
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).
Compliance with the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program can seem just as intimidating as driving on a multi-level interchange in a major city that you’ve never been to before. Thankfully, helpful guidance (like a reliable GPS) can help gasoline and diesel refiners and importers route a path to success.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a partial waiver on July 7, 2025, that lowers the 2024 renewable fuel volume requirement for cellulosic biofuel. As a result, refiners and importers have a lower volume threshold to meet for this category of renewable fuel. EPA’s recent action highlights the key to the program: volume requirements.
Use this road map of the basics to understand how refiners and importers of gasoline and diesel comply with the RFS program.
The RFS program (see 40 CFR Part 80 Subpart M) requires gasoline and diesel fuel (called transportation fuel) that’s sold in the U.S. to contain a specific volume of renewable fuel. There are four renewable fuel categories:
The route to compliance for refiners and importers that produce, distribute, and sell transportation fuel consists of annual standards, volume requirements, and demonstration.
EPA sets national annual volume requirements for renewable fuel that must be blended into the U.S. market’s total amount of transportation fuel. The agency establishes volumes for each renewable fuel category in addition to corresponding percentage standards.
For example, EPA’s waiver for cellulosic biofuel lowered the 2024 annual volume requirement to 1.01 billion gallons and the percentage standard to 0.59 percent, due to lower-than-expected production volume.
Refiners and importers of transportation fuel (“obligated parties”) use the annual percentage standards to determine the number of gallons of gasoline or diesel fuel they must blend individually.
Obligated parties have to meet Renewable Volume Obligations (RVOs) for each type of renewable fuel. RVOs are based on the amount of fuel the parties produce or import (essentially, their share of total transportation fuel). They calculate individual RVOs using this formula:
Consider an example using the amended 2024 requirements for cellulosic biofuel with these factors:
In this example, the RVO for cellulosic biofuel in 2024 is 2,950 gallons.
Obligated parties must demonstrate compliance with their individualized RVOs annually. To do so, they need to obtain and retire enough Renewable Identification Numbers (RINs) to meet the RVO for each renewable fuel category (80.1434(a)(1)).
Obligated parties can get RINs by:
Let’s look at a common path to obtaining RINs using a fuel blender:
Obligated parties report the retired RINs in their annual compliance report (80.1451(a)(1)).
Key to remember: The route to successful compliance with the Renewable Fuel Standard program for gasoline and diesel refiners and importers consists of annual standards, volume requirements, and demonstration.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a direct final rule that adds a reporting option for regulated coal combustion residuals (CCR) facilities and extends compliance deadlines for CCR facilities with CCR management units (CCRMUs). These units include (a) inactive CCR landfills and (b) closed CCR surface impoundments and landfills.
Who’s impacted?
The direct rule applies to facilities subject to EPA’s final rule published in 2024 (2024 Legacy Rule), including:
The 2024 Legacy Rule established regulations for:
What are the changes?
The 2024 regulations (40 CFR Part 257 Subpart D) require active CCR facilities and legacy CCR surface impoundments to submit the Facility Evaluation Report (FER) Part 1 and FER Part 2 that identify any CCRMUs of 1 ton or more on-site.
Facilities with CCRMUs must also:
EPA’s 2025 direct final rule gives regulated facilities the option to:
The rule also delays the compliance timelines for related CCRMU requirements.
Requirement | 2024 Legacy Rule deadline | 2025 direct final rule deadline |
FER Part 1 | February 9, 2026 | February 9, 2026, or February 8, 2027 |
FER Part 2 | February 8, 2027 | February 8, 2027 |
CCR website | February 9, 2026 | February 9, 2026, or February 8, 2027 |
Groundwater monitoring requirements | May 8, 2028 | August 8, 2029 |
Initial annual report | January 31, 2029 | January 31, 2030 |
Closure/post-closure care plan | November 8, 2028 | February 8, 2030 |
Initiate closure | May 8, 2029 | August 8, 2030 |
About the proposed rule
In conjunction with the direct final rule, EPA published a proposed rule to obtain public feedback on further delaying the FERs. The rule offers two compliance timeline options for the evaluation reports:
Additionally, the proposed rule adjusts the deadlines for the other compliance requirements to 12 months from the 2024 Legacy Rule deadlines. The only exception is the CCR website requirement, which corresponds to the FER Part 1 submission date; it could be delayed for up to 24 months.
If EPA receives adverse comments on the direct final rule, the agency will publish a withdrawal of the specific requirements that won’t take effect. The remaining regulations in the direct final rule will take effect. If the agency determines (based on public feedback) to extend the FER Part 2 deadline by 12 months, the agency will withdraw the 2025 direct final rule and conduct the standard rulemaking procedures to apply the extension.
Key to remember: EPA offers active and inactive coal combustion facilities an alternative option to comply with the Facility Evaluation Report and adjusts the compliance timelines for regulations related to CCR management units.
In the world of industrial operations, environmental compliance and workplace safety are often treated as parallel tracks. But in truth, they’re deeply intertwined and two sides of the same coin. Nowhere is this more evident than in the management of hazardous waste and chemical storage.
I recall a visit to a mid-sized manufacturing facility in the Midwest a few years ago. The team had recently undergone a rigorous inspection by the Environmental Protection Agency and proudly walked me through their updated hazardous materials storage area. Everything looked pristine with clearly labeled drums, secondary containment, and a digital tracking system for waste manifests. But as we rounded a corner, I noticed an unlabeled 55-gallon drum tucked behind a stack of pallets. It was leaking.
The safety manager’s face fell. “That’s from a maintenance crew swap last week,” the manager admitted. “It slipped through the cracks.”
That single oversight triggered a cascade of actions: an internal safety audit, retraining on labeling protocols, and a temporary halt to operations in that zone. Fortunately, no one was harmed, but it was a stark reminder that environmental compliance isn’t just about avoiding fines. It’s about protecting people.
When hazardous waste is mismanaged, the risks extend beyond environmental damage. Improper storage can lead to chemical reactions, fires, or toxic exposures. Compliance frameworks like the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (or RCRA) and OSHA’s Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (known as HAZWOPER) Standard exist not only to satisfy regulators but also to safeguard the very people who keep our industries running.
As we continue to navigate evolving regulations and sustainability goals, let’s remember: every label, every log, and every inspection is a step toward a safer, healthier workplace. Compliance isn’t a checkbox; it’s a commitment.
Chemical substances appear in nearly every type of workplace, but what happens when a chemical substance is found to unreasonably endanger the health of workers and others who encounter it? The law mandates that environmental regulations be implemented to reduce or eliminate such risks. That’s where a workplace chemical protection program (WCPP) comes in. It’s designed to protect individuals who are or may be exposed to potentially harmful chemical substances.
Take, for example, the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) December 2024 final rule on trichloroethylene (TCE), which ultimately bans all uses of the chemical. But, the rule allows certain industrial and commercial uses to continue for a limited time if facilities comply with the rule’s WCPP.
It’s important to note that on June 23, 2025, EPA delayed the effective date for WCPP requirements that apply to the Toxic Substances Control Act’s (TSCA’s) Section 6(g) exemptions (40 CFR 751.325) to August 19, 2025. However, the delay doesn’t apply to nonexempt industrial and commercial uses with longer phaseout timelines (751.305), such as using TCE as a processing solvent in battery manufacturing.
Discover what to expect if your facility becomes subject to a WCPP.
When specific uses of chemical substances (i.e., conditions of use) in an occupational setting may pose unreasonable risks of injury to employees or the environment, Section 6 of TSCA requires EPA to develop regulations that reduce or mitigate those risks. The agency implements WCPPs to address the risks.
A WCPP requires covered entities to take certain actions in the workplace that shield individuals who engage with the conditions of use from inhalation and/or dermal risk.
The requirements of a WCPP may apply to entities that manufacture (including import), process, distribute in commerce, use, or dispose of a TSCA-regulated chemical substance.
