention and Cleanup
Facilities storing large amounts of used oil must have a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan. SPCC plans establish procedures, methods, and equipment requirements to prevent oil from reaching waterways, and to contain discharges of oil.
Any spills must be cleaned up immediately, and absorbent materials must be disposed of properly. Rags and shop towels contaminated with hazardous materials may be classified as hazardous waste.
While the EPA focuses on environmental compliance, OSHA (29 CFR Part 1910) regulates worker safety when handling used oil. Key OSHA requirements include:
1. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)
Workers handling used oil must wear gloves and protective clothing to prevent skin exposure. Safety goggles or face shields are also important to avoid eye contact.
2. Hazard communication (HazCom) program
Employers must label all used oil containers with appropriate hazard information and train employees on safe handling procedures and emergency response.
3. Fire and Explosion Safety
Always store used oil away from ignition sources to prevent fire hazards. Ensure storage areas are ventilated to avoid vapor buildup.
Many states have stricter used oil regulations than federal laws. For example:
To ensure compliance, check with your state’s environmental agency for state-specific used oil disposal rules and whether used oil is considered hazardous. Additional permits for transporting or processing used oil may be necessary.
Ensuring compliance with EPA, OSHA, and state laws is essential for safety managers and shop supervisors handling used oil. By following proper storage, transportation, and disposal practices, businesses can reduce environmental risks, improve workplace safety, and avoid costly fines.
Key to remember: By staying informed and proactive, your facility can maintain safe, sustainable, and compliant used oil management practices.
Though the commercial driver’s license (CDL) requirements have been around for decades, they continue to be a hot topic for both motor carriers and drivers. Let’s take a look at some of the CDL-related questions we recently received.
Question: If someone already has their CDL and wants to add a hazmat endorsement, are they required to complete entry-level driver training (ELDT)?
Answer: To add a hazmat endorsement to a CDL, the driver must complete hazmat endorsement ELDT, as prescribed in Appendix E to Part 380.
This endorsement-specific course of theory instruction must be conducted by a school or entity listed on the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s (FMCSA's) Training Provider Registry (TPR).
In addition to the ELDT requirement, the driver must complete a security threat assessment, conducted by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to obtain the hazmat endorsement.
Question: If a driver moves from one state to another (for example from California to Arizona), does the driver have to transfer the CDL to the new state of residence? If so, how long does the driver have to make the change?
Answer:Section 383.23 of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations (FMCSRs) states that a driver's CDL must be issued by the driver’s state or jurisdiction of domicile.
State of domicile is defined in 383.5 as the: "State where a person has his/her true, fixed, and permanent home and principal residence and to which he/she has the intention of returning whenever he/she is absent."
Once the individual's "state of domicile" has been established, that is the state from which the driver's license must be issued.
Section 383.71 requires that the transfer take place within 30 days of moving. Note that some states have shorter time frames for transferring a CDL.
Question: If a driver is cited for a moving violation in either a company or personal vehicle, is the driver required to notify the company?
Answer:Section 383.31(b) of the FMCSRs requires a CDL holder to notify the employer within 30 days after the driver has been convicted of a traffic violation.
Note that many motor carriers have policies that include all drivers (CDL and non-CDL) and require a shorter notification time frame than in the regulations.
Question: I have a driver who is 18-years old. He has a Class A CDL with an intrastate-only restriction (K restriction). I understand that he can't drive a vehicle that requires the driver to possess a CDL across state lines, but can he drive a vehicle that doesn’t require a CDL (between 10,001 pounds and 26,000 pounds) across state lines?
Answer: No, he cannot drive a non-CDL commercial motor vehicle (CMV) across state lines. An interstate (crossing state lines, furthering interstate commerce) driver of a CMV, as defined in 390.5, must be at least 21-years old.
The definition of a commercial motor vehicle in 390.5 includes a vehicle or combination of vehicles that weighs or is rated at 10,001 pounds or more. The definition also includes a vehicle of any size transporting placardable hazmat and certain types of passenger-carrying vehicles.
Key to remember: Compliance with the CDL requirements can be complicated. In addition to all the resources you can find in Compliance Network to assist with your questions, you can reach out to our compliance experts using Expert Help. Our team of experts is always happy to assist.