The WCPP program extends beyond those who directly handle a regulated chemical substance to anyone in the workplace who’s exposed or who could be exposed to it (e.g., employees, independent contractors, volunteers, etc.).
A WCPP generally consists of multiple elements:
If your facility is subject to a WCPP, it’s essential to know the regulations that apply to the specific chemical substance. The chemical’s rule will define the conditions of use to which the WCPP applies and may contain different or additional requirements. Also, state or local regulations may have stricter rules that dictate how (and if) your facility can use the chemical substance.
Key to remember: Facilities that use TSCA-regulated chemical substances may have to comply with EPA’s workplace chemical protection program to protect workers and other exposed individuals from unreasonable health risks.
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!
Two never-before-mentioned rulemakings reached the Office of Management and Budget for review on June 18. The two actions (one on respiratory protection and the other on the General Duty Clause) are only at the proposed rule stage, so stakeholders will have a chance to comment. At this time, it’s unclear whether the proposals are regulatory or de-regulatory. We’ll provide an update in a future monthly roundup as more information becomes available.
OSHA updated its Site-Specific Targeting program to reflect the use of Form 300A data for calendar years 2021 through 2023. This is OSHA’s primary planned inspection program for general industry establishments with 20 or more employees with the highest injury and illness rates. OSHA uses the data to target establishments for inspection.
Each year, backover incidents lead to serious injuries and fatalities in construction zones and workplaces. These incidents happen when drivers lose sight of people, objects, or vehicles behind them. To help prevent these incidents, OSHA launched #MirrorCheck, an initiative to raise awareness of safe work practices that can prevent backovers.
Effective June 27, Kentucky’s occupational safety and health standards are limited to those enforced by federal OSHA. The state will no longer adopt, promulgate, or enforce rules that are more stringent than federal OSHA. Kentucky operates an OSHA-approved State Plan covering most private sector workers and all state and local government workers.
As part of its Heat Illness Prevention campaign, OSHA has added two new resources for employers. One is a customizable guide for creating a toolbox talk on handling heat emergencies. The other explains the risks of heat illness for young workers.
And finally, turning to environmental news, EPA has again delayed the deadline for submitting data on 16 chemical substances required by the Toxic Substances Control Act Health and Safety Data Reporting rule. Manufacturers now have until May 22, 2026, to report on all of the covered chemical substances.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) updated air quality rules for fine particle pollution (PM2.5), reducing the annual standard from 12.0 to 9.0 micrograms per cubic meter. The rule change was announced on February 7, 2024 and was published as a final rule in the Federal Register on March 6, 2024. The change was based on research linking PM2.5 to health problems like heart disease and early death.
Within one year of the final rule (February 7, 2025), governors from each state were required to submit area designation recommendations (attainment, nonattainment, or unclassifiable) to EPA. By February of 2026 (at the latest) EPA is expected to issue final area designations based on State recommendations, air quality data, and other factors.
There is a caveat that on March 12, 2025, EPA announced that the agency will reconsider the rule that tightened the standard from 12.0 to 9.0 micrograms per cubic meter by reviewing implementation concerns and getting stakeholder feedback, but as of this writing, the tighter standard is still in place.
If your business is in one of the areas that will be newly listed as nonattainment for PM2.5, you will face new rules designed to improve air quality. Understanding these changes will help you stay compliant and keep operations running smoothly.
Check out this explanation of nonattainment on Compliance Network's Environmental Institute.
The stricter PM2.5 rule will impact many industries, particularly those that emit a lot of fine particle pollution. Some of the most affected sectors include:
These industries may see higher costs, stricter permits, and changes to operations to meet the new standards.
Businesses in nonattainment areas must follow stricter PM2.5 rules. This may mean updating operations or investing in better pollution control technology. The goal is to reduce fine particle emissions that harm air quality and health.
Businesses expanding or changing operations that increase PM2.5 pollution may need new permits. These permits show compliance with tighter pollution limits.
States with nonattainment areas must update their air quality plans. This could mean new industry rules, such as lowering emissions, increasing monitoring, or changing reporting requirements.
Expect closer tracking of your business’ pollution levels, including real-time monitoring and more frequent reports. Compliance checks may be stricter in nonattainment areas.
If a business increases PM2.5 pollution, it may need to offset that by reducing pollution somewhere else in the same area. This ensures the total pollution level does not rise.
Businesses in nonattainment areas may see higher costs due to stricter rules. Local governments might offer rewards or fines to encourage pollution reductions. Companies may need to find cost-effective ways to lower their PM2.5 levels while staying efficient.
Key to Remember: By having a plan for the possibility of nonattainment now, your business can adjust to the new PM2.5 rules while helping improve air quality and public health.
At first glance, an empty container seems like a non-issue — no product, no problem. But in the eyes of regulators, “empty” is a carefully defined status that can determine whether a container is harmless or still subject to hazardous waste rules, labeling, and fire or environmental risk controls. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and OSHA have detailed definitions of what “empty” truly means. Misunderstanding these rules can lead to serious incidents, hefty fines, and unintentional noncompliance.
Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), a container that once held hazardous waste is only legally “empty” if it meets particular criteria outlined in 40 CFR 261.7. The first standard that must be satisfied is that all material has been removed from the container using normal means such as pouring, pumping, or aspirating. Secondly, no more than 2.5 centimeters or 1 inch of residue remains on the container's bottom or inner lining. Additionally, if the container holds less than 110 gallons, it is empty if no more than 3 percent of the total weight or volume exists. Of course, sometimes special circumstances require further evaluation. For example, a gas cylinder is not empty until the pressure has reduced to atmospheric levels, and acute hazardous waste containers must be triple rinsed with an appropriate solvent or cleaned by another approved method. If these conditions are not met, the container is still legally considered to contain hazardous waste, even if it feels empty.
While EPA focuses on environmental disposal and waste management, OSHA’s concern with empty containers centers on worker safety, particularly the potential for exposure to hazardous residues or vapors. Under OSHA’s Hazard Communication Standard (29 CFR 1910.1200), a container that previously held hazardous chemicals must retain its original hazard label until it is adequately cleaned or until the employer removes the label following proper decontamination procedures. For example, a drum labeled “Flammable” must keep this label even if it appears empty, as residual material or vapors may still pose a significant ignition or fire risk. Removing such labels prematurely could lead to workplace hazards and violations of OSHA regulations.
Employers must first clearly determine which rules apply to them: whether the container held hazardous materials governed by EPA regulations, hazardous chemicals subject to OSHA requirements, or both. Emptying procedures should be followed, including properly draining the container, performing triple-rinsing when required, and thoroughly documenting all decontamination activities. Original hazard labels must be maintained on containers until they are thoroughly cleaned or reconditioned, as removing labels prematurely violates OSHA’s Hazard Communication Standard. Additionally, employers should provide employees with training on the proper handling, labeling, and disposal of containers and ensure they fully understand what constitutes an empty container under federal standards. Finally, a detailed record of all rinsing, draining, and cleaning processes should be maintained to demonstrate compliance during EPA or state inspections.
Keys to remember: Employers should educate their teams, enforce proper cleaning procedures, and maintain compliance records to ensure they are staying compliant with “empty” container standards.
When it comes to oil spill prevention, it’s a good thing to be in “tiers.” Why? It’s because Tier I or Tier II qualified facilities have simplified requirements for the Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires facilities subject to the SPCC rule (40 CFR Part 112) to develop and implement a plan that describes how they will use operating procedures, control measures, and countermeasures to prevent oil spills from reaching navigable waters or adjoining shorelines. Typically, SPCC Plans must be certified by a professional engineer (PE), but qualified facilities can self-certify the plans.
Let’s compare Tier I and Tier II qualified facilities.
A qualified facility:
The SPCC rule identifies two types of qualified facilities:
SPCC Tier Tip: EPA provides a fact sheet (Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan Qualified Facilities Applicability) to help facilities determine eligibility as a qualified facility and (if applicable) which tier applies.
Tier I and Tier II qualified facilities are subject to many of the same requirements for SPCC Plans, including basic requirements, certification, and updates to qualification changes.
All qualified facilities have to develop and implement a written SPCC Plan. Each plan is unique to the facility, but all plans must include:
The primary similarity is that Tier I and Tier II qualified facilities may self-certify their SPCC Plans and amendments to the plan.
SPCC Tier Tip: Some states may not allow self-certification. EPA recommends checking with the state engineer licensing board to determine whether SPCC Plans can be self-certified.
When the status of a facility changes, the owner or operator must prepare and implement an SPCC Plan according to the requirements that apply to its new designation within six months.
Tier I facilities may still be able to self-certify if they meet the Tier II criteria; if so, these facilities can comply with the Tier II rules. However, facilities that are no longer eligible as qualified facilities have to comply with the full SPCC Plan requirements, including obtaining PE certification of the plan.
The primary difference between Tier I and Tier II facilities is the extent of the SPCC Plan. Additionally, Tier II facilities may employ certain alternative spill control methods.
Tier I qualified facilities may use the template in Appendix G of Part 112 as their SPCC Plan. It’s a simplified plan that only contains the requirements applicable to Tier I facilities.
These facilities must also:
Tier II qualified facilities have to develop a full SPCC Plan that complies with 112.7 and the applicable requirements of Subparts B and C of Part 112. This includes developing facility diagrams.
Tier II qualified facilities (with certification) may implement certain alternative measures and methods that Tier I facilities can’t. Tier II facilities must obtain written certification from a PE to include:
Qualified facilities, whether Tier I or Tier II, benefit from the ability to self-certify their SPCC Plans. That’s something that can make owners and operators “tier” up with happiness.
Key to remember: Tier I and Tier II qualified facilities share many similarities under the SPCC rule, but knowing where the requirements differ is vital to maintaining compliance.
Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news. Let's take a look at what happened over the last month!
OSHA will host an informal public hearing on its proposed Heat Injury and Illness Prevention rule on June 16. Information about the proposed rule and instructions on how to watch the hearing can be found on OSHA’s website.
OSHA’s National Safety Stand-Down to Prevent Falls in Construction event, held the week of May 5, raised awareness of fall hazards in an effort to help prevent injuries and fatalities. Slips, trips, and falls were the leading cause of death in the construction industry in 2023, accounting for 421 fatalities.
After concluding its investigation of a California chemical facility fire, the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board is calling for improved heater safeguards to prevent similar incidents. The fire was caused by an overheated refinery furnace. The Board also made several safety recommendations for chemical facilities.
Following a number of recent fall incidents, the Mine Safety and Health Administration issued a safety alert advising miners to use fall protection. The most recent incident occurred when a miner fell from the deck of a bulldozer.
Turning to environmental news, EPA further delayed the PFAS manufacturing report submission period. The date was moved from July 11, 2025, to April 13, 2026. This is a one-time reporting requirement for manufacturers of per- and polyfluoroalkyl, or PFAS, substances.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has again delayed the deadline for submitting data on 16 chemical substances required by the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Health and Safety Data Reporting rule. Manufacturers (including importers) now have until May 22, 2026, to report on all of the covered chemical substances.
What’s required?
The TSCA Section 8(d) Health and Safety Data Reporting rule (40 CFR Part 716) requires manufacturers (including importers) of 16 chemical substances to report data from:
The covered chemical substances include:
|
|
Note that EPA’s first extension in March 2025 moved the submission deadline for vinyl chloride to June 11, 2025, and for the remaining 15 chemical substances to September 9, 2025. This rule pushes the submission deadline for all chemical substances (including vinyl chloride) to May 22, 2026.
Who’s covered?
The rule applies to manufacturers in the North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes for chemical manufacturing (NAICS code 325) and petroleum refineries (NAICS code 324110) that:
The reporting requirement also applies to manufacturers of substances for commercial purposes that coincidentally produced a covered chemical substance during the manufacture, processing, use, or disposal of another substance or mixture (including byproducts and impurities).
How do you report?
Reporters submit the TSCA Section 8(d) data via the Chemical Information Submission System (or CISS) tool on the Chemical Safety and Pesticide Program (CSPP) system. The CSPP is accessed through EPA’s Central Data Exchange.
Key to remember: Manufacturers now have even more time to submit TSCA Section 8(d) health and safety data reports for 16 chemical substances.
There’s one question that all potential purchasers should ask before buying an industrial or commercial property: Could the business be held liable for hazardous substance contamination? The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), also called “Superfund,” allows the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to make both current and past facility owners and operators responsible for cleaning up sites contaminated by hazardous substances.
However, CERCLA offers liability protections to landowners and potential purchasers who didn’t cause or contribute to property contamination if they meet specific requirements, including conducting All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI).
Here’s how AAI can shield your organization from Superfund liability.
EPA defines AAI as “the process of evaluating a property’s environmental conditions and assessing potential liability for any contamination.” It encompasses the activities required by the AAI rule (40 CFR Part 312) to:
Potential property owners must comply with the AAI rule to claim protection from CERCLA liability. They may use one of three landowner defenses:
You must meet the AAI requirements if you plan to purchase a property for nonresidential use and may want to use CERCLA liability protections for hazardous substance releases or threatened releases after purchase.
The AAI rule requires an environmental professional to conduct most of the activities (312.21), but it also contains provisions that the potential owner must meet (312.22).
Who qualifies as an environmental professional?
An environmental professional has the needed background to identify conditions of a property that indicate releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances. According to 312.10, an environmental professional needs:
The AAI rule lists the actions needed to qualify for CERCLA liability protection using the landowner defenses. All AAI tasks must be completed before acquiring the property. Most tasks need to be completed within one year prior to purchasing a property. However, a handful of actions must happen within 180 days before purchase:
The environmental professional:
The potential landowner:
Report the results
The AAI results must be documented in a written report that’s signed by the environmental professional. It must include:
The regulations don’t provide specific requirements for the AAI format, and although the rules outline the actions you must take, it can be daunting to implement AAI without further guidance.
Consider using industry standards! EPA even references ASTM International Standards at 312.11 that you can use to comply.
Key to remember: Potential landowners can shield themselves from CERCLA liability for hazardous substance contamination by conducting All Appropriate Inquiries.
Thank you to all our members that have taken the time to provide the Compliance Network team with feedback on what they like and do not like about the site. We have taken this feedback to heart and have redesigned the homepage to better serve our members. Our goal is to make finding the information you need easier and faster.
Let’s take a tour!
Sitewide Search
We heard you. Search has been brought front and center to help you find the information you need quickly.
Activity Overview
The Activity Overview will provide quick access to items that matter to you.
Latest in your favorite Topics
This section will highlight any new content added to your selected topics of interest.
Network Polls and Discussion Activity
See what other professionals in your field are saying.
Premium Content
Exclusive content only available to Compliance Network members.
Trending
Catch up with what other professional like yourself are reading.
The new homepage will go live in June. Don’t hesitate to let us know what you think: compliancenetwork@jjkeller.com
A Title V operating permit is a legally enforceable document with the federal and state air emissions regulations that a facility must meet to operate. One requirement that applies to all Title V permit holders is the annual compliance certification. It answers whether a facility fulfills the permit’s terms and conditions (such as emissions limits, monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting).
Whether the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or a state or local regulatory agency issues the Title V permit, your facility must complete the annual compliance certification.
Discover what your facility needs to comply, certify, and repeat.
Facilities submit annual compliance certifications to the Title V permitting authority, which is usually a state or local regulatory agency (40 CFR 70.6). An EPA Regional Office serves as the permitting authority (71.6) for federally issued permits.
Title V tip: Check the state or local regulations for Title V compliance certification rules. They may require more frequent submissions and additional information.
At a minimum, the annual compliance certification covers two major areas for every permit term or condition:
Let’s take a closer look at each element.
Your facility’s compliance methods are the ways it tracks whether it’s meeting the Title V permit requirements or not. When a term or condition isn’t met (like exceeding an emission limit), it’s known as a deviation.