The 150 air-mile exemptions, which are in the regulations at 395.1(e)(1) and (2), allow a driver to use a time record in place of a log, provided that certain conditions are met. While this is possibly the most widely used hours-of-service exemption, it may be the most commonly misused exemption, as well.
To be able to use this logging exemption in 395.1(e)(1), the driver must:
The company must retain the time record and have it available for inspection for six months.
Need more info? View our ezExplanation on the 150 air-mile exception. |
If the driver cannot meet the terms of the exemption (he or she goes too far or works too many hours), the driver must complete a regular driver’s log for the day as soon as the exemption no longer applies.
If the driver has had to complete a log 8 or fewer days out of the last 30 days, the driver can use a paper log for the day. If the driver had to complete a log more than 8 days out of the last 30 days, the driver needs to use an electronic log for the day (unless one of the ELD exemptions applies, such as operating a vehicle older than model year 2000).
When a property-carrying driver is operating under the 150 air-mile exemption, the driver is also exempt from having to take the required 30-minute break (see 395.3(a)(3)(ii)).
If the driver began the day as a 150 air-mile driver and has driven more than 8 consecutive hours without a break, and something unexpected happens and the driver can no longer use the 150 air-mile exemption, the driver must stop and immediately take the 30-minute break as well as start logging. If the driver went outside of the 150 air-mile area before the driver had 8 hours of driving without a break from driving, the driver would be expected to take the break at the appropriate time.
Here are some of the common myths and misunderstandings about the 150 air-mile exemption:
The 150 air-mile exemption at 395.1(e)(2) only applies to drivers that: Operate property-carrying vehicles that do not require a CDL to operate, and Stay within the 150 air-miles of their work reporting location.
If the driver stays within the 150 air-mile radius of the work reporting location, and returns to the work reporting location within 14 hours on 5 of the last 7 days, and 16 hours on 2 of the last seven days, the driver is allowed to use a time record in place of a log.
If the driver does not meet the terms of the exception, the driver will need to complete a log for the day. If the driver had to log more than 8 days out of the last 30 days, the driver will need to use an electronic log for the day. All of the other issues discussed above would apply to these drivers as well.
If you have drivers that use these exemptions, you will need to check time records to make sure they are complying with the appropriate time limits. You will also need to check movement records to verify that the drivers using these exemptions are staying within the mandated area (within 150 air-miles of the work reporting location for the day).
If a driver is over the hours limit, or has gone too far, you need to verify that the submitted a log for the day, either paper or electronic, depending on how many days the driver had to log out of the previous 30 days.
During an audit, if it is discovered that your drivers are using these exemptions incorrectly, you will be cited for not having drivers’ logs when required. Each day this occurred will be another violation, so the fine could be rather large if you are not managing the use of these exemptions!
Many shippers are unaware of their responsibility to provide placards to drivers, but the responsibility shifts as soon as the driver hits the road.
Knowledge Check: What would you do in this placarding scenario? |
Check the regulations
According to Section 172.506 of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR), a shipper offering a hazardous material for transportation by highway must provide the motor carrier with the required placards for the material being offered. The shipper must offer the placards to the carrier prior to, or at the same time as, the material is offered for transportation — unless the vehicle is already placarded for the hazmat.
Section 172.506 also states that no motor carrier may transport a hazardous material in a motor vehicle unless the required placards for the hazmat are affixed to the vehicle. Before transport, the driver is responsible for displaying the required placards for all the hazmat that is on the vehicle.
Avoid issues with shippers
Many trailers are equipped with flip placards that represent most classes of hazardous materials but without adequate training, shippers may not understand their responsibility to provide the driver with the required placards. If a driver arrives and the shipper fails to provide placards, the driver should contact dispatch for additional instructions or drive to a truck stop to secure the necessary placards. The driver becomes responsible for placards as soon as the trailer enters a public highway, so train your drivers to temporarily refuse the shipment until the proper placards can be obtained. If necessary, the driver must bobtail or leave empty before driving to pick up placards.