Compliance methods consist of monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting:
Three questions determine the compliance status of each permit requirement during the covered period:
Intermittent vs. continuous compliance
For each permit term or condition, your facility has intermittent compliance if it doesn’t meet the requirements at any time during the covered period. Your facility achieves continuous compliance only if it:
Possible exception to compliance
EPA defines a possible exception to compliance as “any periods during which compliance is required and in which an excursion or exceedance … occurred” (70.6(c)(5)(iii)(C)).
Simply put, a possible exception to compliance is a deviation that occurs when compliance is mandated. If compliance isn’t required or another permit requirement excuses it, the deviation isn’t a possible exception.
Your facility’s Title V permit provides instructions for how to submit the annual compliance certification, including the required forms and methods (via mail or electronic submission). You can also confirm requirements with your permitting authority. Generally, federally permitted facilities use the Annual Compliance Certification (EPA Form 5900-04).
Title V tip: Electronic submissions may be an option through the Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI) on EPA’s Central Data Exchange. Check with your permitting authority to determine whether you may submit the annual compliance certification electronically via CEDRI.
Annual compliance certification is vital to maintaining your Title V permit. Keep in mind: comply, certify, and repeat.
Key to remember: Facilities with a Title V operating permit must certify compliance with the requirements at least annually.
In today's rapidly evolving energy landscape, businesses are turning to back-up emergency generators to keep operations running smoothly. Several key factors are driving this growing trend:
Climate change has led to more intense weather like hurricanes, wildfires, and heatwaves. These events put pressure on power grids, causing outages that disrupt business operations. Generators help by providing backup power during unexpected failures.
Artificial intelligence (AI) and data centers need a lot of electricity. As these technologies grow, power grids struggle to keep up. Companies use generators to prevent power shortages and keep essential systems running.
Aging infrastructure and unsteady energy supply from renewable sources can make electrical supply unstable. Industries like manufacturing, healthcare, and finance need steady power to avoid costly interruptions. Generators act as a safety net when the grid fails.
Backup generators help keep businesses running, but they also impact the environment. Companies must follow air quality regulations to reduce pollution and operate safely.
Air permits
•State agencies usually oversee air permits, but The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has granted many county and city agencies the authority to issue them. For major permits such as New Source Review (NSR) and Title V, federal regulations apply, but state or local governments may still manage the process.
•In some areas, businesses can apply for a general permit or permit-by-rule for emergency generators. These permits are often easier to obtain and take less time to process. Checking air permitting regulations will help determine if this option is available.
•Businesses should find out if they need a pre-construction or construction air permit before setting up an emergency generator. These permits are based on the proposed equipment’s potential to emit (PTE) of criteria pollutants such as NOx, SO2, CO, and CO2 and hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) such as formaldehyde and acrolein, which are emitted during the combustion of fuel. The type(s) of fuel used in the generator, such as diesel, natural gas, gasoline, or propane, will affect the calculated PTE. Read more about construction permits in this ezExplanation: NSR Permits.
(Note: many state and local permitting agencies allow for the use of 500 hours for calculating PTE from an emergency engine, as per EPA’s 2011 Fox Memo, but some agencies still require using 8,760 hours and only accept 500 hours as an enforceable limit defined in a permit.)
•Federal law sets a limit on emergency generators, allowing less than 100 hours of non-emergency use per year. This includes maintenance and testing. Some permits may also restrict the times of day when the generator can be used for non-emergency purposes.
•The permit may require businesses to use the generator according to the manufacturer’s specifications. This is especially important if the business used manufacturer guarantees to calculate PTE.
•Businesses must track fuel use and operating hours to stay within the limits used in emissions calculations. They can do this using fuel records, fuel measuring devices, and hour meters that log the generator’s usage time.
•After getting a construction permit, a facility may need to apply for an operating permit within a year of the generator beginning operation. Some state and local agencies have stricter rules and deadlines. Check out J. J. Keller’s ezExplanation for Operating Permits: Clean Air Act: Operating Permits
EPA emission standards
The EPA enforces strict emissions regulations for stationary engines. Businesses must ensure their generators meet the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for compression ignition (40 CFR 60 Subpart IIII) and spark ignition internal combustion engines (ICE) (40 CFR 60 Subpart JJJJ), which can be found here. Additionally, the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) apply to reciprocating internal combustion engines (RICE). 40 CFR 63 Subpart ZZZZ can be found here.
These rules, depending on the specific type of generator engine, will be required even if a permit is not necessary.
Keep in mind that using an emergency generator may also involve other factors depending on the type and amount of fuel stored:
•Aboveground Storage Tank (AST) Requirements
•Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plans
•EPCRA Tier II Reporting
Key to remember: When installing an emergency generator, companies must navigate complex air quality regulations to ensure compliance. By selecting the right fuel type and securing necessary permits, businesses can maintain reliable power while minimizing environmental impact.
Several questions we receive from our customers use the terms “hazardous waste” and “hazardous materials” interchangeably. At a recent event, a few attendees admitted that they didn’t think there was a difference between the two. This is a common point of confusion and we want to ensure that our readers know the difference. Let’s dive into it!
The term hazardous material is defined by the Department of Transportation and refers to any substance or material that poses an unreasonable risk to health, safety, and property during transportation. Hazardous materials include hazardous substances, hazardous wastes, marine pollutants, and elevated-temperature materials. Essentially, if it’s dangerous and transported, it’s considered a hazardous material.
On the other hand, hazardous waste is defined by the Environmental Protection Agency. It refers to contaminated chemicals or by-products that no longer serve their purpose and need to be disposed of. Hazardous wastes are either listed or exhibit characteristics like ignitability, corrosivity, toxicity, or reactivity. It’s essentially waste that poses a danger to health or the environment and requires special handling and disposal.
To put it simply, hazardous material is a broad term that includes various dangerous substances during transportation, while hazardous waste specifically refers to dangerous by-products that need disposal. Understanding these terms is crucial for compliance with environmental and safety regulations.
If you ever find yourself unsure, remember that hazardous materials are about transportation risks, and hazardous wastes are about disposal risks.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued an interim final rule that further delays the submission period for the one-time reporting requirement for manufacturers of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). It pushes the starting submission period to April 2026.
Under Section 8(a)(7) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), EPA requires any business that manufactured (including imported) any PFAS or PFAS-containing article between 2011 and 2022 to submit the report.
What’s the new timeline?
The Section 8(a)(7) PFAS report’s opening submission period was moved from July 11, 2025, to April 13, 2026. Most manufacturers have six months to submit the report. Small manufacturers reporting only as importers of PFAS-containing articles have one year.
TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS report submission period | |
---|---|
Most manufacturers | April 13, 2026–October 13, 2026 |
Small manufacturers reporting solely as PFAS article importers | April 13, 2026–April 13, 2027 |
About the report
Manufacturers (including importers) covered by the TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS reporting rule (40 CFR Part 705) must provide information about:
It’s the second time EPA has postponed the reporting period. In September 2024, the agency moved the beginning submission period from November 2024 to July 2025. This latest interim rule pushes the starting period from July 2025 to April 2026.
Why the delay?
EPA needs more time to prepare the online reporting tool on the Central Data Exchange that businesses will use to submit the data. The agency will conduct tests to ensure that the application can accept submissions and that reporters don’t encounter technical issues.
Key to remember: EPA further delayed TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS reporting. The submission period now begins on April 13, 2026.
Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news. Let’s take a look at what’s happened over the last month!
On April 17, OSHA released 2024 injury and illness data. This includes information from more than 370,000 establishments that submitted Form 300A, as well as partial data from more than 732,000 Form 300 and Form 301 records. OSHA provides public access to the data in an effort to identify unsafe conditions and workplace hazards that may lead to occupational injuries and illnesses.
This year’s National Stand-Down to Prevent Struck-by Incidents took place the week of April 21. Struck-by incidents are the second leading cause of death among construction workers and the leading cause of nonfatal injuries in the construction industry. The stand-down emphasized the importance of training and prevention on worksites.