Another common placarding question with shippers involves combination loads. If a driver arrives at a shipper’s location and is already transporting a hazardous material below the placarding threshold, is the shipper required to provide placards for the combination load on the trailer? In this scenario, the driver already has 600 pounds of a Class 8 corrosive material on the trailer, and the shipper is offering an additional 500 pounds of the same commodity. The regulations state that the shipper is only required to provide placards for the commodity that is being offered, not for the aggregate weight of both shipments. In this scenario, the driver is responsible for providing placards since it involves a combination load.
The Hazardous Materials Regulations are complex, especially for newer employees. Drivers that can speak “hazmat” to shippers often secure additional business, so be sure to train your drivers and give them the confidence to have impactful conversations with shippers.
Key to remember: Carry extra placards in case a shipper is unable to supply the required placards or a combination of hazmat on the vehicle requires different placards.
**Update 5/2/25: The CVSA has taken emergency action to make violations of the English-language standard an out-of-service condition, effective June 25, 2025. The group took the emergency move to meet the president's 60-day deadline.**
The current administration is taking steps to reinforce English language proficiency requirements for commercial drivers. The goal is to improve roadway safety per the president’s April 28 executive order, “Enforcing Commonsense Rules of the Road for America’s Truck Drivers.”
In addition to addressing the English-language requirements, the Department of Transportation also plans to review non-domiciled commercial driver’s licenses to identify unusual patterns or other irregularities with these licenses.
The executive order requires Secretary of Transportation Sean P. Duffy to rescind “English Language Proficiency Testing and Enforcement Policy MC-ECE-2016-006,” which is the current Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) guidance on English-language enforcement. The order directs Secretary Duffy to rescind the 2016 guidance and reissue new guidance to both FMCSA and enforcement personnel within 60 days of April 28.
Under the order, the new guidance for enforcement personnel will outline the new inspection procedures needed to verify compliance with 391.11(b)(2).
Once the new guidance has been issued, the order directs FMCSA to take steps to ensure that out-of-service criteria are updated to place violators of the English language proficiency requirement out of service.
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations state that a driver who is unable to sufficiently read or speak English or understand signs cannot operate a commercial vehicle, but the 2016 FMCSA enforcement directive ordered inspectors not to place drivers out of service for violating the language requirements. The new April 28 order seeks to replace FMCSA’s directive to reduce the likelihood of avoidable language-related accidents on the road.
In March 2025, the president declared English as the official language of the United States.
One question that comes up when reviewing roadside inspection reports is, “What is the meaning of the letters that follow a violation of 392.2 on a roadside inspection report?”
A violation of 392.2 is a violation of a local or state law, regulation, or ordinance. These must be obeyed due to 392.2, which reads, “Every commercial motor vehicle must be operated in accordance with the laws, ordinances, and regulations of the jurisdiction in which it is being operated.”
The confusion is that there are no paragraphs in 392.2, so there technically should be no letters following that section. However, to inform the driver, carrier, and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) what particular state or local law or regulation was involved, FMCSA has developed a system of suffix codes. The letters following “392.2” – the “suffix” — show which state or local law or regulation was involved.
When one of these codes is used, the officer should include a description of the specific violation in the “violation details” area on the actual inspection report. FYI: Summary roadside inspection reports (such as the ones visible in CSA’s SMS) do not show these details.
For more information, see our ezExplanation on Roadside Inspections. |
Not all of these state and local law or regulation violations are used by the FMCSA for scoring purposes. The Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) Safety Measurement System (SMS) does not use the 392.2 violations that cannot be tied to crash causation. Here are a couple of examples: 392.2UCR Failure to pay UCR fee and 392.2W Size and weight are not used.
Below are the top 10392.2violations written during 2021. All of these violations are safety-related, and therefore used in the CSA SMS for scoring. The BASIC within the SMS the violation is scored in is shown following the violation description.
In general, FMCSA does not write traffic codes. They rely on local and state agencies to do that. When state or local traffic codes are violated, it appears on a roadside inspection report as a violation of 392.2, with a suffix indicating which traffic code was involved.
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) has built security measures into its registration system to verify you are who you say you are. FMCSA now requires new registrants to pass an identity proofing and verification check through the Unified Registration System (URS) to obtain new registration (either a USDOT number or USDOT number and operating authority).