A safety alert from the Mine Safety and Health Administration urges the mining community to implement effective safety and health programs, with a focus on identifying and eliminating health and safety hazards. The alert was issued due to a high number of mining fatalities in the first quarter of 2025.
The Mine Safety and Health Administration temporarily paused its silica enforcement for coal mine operators until August 18, four months from its original compliance date of April 14. Under the agency’s silica rule, mine operators must update their respiratory protection programs. This may require them to obtain additional respirators and sampling devices. The agency says this four-month pause provides time for operators to come into compliance.
And finally, turning to environmental news, EPA updated the process for making data corrections to hazardous waste manifests. Waste handlers must correct errors on the manifest within 30 days of a request from EPA or a state agency. They also must submit corrections electronically.
And finally, EPA streamlined its pesticide registration process. The agency updated its MyPest app and made policy changes regarding how to submit two of its registration forms.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
You’ve likely never thought of “staying in touch” as a legal obligation, but that’s exactly what it is for facilities that generate small quantities of hazardous waste. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) mandates that small quantity generators (SQGs) give updates on their hazardous waste activities every four years. The next re-notification is right around the corner; it’s due by September 1, 2025.
Here's what SQGs need to know to stay in touch — and in compliance — with EPA.
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) enables EPA to control hazardous waste from generation to disposal. The agency keeps tabs on SQGs through the re-notification regulation at 40 CFR 262.18(d). It requires SQGs to re-notify EPA or the state environmental agency of their generator status and activities every four years by submitting the:
Regulated SQGs must submit the Site ID Form. EPA and many states use the myRCRAid module on RCRA Information (RCRAInfo) for re-notifications.
Here’s how to submit the Site ID Form on myRCRAid:
Once you submit the Site ID Form, its status on myRCRAid will display “Pending.” EPA or the state regulator will approve or reject the re-notification submission.
Consider these tips when preparing your SQG re-notification:
Submitting the SQG re-notification properly keeps EPA updated and your facility compliant.
Key to remember: Small quantity generators of hazardous waste must re-notify EPA or the state agency by September 1, 2025.
The next time you’re at a service station, consider the fact that you’re standing above underground tanks holding the fuel that you’re pumping into your vehicle. This brings up an important question about any underground tank: Since you can’t see the tank, how do you know if it starts to leak? The answer is a release detection system.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires that all regulated underground storage tanks (USTs) have release detection systems and that owners and operators of USTs test the equipment annually to ensure it operates correctly.
Let’s look at three aspects of release detection equipment testing: how to conduct testing, what to test for, and what to record.
UST owners and operators may conduct release detection equipment testing according to:
Manufacturer’s instructions
Each piece of release detection equipment should have an associated manual or guide for owners to reference. The manual or guide will explain how to test the equipment.
Tip: Most equipment manufacturers provide online versions of their product manuals and guides, which you can likely find on the manufacturer’s website. If you can’t find guidance, contact the manufacturer directly.
Industry codes and standards
EPA’s regulations stipulate that UST owners and operators who follow industry codes and standards must choose ones developed by a nationally recognized association (like ASTM International or the Petroleum Equipment Institute (PEI)) or an independent testing laboratory.
For instance, the agency states at 280.40(a)(3) that UST owners and operators may use PEI/RP1200, Recommended Practices for the Testing and Verification of Spill, Overfill, Leak Detection and Secondary Containment Equipment at UST Facilities, to comply.
Implementing agency requirements
EPA’s rules for testing release detection equipment serve as the minimum standards. Most state regulatory agencies implement UST programs and may impose stricter or additional requirements. Plus, local regulations may apply.
Check state and local rules to ensure your UST complies with the right requirements.
At a minimum, UST owners and operators must test the following factors that apply to their release detection systems.
The regulation at 280.45(b)(1) mandates that UST owners and operators keep records of the annual release detection equipment testing results for at least three years.
For each annual testing record, list:
Petroleum and other hazardous substances that leak from USTs can endanger human and environmental health. A leaking UST’s primary threat is groundwater contamination. Groundwater supplies drinking water for almost half of Americans.
A release detection system enables a facility to respond sooner to accidental releases and, therefore, limit potential harmful impacts — only if the equipment used for the system operates properly.
Testing your UST’s release detection equipment is vital because it allows you to identify which components function accurately and which parts have problems that need correction. A well-functioning release detection system can help your facility:
Key to remember: EPA requires facilities to test the release detection equipment used on underground storage tanks each year to make sure it operates properly.
Pesticide registrations just became simpler, more modern, and more transparent! EPA recently updated an app and made policy changes regarding how to submit two forms. All these changes result in a streamlined pesticide registration process.
On April 18, EPA made enhancements to its MyPest app, which sources say was initially launched in mid-January. EPA is proud to say that MyPest already boasts over 1,200 registrants. The new app allows registrants of pesticide products to:
Updates to MyPest include an enhanced dashboard page. The page offers information about the registrant’s cases and products. More updates are planned later this year.
On April 4, EPA announced in the Federal Register the issuance of Pesticide Registration (PR) Notice 2025-1. The notice itself is dated effective March 27, 2025. Its subject line reads, “Revised Procedures for Citing Data to Support Pesticide Registrations (EPA Forms No. 8570-34 and 8570-35).”
The latest PR notice supersedes PR Notice 98-5, dated June 12, 1998. While the revisions were proposed last June, the agency only finalized them now. According to PR Notice 2025-1:
The two forms — EPA Forms 8570-34 and 8570-35 — have not been modified. Only policies regarding the submission of the two forms have changed. The agency:
EPA contends that none of the information on Form 8570-35 is confidential. Put another way, none of the information on the Data Matrix is protected from public release. Therefore, the agency claims there is no reason to submit two versions of the form.
According to EPA, entities potentially affected by the policy changes include, but are not limited to:
Using electronic reporting for EPA Forms 8570-34 and 8570-35 brings efficient data transmittal, argues EPA. A bonus is that electronic reporting will also reduce errors. That’s because of automated validation tools in the portal. Submitters should experience lower costs and faster review and transmission of data, the agency adds.
In 2024, EPA received a total of 3,309 Data Matrices. Moving from two versions to just one for the Data Matrix form should save registrants and EPA time. Specifically, completing, submitting, and processing the Data Matrix should be quicker. EPA will also experience time savings when providing the public access to the information. Extra steps under the Freedom of Information Act would not be needed.
The MyPest app update is a step forward in efficiency and transparency, concludes EPA. The app enhancements are part of the agency’s overall move toward digital and streamlined processes. EPA projects that the app will improve the timeliness of pesticide registration decisions.
Recent actions streamline the pesticide registration process and make it more transparent. These actions relate to the MyPest app and EPA Forms 8570-34 and 8570-35.
ENTER THE INSTITUTE
Be your company’s leading compliance authority with a robust library of articles, videos, and practical exercises designed to grow your knowledge of 120+ regulatory subjects.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a direct final rule that adds a reporting option for regulated coal combustion residuals (CCR) facilities and extends compliance deadlines for CCR facilities with CCR management units (CCRMUs). These units include (a) inactive CCR landfills and (b) closed CCR surface impoundments and landfills.
Who’s impacted?
The direct rule applies to facilities subject to EPA’s final rule published in 2024 (2024 Legacy Rule), including:
The 2024 Legacy Rule established regulations for:
What are the changes?
The 2024 regulations (40 CFR Part 257 Subpart D) require active CCR facilities and legacy CCR surface impoundments to submit the Facility Evaluation Report (FER) Part 1 and FER Part 2 that identify any CCRMUs of 1 ton or more on-site.
Facilities with CCRMUs must also:
EPA’s 2025 direct final rule gives regulated facilities the option to:
The rule also delays the compliance timelines for related CCRMU requirements.