Effective January 1, 2025, Login.gov is solely used for accessing the FMCSA Portal and the URS.
If you have an existing FMCSA Portal account, verify your FMCSA Portal profile, ensuring your portal account's email matches your Login.gov account.
If you haven't registered with Login.gov yet, use your Portal account email for registration.
As of January 20, 2025, FMCSA registration options have been integrated into the FMCSA Portal to enhance security and comply with the presidential mandate for multi-factor authentication (MFA).
Online updates can now be made to:
If you already have a Login.gov account, you don’t need to create a new one. Use your existing Login.gov account only if it’s not already associated with an FMCSA Portal account. Each FMCSA Portal account type — whether for a company employee, associate of a company, insurance filer, or BOC-3 filer — requires its own unique Login.gov account. You cannot use the same Login.gov account for multiple FMCSA Portal accounts.
The system will still allow intrastate carriers to obtain a USDOT number if their state requires it. Those carriers can apply for a USDOT number as intrastate carriers and go through the same identity verification and business verification processes as other system users. However, FMCSA won’t track or monitor state requirements in the new FMCSA registration system.
The goal of the new registration system is to transition from a paper-based registration system to a completely online process where common transactions can be completed in minutes. The elimination of paper-based forms is a subject for future rulemaking. Until there’s a regulatory change, FMCSA will continue to accept paper forms. Paper-based requests are expected to take longer to process than those completed online in the new system. The additional time is needed for the agency to manually review, verify, confirm, and process information that otherwise would be conducted automatically and electronically by the system.
Key to remember: Stay up to date with changes as FMCSA simplifies the registration process; streamlines identification; develops a new, user-friendly registration system; and incorporates enhanced verification tools.
Because the stock market has been volatile in 2025, employees may be nervous about what that’s doing to their 401(k) accounts and look to their HR department for guidance. Being an HR professional, however, doesn’t make you financial adviser. But what can you say to help reassure them?
First, it’s important to draw a line between education and advice. When approached by concerned employees, you may emphasize the long-term nature of these types of accounts. It’s okay to remind them that 401(k)s are for retirement, and the best approach traditionally has been to avoid drastic actions.
You should not, however, cross the line and give specific advice about:
Advice in those areas should be left up to professionally licensed fiduciaries. Fiduciaries are financial advisers who are legally obligated to act in the best interest of their clients.
Key to remember: Employees may be worried about their 401(k) account balances during times of market volatility and look to HR for help. It’s important to be supportive, and provide education, but leave financial advice to the experts.
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.
An employee came to you with a complaint about being picked on. You investigated and found the employee’s story to be true. The workplace bully was disciplined and eventually quit. The problem seems to have been solved, but it’s likely the employee, and maybe others, are suffering residual effects from the incident.
In a 2024 Forbes article, Bryan Robinson, Ph.D., refers to the ongoing negative impact an experience like this can have on a person, calling it a “work wound.”
People suffer from invisible work wounds as the result of:
Unaddressed work wounds can last for months or even years, and carryover to new jobs in the future. They often have a snowballing effect leading to more bullying, bad behavior, and betrayal. Employees suffering from work wounds can experience anger or suffer from mental health issues, like stress, that may lead to burnout. Eventually, the result is employee churn, loss of productivity, and even dangerous behaviors in the workplace.
Strategies for addressing work wounds include:
Key to remember: Employees may be suffering from psychological work wounds that are the result of something that happened to them on the job recently, or in the past, even at a previous employer. Leaders should work to heal these wounds and prevent future wounds from occurring.
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.
Employers sometimes get tripped up on how to calculate the 1,250 hours worked eligibility criterion when employees need leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA).
Does working overtime count toward the 1,250?
Recently, someone asked if overtime hours counted toward the 1,250 hours worked requirement (it does).
All hours actually worked apply to the 1,250, whether overtime or regular time, even if the overtime is not mandatory.
The 1,250 hours is calculated in relation to when the leave will begin, not when the employee puts an employer on notice of the need for leave.
Whether an employee is allowed to work overtime, however, is generally up to company policy. As far as pay goes, remember, if the employee is nonexempt (“hourly”) and works any overtime (mandatory or voluntary) the employee must be paid time and one-half for all hours worked over 40 within the workweek.