Requirement | 2024 Legacy Rule deadline | 2025 direct final rule deadline |
FER Part 1 | February 9, 2026 | February 9, 2026, or February 8, 2027 |
FER Part 2 | February 8, 2027 | February 8, 2027 |
CCR website | February 9, 2026 | February 9, 2026, or February 8, 2027 |
Groundwater monitoring requirements | May 8, 2028 | August 8, 2029 |
Initial annual report | January 31, 2029 | January 31, 2030 |
Closure/post-closure care plan | November 8, 2028 | February 8, 2030 |
Initiate closure | May 8, 2029 | August 8, 2030 |
About the proposed rule
In conjunction with the direct final rule, EPA published a proposed rule to obtain public feedback on further delaying the FERs. The rule offers two compliance timeline options for the evaluation reports:
Additionally, the proposed rule adjusts the deadlines for the other compliance requirements to 12 months from the 2024 Legacy Rule deadlines. The only exception is the CCR website requirement, which corresponds to the FER Part 1 submission date; it could be delayed for up to 24 months.
If EPA receives adverse comments on the direct final rule, the agency will publish a withdrawal of the specific requirements that won’t take effect. The remaining regulations in the direct final rule will take effect. If the agency determines (based on public feedback) to extend the FER Part 2 deadline by 12 months, the agency will withdraw the 2025 direct final rule and conduct the standard rulemaking procedures to apply the extension.
Key to remember: EPA offers active and inactive coal combustion facilities an alternative option to comply with the Facility Evaluation Report and adjusts the compliance timelines for regulations related to CCR management units.
Chemical substances appear in nearly every type of workplace, but what happens when a chemical substance is found to unreasonably endanger the health of workers and others who encounter it? The law mandates that environmental regulations be implemented to reduce or eliminate such risks. That’s where a workplace chemical protection program (WCPP) comes in. It’s designed to protect individuals who are or may be exposed to potentially harmful chemical substances.
Take, for example, the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) December 2024 final rule on trichloroethylene (TCE), which ultimately bans all uses of the chemical. But, the rule allows certain industrial and commercial uses to continue for a limited time if facilities comply with the rule’s WCPP.
It’s important to note that on June 23, 2025, EPA delayed the effective date for WCPP requirements that apply to the Toxic Substances Control Act’s (TSCA’s) Section 6(g) exemptions (40 CFR 751.325) to August 19, 2025. However, the delay doesn’t apply to nonexempt industrial and commercial uses with longer phaseout timelines (751.305), such as using TCE as a processing solvent in battery manufacturing.
Discover what to expect if your facility becomes subject to a WCPP.
When specific uses of chemical substances (i.e., conditions of use) in an occupational setting may pose unreasonable risks of injury to employees or the environment, Section 6 of TSCA requires EPA to develop regulations that reduce or mitigate those risks. The agency implements WCPPs to address the risks.
A WCPP requires covered entities to take certain actions in the workplace that shield individuals who engage with the conditions of use from inhalation and/or dermal risk.
The requirements of a WCPP may apply to entities that manufacture (including import), process, distribute in commerce, use, or dispose of a TSCA-regulated chemical substance.
The WCPP program extends beyond those who directly handle a regulated chemical substance to anyone in the workplace who’s exposed or who could be exposed to it (e.g., employees, independent contractors, volunteers, etc.).
A WCPP generally consists of multiple elements:
If your facility is subject to a WCPP, it’s essential to know the regulations that apply to the specific chemical substance. The chemical’s rule will define the conditions of use to which the WCPP applies and may contain different or additional requirements. Also, state or local regulations may have stricter rules that dictate how (and if) your facility can use the chemical substance.
Key to remember: Facilities that use TSCA-regulated chemical substances may have to comply with EPA’s workplace chemical protection program to protect workers and other exposed individuals from unreasonable health risks.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) updated air quality rules for fine particle pollution (PM2.5), reducing the annual standard from 12.0 to 9.0 micrograms per cubic meter. The rule change was announced on February 7, 2024 and was published as a final rule in the Federal Register on March 6, 2024. The change was based on research linking PM2.5 to health problems like heart disease and early death.
Within one year of the final rule (February 7, 2025), governors from each state were required to submit area designation recommendations (attainment, nonattainment, or unclassifiable) to EPA. By February of 2026 (at the latest) EPA is expected to issue final area designations based on State recommendations, air quality data, and other factors.
There is a caveat that on March 12, 2025, EPA announced that the agency will reconsider the rule that tightened the standard from 12.0 to 9.0 micrograms per cubic meter by reviewing implementation concerns and getting stakeholder feedback, but as of this writing, the tighter standard is still in place.
If your business is in one of the areas that will be newly listed as nonattainment for PM2.5, you will face new rules designed to improve air quality. Understanding these changes will help you stay compliant and keep operations running smoothly.
Check out this explanation of nonattainment on Compliance Network's Environmental Institute.
The stricter PM2.5 rule will impact many industries, particularly those that emit a lot of fine particle pollution. Some of the most affected sectors include:
These industries may see higher costs, stricter permits, and changes to operations to meet the new standards.
Businesses in nonattainment areas must follow stricter PM2.5 rules. This may mean updating operations or investing in better pollution control technology. The goal is to reduce fine particle emissions that harm air quality and health.
Businesses expanding or changing operations that increase PM2.5 pollution may need new permits. These permits show compliance with tighter pollution limits.
States with nonattainment areas must update their air quality plans. This could mean new industry rules, such as lowering emissions, increasing monitoring, or changing reporting requirements.
Expect closer tracking of your business’ pollution levels, including real-time monitoring and more frequent reports. Compliance checks may be stricter in nonattainment areas.
If a business increases PM2.5 pollution, it may need to offset that by reducing pollution somewhere else in the same area. This ensures the total pollution level does not rise.
Businesses in nonattainment areas may see higher costs due to stricter rules. Local governments might offer rewards or fines to encourage pollution reductions. Companies may need to find cost-effective ways to lower their PM2.5 levels while staying efficient.
Key to Remember: By having a plan for the possibility of nonattainment now, your business can adjust to the new PM2.5 rules while helping improve air quality and public health.
In the world of industrial operations, environmental compliance and workplace safety are often treated as parallel tracks. But in truth, they’re deeply intertwined and two sides of the same coin. Nowhere is this more evident than in the management of hazardous waste and chemical storage.
I recall a visit to a mid-sized manufacturing facility in the Midwest a few years ago. The team had recently undergone a rigorous inspection by the Environmental Protection Agency and proudly walked me through their updated hazardous materials storage area. Everything looked pristine with clearly labeled drums, secondary containment, and a digital tracking system for waste manifests. But as we rounded a corner, I noticed an unlabeled 55-gallon drum tucked behind a stack of pallets. It was leaking.
The safety manager’s face fell. “That’s from a maintenance crew swap last week,” the manager admitted. “It slipped through the cracks.”
That single oversight triggered a cascade of actions: an internal safety audit, retraining on labeling protocols, and a temporary halt to operations in that zone. Fortunately, no one was harmed, but it was a stark reminder that environmental compliance isn’t just about avoiding fines. It’s about protecting people.
When hazardous waste is mismanaged, the risks extend beyond environmental damage. Improper storage can lead to chemical reactions, fires, or toxic exposures. Compliance frameworks like the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (or RCRA) and OSHA’s Hazardous Waste Operations and Emergency Response (known as HAZWOPER) Standard exist not only to satisfy regulators but also to safeguard the very people who keep our industries running.
As we continue to navigate evolving regulations and sustainability goals, let’s remember: every label, every log, and every inspection is a step toward a safer, healthier workplace. Compliance isn’t a checkbox; it’s a commitment.
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!
Two never-before-mentioned rulemakings reached the Office of Management and Budget for review on June 18. The two actions (one on respiratory protection and the other on the General Duty Clause) are only at the proposed rule stage, so stakeholders will have a chance to comment. At this time, it’s unclear whether the proposals are regulatory or de-regulatory. We’ll provide an update in a future monthly roundup as more information becomes available.