More about FMLA leave requirements
To be eligible to take FMLA leave, employees must:
Whether an employee has worked the minimum 1,250 hours is calculated based on determining compensable hours or work under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
Calculating the 1,250 hours worked
When it comes to figuring out if an employee has worked at least 1,250 hours, it can get tricky. As was mentioned above, all hours worked, regular and overtime, must be counted.
Hours not worked should not be counted. The “not worked hours” include such time off as vacation time, sick leave, paid or unpaid holidays, or any other time in which an employee isn’t actually working — which can include disability, bereavement, FMLA and other forms of leave.
Once an employee meets the three eligibility criteria, including the 1,250 hours worked, for a particular leave reason, the employee remains eligible for the duration of the 12-month leave year period.
If the employee needs leave for another, different reason, eligibility would be recalculated.
Key to remember: All hours worked must be included in the 1,250 hours criterion when determining whether an employee is eligible for FMLA leave. Hours that aren’t worked (like vacation) are not included.
A new year often begins a new round of employee performance reviews. Since the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) allows eligible employees to take up to 12 (or 26) weeks of leave, many events can occur during an employee’s leave, including the employee’s pre-scheduled performance review. Such reviews might take place on an annual or other scheduled basis. How you treat the timing of those reviews should include some thought.
If, for example, Jo Employee takes 12 weeks of FMLA leave, during which her annual performance review is scheduled, here are some questions to ponder:
Delaying a review
An annual performance review generally takes into consideration a full years’ worth of work. Some employers think it’s best to delay the performance review by the same amount of time an employee took FMLA leave to capture an entire years’ work. This practice, however, might risk running afoul of one of the cornerstones of the FMLA: Returning the employee to his or her position, including the equivalent pay, benefits, and working conditions.
The issues can be particularly concerning if the performance review affects wage increases or other compensation.
What the regulations say
The FMLA regulations indicate that an equivalent position includes equivalent pay, which includes any unconditional pay increases that may have occurred during the FMLA leave period. Equivalent pay also includes bonuses or payments, whether discretionary or non-discretionary. FMLA leave cannot undermine the employee’s right to such pay.
Furthermore, “… employers cannot use the taking of FMLA leave as a negative factor in employment actions, such as hiring, promotions, or disciplinary actions; nor can FMLA leave be counted under no fault attendance policies.” [29 CFR 825.220(c)]
Avoiding a negative factor
Therefore, you would need to look at whether delaying an employee’s performance review could be seen as having a negative factor for the employee.
If, for example, Jo Employee took 12 weeks of leave from April through June, during which she would otherwise have obtained a pay increase in May, but you delayed this increase until September (so you could use a full 12 months of work), you may have violated the equivalent pay provision. If delaying a review creates a new review schedule going forward, the negative impacts could continue.
If, however, a pay increase is conditioned upon seniority, length of service, or work performed, you would grant it in accordance with your policy or practice as applied to other employees on an equivalent leave status for a reason that does not qualify as FMLA leave.
In other words, don’t treat an employee on FMLA leave differently than you would an employee on other forms of leave.
Key to remember: It might be less risky to keep the performance review on schedule and prorate wage increases to account for FMLA leave.
Many safety professionals struggle to increase safety culture and employee engagement. Part of the challenge is focusing on changing results rather than focusing on the employees’ experiences and perceptions that drive their choices.
Authors Roger Connors and Tom Smith introduced the Results Pyramid in the book, “Change the Culture, Change the Game.” The concept is that experiences drive beliefs, and beliefs drive actions. Finally, actions drive results (the top of the pyramid). Employers that want to change the results should focus on changing the experiences and beliefs at the base of the pyramid.
Changing employees’ beliefs won’t happen quickly. Most people try to fit a new experience into their pre-conceived ideas. Beliefs developed over many years do not change based on a handful of experiences. However, simply telling employees to make different choices may not effectively drive change if the employees’ experiences don’t support the new behaviors.
In short, the results pyramid suggests that employers identify which employee actions would drive the desired results, then determine what experiences and beliefs they can foster to encourage those actions.
Company culture is built on employees’ experiences because that provides the motivation for their actions (and therefore their results). For example, if the employer emphasizes production, then employees will act in ways that deliver maximum productivity.
Arguably, the results pyramid could be a circle because a company’s reactions to results also affect the employees’ experiences. A positive outcome that is met with praise creates an experience that employers hope will encourage desired behaviors in the future. Similarly, a negative outcome that results in discipline creates an experience intended to discourage certain behaviors.
As noted, people usually don’t change their beliefs based on a handful of experiences. Repetition is often necessary, but if that does not change results (like giving repeated warnings), employers should try a different approach. Remember that employee actions are a product of their experiences and beliefs. For related information, see our article, Poor attitude is a symptom, not a cause of non-compliance.
Understanding how management affects that decision-making can help employers attain the desired results. Telling employees what to do attempts to influence their actions, but employees may follow their beliefs rather than their instructions, based on what they think the company expects from them.
Recognizing this can help employers focus their communication to change the beliefs that drive employee actions. If employees believe that safety is a lower priority than production, that will impact their decision-making and actions.
Trying to change employee actions by telling them what to do can be effective if the instructions do not contradict their beliefs. For example, providing instruction in areas where employees have no experience (like how to operate a forklift) should be effective. However, if a forklift operator’s future experiences create a belief that speed is a top priority, the operator may take safety shortcuts to get work done faster. At that point, telling the operator to slow down probably won’t be effective because it conflicts with the operator’s experience and beliefs. Only by creating new experiences and changing those beliefs will the operator start to behave differently.
Key to remember: Employees experiences create their perceptions of what they believe their employer expects, and they may ignore instructions that conflict with those experiences.
What if forklifts could prevent accidents before they even occur? Thanks to advances in technology, this is quickly becoming a reality that safety managers need to understand. According to OSHA, up to 62,000 forklift injuries occur annually, with an estimated eighty-five fatalities per year. Fortunately, advancements in technology can improve forklift safety and regulatory compliance. Here’s how employers and forklift manufacturers are using technology to reduce accidents and enhance efficiency:
One of the most significant forklift safety advancements is using smart sensors and avoidance systems. Modern forklifts equipped with sensors, cameras, and radars can now detect structures, pedestrians, and other lifts in real-time. Like today’s vehicles, advanced systems include automatic braking, which stops the forklift before a collision occurs.
Telematics systems have revolutionized forklift compliance by providing real-time data on vehicle usage, operator behaviors, and maintenance needs. These systems can track key metrics like speed, inspection data, impact events, and seatbelt use. Telematics can also identify unsafe driving habits, allowing employers to deliver targeted training programs to improve operator behaviors.
Additionally, telematics helps employers by better preparing them to investigate forklift incidents when no witnesses or camera footage exists. It does this by providing information like where on the lift the impact occurred. The system can also lock the lift down in the spot where the incident occurred, notify supervisors, and provide the speed at which the operator was going.
Simulators have transformed how employers can deliver training by allowing forklift operators to practice in a risk-free environment. Simulators can recreate real-world scenarios such as navigating tight spaces, managing different loads, and learning the exact controls of the lift they will operate. Additionally, e-learning platforms provide interactive training modules that ensure operators stay updated on regulations and best practices.
Modern forklifts with advanced weight sensors and stability control systems help prevent unsafe lifting practices. These systems provide real-time feedback to operators, alerting them if a load exceeds the forklift’s weight capacity or is improperly balanced. Modern lifts even have load leveling technology that adjusts the forks to ensure a stable and secure lift.
Technology has streamlined forklift inspections and regulatory compliance through digital checklists and automated reporting. Mobile apps and onboarding systems allow operators to complete pre-shift inspections accurately and retain the record without hanging on to paper copies. Compliance automation can also send alerts to inform the employer when an operator’s license is expiring, or when issues arise during a pre-shift inspection. This technology can even enable employers to distribute operator-assigned key cards, allowing operators to access only lifts on which they have received training and certification.
As technology continues to evolve, forklift safety will only improve. Companies that invest in these advancements put themselves in a position to reduce downtime, lower insurance costs, and improve overall productivity. So, embrace innovation; it is a step toward a safer and more productive workplace.