OSHA updated its Site-Specific Targeting program to reflect the use of Form 300A data for calendar years 2021 through 2023. This is OSHA’s primary planned inspection program for general industry establishments with 20 or more employees with the highest injury and illness rates. OSHA uses the data to target establishments for inspection.
Each year, backover incidents lead to serious injuries and fatalities in construction zones and workplaces. These incidents happen when drivers lose sight of people, objects, or vehicles behind them. To help prevent these incidents, OSHA launched #MirrorCheck, an initiative to raise awareness of safe work practices that can prevent backovers.
Effective June 27, Kentucky’s occupational safety and health standards are limited to those enforced by federal OSHA. The state will no longer adopt, promulgate, or enforce rules that are more stringent than federal OSHA. Kentucky operates an OSHA-approved State Plan covering most private sector workers and all state and local government workers.
As part of its Heat Illness Prevention campaign, OSHA has added two new resources for employers. One is a customizable guide for creating a toolbox talk on handling heat emergencies. The other explains the risks of heat illness for young workers.
And finally, turning to environmental news, EPA has again delayed the deadline for submitting data on 16 chemical substances required by the Toxic Substances Control Act Health and Safety Data Reporting rule. Manufacturers now have until May 22, 2026, to report on all of the covered chemical substances.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
At first glance, an empty container seems like a non-issue — no product, no problem. But in the eyes of regulators, “empty” is a carefully defined status that can determine whether a container is harmless or still subject to hazardous waste rules, labeling, and fire or environmental risk controls. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and OSHA have detailed definitions of what “empty” truly means. Misunderstanding these rules can lead to serious incidents, hefty fines, and unintentional noncompliance.
Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), a container that once held hazardous waste is only legally “empty” if it meets particular criteria outlined in 40 CFR 261.7. The first standard that must be satisfied is that all material has been removed from the container using normal means such as pouring, pumping, or aspirating. Secondly, no more than 2.5 centimeters or 1 inch of residue remains on the container's bottom or inner lining. Additionally, if the container holds less than 110 gallons, it is empty if no more than 3 percent of the total weight or volume exists. Of course, sometimes special circumstances require further evaluation. For example, a gas cylinder is not empty until the pressure has reduced to atmospheric levels, and acute hazardous waste containers must be triple rinsed with an appropriate solvent or cleaned by another approved method. If these conditions are not met, the container is still legally considered to contain hazardous waste, even if it feels empty.
While EPA focuses on environmental disposal and waste management, OSHA’s concern with empty containers centers on worker safety, particularly the potential for exposure to hazardous residues or vapors. Under OSHA’s Hazard Communication Standard (29 CFR 1910.1200), a container that previously held hazardous chemicals must retain its original hazard label until it is adequately cleaned or until the employer removes the label following proper decontamination procedures. For example, a drum labeled “Flammable” must keep this label even if it appears empty, as residual material or vapors may still pose a significant ignition or fire risk. Removing such labels prematurely could lead to workplace hazards and violations of OSHA regulations.
Employers must first clearly determine which rules apply to them: whether the container held hazardous materials governed by EPA regulations, hazardous chemicals subject to OSHA requirements, or both. Emptying procedures should be followed, including properly draining the container, performing triple-rinsing when required, and thoroughly documenting all decontamination activities. Original hazard labels must be maintained on containers until they are thoroughly cleaned or reconditioned, as removing labels prematurely violates OSHA’s Hazard Communication Standard. Additionally, employers should provide employees with training on the proper handling, labeling, and disposal of containers and ensure they fully understand what constitutes an empty container under federal standards. Finally, a detailed record of all rinsing, draining, and cleaning processes should be maintained to demonstrate compliance during EPA or state inspections.
Keys to remember: Employers should educate their teams, enforce proper cleaning procedures, and maintain compliance records to ensure they are staying compliant with “empty” container standards.
Speeding accounted for 13 percent of driver violations during roadside inspections in 2024.
In fact, the top driver violation for the year was speeding 6 to 10 miles per hour (mph) over the limit, and 11 to 14 mph over held the sixth spot for the year.
If your carrier has experienced a violation for speeding, how will it impact your operation?
Speeding appears on roadside inspections at 392.2-SLLS. The violation will have suffix of:
All suffixes except “1” are severity weighted and used in the Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) Unsafe Driving BASIC calculations. The remaining violations are valued from four to ten, depending on the degree of infraction.
Even if drivers do not exceed the posted limit by much, a habit of driving at least 6 mph over the limit will negatively impact the carrier’s CSA Unsafe Driving BASIC score.
Although third parties can’t see a motor carrier’s Unsafe Driving BASIC score, they can view the roadside inspection reports and listed violations. This provides customers, brokers, and your insurance provider with a glimpse into your safety record to identify unsafe driving patterns — without ever having to do any math.
Aside from a high Unsafe Driving BASIC score, speeding can add to the carrier’s operational costs, such as:
In addition, when speed is a factor in a crash, it typically adds to the seriousness of the accident.
Speed is often paired with other aggressive behaviors such as sudden acceleration and hard braking and cornering. By addressing speeding, hopefully you’re eliminating other unwanted driving habits.
Your first task is to identify those exhibiting bad behaviors. This can be accomplished through:
Company policies and procedures should clearly spell out what behaviors are unacceptable along with specific consequences. Don’t limit traffic citations to those occurring in a commercial motor vehicle. Behavior in a personal vehicle should be taken into consideration, since it could easily transfer over to time spent behind the wheel of your truck.
A policy, for instance, would list speeding as unacceptable along with the corrective actions for each citation (e.g., 6-10 mph over) and what frequency of violation will be held against the driver (e.g., violations within the past one, three, or five years). These policies must be consistently enforced.
Mistakes happen, and the intent of identifying unsafe driving behaviors is not to end a driving career, it’s to sustain it. Many carriers have a progressive discipline policy to get the driver back on track. Often drivers are subject to coaching and refresher training.
Key to remember: Speeding is the most common roadside inspection violation for commercial drivers, accounting for 13 percent of driver violations. Avoid becoming a statistic by proactively identifying and working with those drivers exhibiting the behavior.
A recent fatality in Washington State serves as a sad reminder that cargo securement is critical no matter what type of vehicle you operate.
The case involved a 63-year-old maintenance worker who died after being crushed in a commercial service truck by a stack of unsecured plywood.
A week prior to the incident, he had loaded 11 four- by eight-foot plywood panels in the back of an enclosed-body service truck, stacking them against the left side of the truck body with the long edge down, according to a report from the Washington State Department of Labor & Industries (L&I).
On the morning of the incident, he was in the back of the truck, positioned between the stack of plywood on the left and a dolly that was strapped to the right side of the vehicle. The unsecured stack of plywood — weighing about 450 pounds — tipped to the right and pinned the worker’s neck against a cross-brace on the dolly, rendering him unconscious. Efforts to revive him were unsuccessful, the L&I report says, and he was pronounced dead at the scene.
Why the plywood tipped over remains a mystery, but the fact remains that the fatality likely would not have occurred had the plywood been secured.
L&I investigators also discovered that unsecured lumber and ladders were lying on the truck floor, presenting a tripping hazard that could have contributed to the event.
Federal regulations require that all cargo be secured when transported by commercial motor vehicle, even if the cargo is enclosed inside a truck body. The securement regulations in 49 CFR Part 393, Subpart I, apply to all vehicles operating in interstate commerce that weigh or are rated at 10,001 pounds or more, no matter the type of vehicle (e.g., service truck/van, dry van, flatbed, pickup truck, etc.).
Though state regulations may vary, Washington similarly requires cargo securement for vehicles over 10,000 pounds. For smaller vehicles, labor laws may require cargo securement as a worker-safety measure.
In response to the fatality, L&I made the following recommendations to keep workers safe:
Key to remember: A fatality involving unsecured plywood in the back of a service truck serves as a harsh reminder that cargo securement is vital no matter the type of vehicle or cargo involved.
Don’t be at a loss on how to respond to an inconclusive DOT drug test result. Know when you must arrange a second drug test to rule out or confirm drug use.