Key to remember: Technology can help operators prevent collisions, improve operator skills, simplify record-keeping, and keep businesses compliant.
Teen workers can be an asset to your company, especially if business ramps up during the summer months and you need more hands on deck. These young people may be both excited and anxious when they start their seasonal jobs. While it's an opportunity to go out into the world on their own, learn new skills, and earn money, they're entering an environment with unfamiliar faces, tasks, and expectations. That means employers need to explain the policies, procedures, and potential hazards the “kids” would encounter, as well as how to safely perform their work. In fact, safety training on certain topics is required by OSHA, no matter the age of the employee!
Teen workers have a high rate of job-related injuries, due in part to the industries in which they work — such as retail and food service — combined with little or no prior work experience and a lack of safety training. They must be trained just as any other employee would when starting a new job, including temporary workers. However, keep in mind it may be their first time in the workforce or the first time they’re operating equipment. Extra training may go a long way!
OSHA outlines the following employer responsibilities for teen workers:
Key to remember: Just like workers in other age demographics, teen workers must be trained to safely perform their assigned tasks prior to beginning work. Training should also include recognition of workplace hazards, what to do if injured or ill, and who to ask if questions or concerns arise.
In late April 2025, a worker at a manufacturing facility in upstate South Carolina was leaving his shift for the day when another employee struck him in a vehicle. The incident offered a stark reminder of how employers may overlook parking lot safety. Whether it is slips and trips, vehicle accidents, poor lighting, or even crime, parking lots carry real risks and employers can face serious liability if they do not take actions to address them. Recognizing these risks is the first step in addressing them and reducing liability. Regular inspections are essential for identifying and correcting hazards before they lead to incidents. Leadership should frequently check for damaged pavement, pooled water, malfunctioning lights, and inadequate signage. Documenting inspections along with corrective actions can serve as a strong legal defense if an accident occurs.
Ongoing maintenance ensures that the parking lot remains safe year-round. This includes patching potholes, repainting faded lines and crosswalks, trimming overgrown landscaping, and cleaning up spills and debris. Neglecting these tasks not only increases the likelihood of accidents but also weakens any argument that the employer acted responsibly. In addition, if an OSHA inspector arrives to conduct an inspection and notices poor maintenance outdoors, the inspector may expect similar conditions indoors. Lighting and surveillance are crucial components of a safe parking environment. Proper lighting – especially in corners, walkways, and entrances – not only reduces the chance of injuries but can also discourage criminal activity. Additionally, installing security cameras or scheduling security patrols adds another layer of protection and can be a major tool in establishing root cause or fault in an incident.
Accidents spike when drivers are confused or lost, diverting their focus from driving. Clear signage and effective traffic flow design play a crucial role in preventing confusion and reducing the likelihood of vehicle accidents. Signs should clearly indicate one-way traffic, designate accessible and emergency parking areas, mark crosswalks, and clearly indicate speed limits. In high-risk zones, employers can further reinforce safety by installing speed bumps or raised walkways to slow traffic and protect pedestrians. Employee education is another key factor. Workers should receive training to stay alert in the parking lot, report any hazards or suspicious activity, and understand any company policies regarding safety escorts or after-hour procedures. Deliver regular reminders rather than waiting for a complaint or near-miss incident in the parking lot. When employees are part of the safety culture, they help prevent incidents and reinforce the organization’s commitment to their well-being. Finally, even with preventive measures in place, accidents can still happen. That is why it is important to have a response plan. This includes establishing an incident reporting procedure, documenting events thoroughly, and maintaining open communication with your employees. The ability to respond quickly and effectively can significantly reduce both the impact of an incident and the legal consequences that could follow.
Keys to remember: Keep parking lots safe with regular maintenance, good lighting, clear signage, and employee awareness. A proactive approach not only prevents accidents but also protects businesses from liability.
One motor vehicle parts manufacturer could wind up with the highest OSHA penalty in the last 10 years. That figure could also be within the top 20 stiffest penalties in the agency’s history! The recent initial mega-penalty amount is in part thanks to a longstanding OSHA “instance-by-instance” citation policy.
That policy multiplies penalties by the number of “instances” of the alleged violation. An instance may be per machine, employee, location, entry, etc. Let’s say the maximum penalty for one violation is $165,514. That can quickly climb to $1,655,140 if the violation impacts 10 employees, for example. Read more about the policy in our article, “OSHA carves out time for THREE more inspection memos.”
Last July, two Nevada OSHA follow-up inspections on the same day found 70 alleged violations at the parts manufacturing site. All but six of them were considered serious, repeat, or willful violations. A health inspection amounted to $4,137,482 in initial penalties. The safety inspection came in at $176,593. Alleged per-instance violations included:
The “extra” instances amounted to over $3.6 million in penalties. Remaining “one-off” citations and penalties went to various standards. Those included injury and illness recordkeeping and reporting, general PPE, machine guarding, and electrical standards.
The manufacturer has contested all the citations in the two cases. We won’t know the final penalty amounts until the cases are settled or closed.
The auto parts maker is not alone. Employers cited $40,000 or more in a single inspection since January 1, 2015, are posted on OSHA’s website. After freezing the data for a few months, the agency just updated the list. Now that list of high-penalty inspections has surpassed the 15,000 mark.
We calculate there were about 125 high-penalty cases per month on average through April 2025. That’s a span of 10 years and four months. The average is about 1,500 high-penalty cases per year.
OSHA’s total penalty amounts can and have pushed into the tens of millions of dollars for a single inspection. However, the highest initial penalty figures for a single inspection since 2015 include:
The majority (78 percent) of inspections on the list are under $100,000 in initial penalties. To learn more, search OSHA’s “Enforcement Cases with Initial Penalties of $40,000 or Above” tool by:
“Initial penalty” amounts are not necessarily the final or current penalty amounts. Not all cases are final. Some cases might have even ended up with a final total penalty under $40,000. Also, some employers are listed in the tool more than once. It just depends on how many penalty cases at or over $40,000 they had.
A disclaimer on the tool explains that it is updated weekly. There’s also a short posting delay to ensure the parties are notified.
A recent Nevada OSHA case illustrates OSHA’s use of its instance-by-instance citation policy. The initial total penalty amount in the case is the highest we’ve seen in 10 years. OSHA tracks all cases with initial penalty amounts over $40,000 and posts them on its website.
If you are tempted to use artificial intelligence (AI) to fine-tune your first aid safety program, you may want to pause for a moment! Although AI can provide a wealth of information, it relies heavily on algorithms that find and interpret a vast library of internet content, some of which may not be as accurate as intended.
Let’s take our first aid program for example. When using a free AI tool, I asked it, “What are OSHA’s first aid program requirements?” and only got partial truths that could have resulted in compliance issues and potential citations.
AI advised that, “OSHA doesn’t have a specific “First Aid Program” standard, but their regulations do require employees to provide prompt medical attention under the General Duty Clause of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970.”
Sure, this is partially true that the standard isn’t called a “First Aid Program” and there is a General Duty Clause. However, there is, in fact, an applicable Medical Services and First Aid standard at 29 CFR 1910.151 that this particular search didn’t identify.
Without putting in the proper manual (human) effort of verifying the information, I could have been led astray and missed a lot of key regulatory requirements that are necessary.
AI can be incredibly helpful, but it’s not human. It can’t replace the experience and decision-making process we humans provide. The information or analytics put out is completely dependent not only on what information is initially put in (by humans), but also on how we develop the prompts telling AI what to look for.
For the above example, by changing my prompt from “what are OSHA’s first aid requirements” to “OSHA first aid standard,” I was finally provided information on 1910.151 that includes:
When you see the word “shall” in any standard, the employer doesn’t have a choice — it must be done and if not, could be cited. So, without putting in the extra effort to do more AI searching and regulatory comparison, I may have missed these requirements, costing the company money in non-compliance, but more concerning, potentially causing serious injury to an employee.
To avoid First Aid and other program citations, we must keep AI in check by doing our homework to ensure the information is accurate. This can be done in various ways:
Keys to remember: AI output is only as good as the human-entered information it is searching and interpreting. Users must verify regulatory information to avoid potential citations for program non-compliance.