And make sure your drivers aren’t confused when instructed to take an additional trip to the collection site.
Managers, drivers, and others involved in DOT drug testing at your motor carrier can benefit from refresher training on the topic of recollections. Use the following summary as a starting point.
Only specific scenarios identified in 49 CFR Part 40 require or permit recollections. They include negative dilute and invalid laboratory results.
A motor carrier can’t perform a second collection to nullify a prior test result. If the medical review officer (MRO) reported a drug test violation, there was an official result. A new drug test will not erase the violation.
One of the more common reasons for recollection is a negative dilute result for a urine specimen.
The negative dilute will fall into one of two scenarios:
Drivers must know the policy when testing under #2-a prior to the original collection, and the policy must be enforced consistently by the motor carrier.
The second test result becomes the test of record. If the second sample is reported as negative dilute, the result is considered negative at this point. The DER can’t request yet another test.
However, another test could be required as the result of a recollection under #2-a (employer test) if the lab finds the creatinine level greater than or equal to 2mg/dL but less than or equal to 5mg/dL. The MRO will direct the DER to request a third urine specimen (this time under direct observation). This test becomes the test of record, and the process doesn’t go further even if it comes back negative dilute.
An invalid drug test result occurs when the laboratory finds a substance is interfering with the immunoassay test on the specimen.
After the MRO is notified of the results, the MRO contacts the driver as part of the verification process. The MRO is looking for a medical explanation and/or valid prescription that might be the cause. If the driver is unable to provide a valid explanation, the MRO:
The motor carrier must ensure that the driver has minimum possible advance notice when told to go to the collection site. The second test result becomes the test of record.
It doesn’t matter whether it’s an MRO-mandated retest or employer-based retest for a negative dilute, failing to go for testing after notification is a refusal to test. The DER reports these events to the CDL Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse as violations.
It’s important to note that recollections apply to pre-employment drug tests too. If you look at 40.191(a)(6), declining to take another test has no protection for those taking pre-employment drug tests.
That said, the prospective employer must notify the driver applicant and arrange a convenient time. This might prove difficult if the driver is working another job. The DER must take into consideration any extenuating circumstances that delay testing, rather than automatically deeming it a refusal to test. DERs always have discretion.
If the driver-applicant refuses to go for the second test altogether (e.g., no longer interested in the job), that’s a much different story than having scheduling conflicts. It’s a refusal to test.
When testing under the carrier’s authority as the result of a negative dilute, it’s important to carefully communicate which test types are covered in the policy. It’s especially important for pre-employment testing, so applicants know expectations.
Key to remember: Retesting helps rule out drug use, and the DOT requires another trip the clinic for a second specimen under specific scenarios.
To improve impartiality, timeliness, transparency, and fundamental fairness of the DataQs Request for Data Review (RDR) process, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) is proposing finalizing improvements to the DataQs system. The changes will impact the state-provided data in FMCSA’s Motor Carrier Management Information System (MCMIS).
This includes roadside inspection reports and crash reports. This is the data used to populate FMCSA’s carrier and driver scoring and tracking systems, such as Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) and the driver Pre-employment Screening Program (PSP).
Standardization
FMCSA’s proposal would require states to incorporate a standardized multi-level review process for RDRs to continue to receive their Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP) funds. The process will involve:
In some states, this process, or something similar to it, is already in place.
Burden of proof
Just a reminder, when filing a DataQs RDR you need to understand that the burden of proof is on you. This means building a case based on facts that is strong enough to overcome the official record.
Next steps
A follow-up notice in the Federal Register will respond to any comments received and announce the updated processes that states must implement.
Key to remember: While these much-anticipated changes have been in the works for a couple of years, it looks like we are quickly approaching the finish line. Therefore, it will soon be time to re-familiarize yourself with DataQs.
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!
This year’s Brake Safety Week is set for August 24-30, meaning it’s time to make sure your vehicles and drivers are inspection ready!
The Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) hosts this week-long inspection and compliance enforcement event each year to offer brake-safety awareness and to collect important brake-related data.
This year, inspectors will focus on drums and rotors. Brake drum and rotor issues can have a serious negative impact on a vehicle’s brake efficiency. There’s the possibility that broken pieces of drums and rotors can become dislodged from the vehicle enroute and damage other vehicles or lead to injuries or fatalities to the public.
CVSA-certified inspectors will perform routine inspections on commercial vehicles from August 24-30 with a special focus on brake components and systems. Some jurisdictions will also use performance-based brake testers (PBBT) to help assess a vehicle’s braking performance.
If an inspector finds any commercial vehicle with brake-related out-of-service violations, that vehicle will be removed from roads until the violations are corrected.
Brake Safety Week helps remind drivers and motor carriers to keep up with proactive vehicle maintenance and safety procedures. Law enforcement use this opportunity to highlight the importance of brake safety and to offer some educational outreach.
To help prepare for this year’s Brake Safety Week event, the CVSA recommends:
A flyer with eight brake drum and rotor tips is also available at https://www.cvsa.org/programs/operation-airbrake/focus-area/.
Are your forklift operators certified? Do they need a state driver’s license? Are they physically able to operate forklifts? All are commonly asked questions — so, let’s make sure you're compliant.
OSHA’s powered industrial truck (PIT) standard (29 CFR 1910.178) is intended to ensure the safe use of fork trucks, tractors, platform lift trucks, motorized hand trucks, and other specialized industrial trucks powered by electric motors or internal combustion engines. The standard outlines requirements for operational permits and certification.
And, though not specified in the standard itself, PIT operators must be at least 18 years old per federal child labor regulations.
The OSHA PIT standard clearly defines requirements for training and certification. However, some licensing and certification information isn’t as clear. Here are some clarifications:
Q: Who can train, evaluate, and certify PIT operators?
A: OSHA requires in 1910.178(l)(2)(iii) that, “All operator training and evaluation shall be conducted by persons who have the knowledge, training, and experience to train powered industrial truck operators and evaluate their competence.” The OSHA standard doesn’t further define this requirement or set any specific or additional certifications.
Q: Does OSHA require PIT operators to have a valid driver's license?
A: Federal OSHA has no requirement that a forklift operator has a valid motor vehicle driver's license. Some states are more stringent, so check your local and state requirements to confirm.
Q: Does OSHA have regulations that impact an employee’s ability to operate PITs if they’ve received a DUI or suspended license?
A: Because OSHA doesn't require a valid motor vehicle driver's license, the status of that license doesn’t impact PIT operator permitting. Individual states or the employer may have policies that dictate otherwise.
Q: Are PIT drivers required to have their license on them when they are working?
A: Federal OSHA doesn’t require PIT operators to have a license or permit. However, some states such as Michigan do require this. Typically, in states that require a permit or license, the license must be “readily available.” Companies have the option to require the permit or license be carried with the operator.
Q: Are operators required to be trained on each manufacture of PIT model?
A: A June 15, 1999, OSHA letter of interpretation (LOI) clarifies that operators are to be trained and evaluated in the safe operation for the type of truck they’ll be assigned. Operators wouldn’t need additional training for same truck types but would need additional training when truck- or workplace-related training topics are different.
Q: Do PIT operators need to be recertified if they move from one state to another with the same company?
A: In an LOI dated October 1, 1999, OSHA states, "As long as the employer has a reasonable basis to believe that the third-party trainer is qualified and has a program that meets the requirements of the standard, it can rely on that trainer to conduct the training and evaluation of employees and can certify that these employees have been trained. However, the employer may need to provide additional training on site-specific or truck-specific matters." This shouldn’t require retraining for the same type of forklift as already certified; however, workplace conditions or other factors of the new work location may require training for forklift operation in the other state(s).
Interested in information on how material handler training can help forklift operators? See our Compliance Network article "To improve forklift safety, train material handlers." |
In addition to being properly trained and evaluated, OSHA expects employers to ensure physical capabilities. OSHA references the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standard B56.1-1969. Section 6 clarifies that, “Operators of powered industrial trucks shall be physically qualified. An examination should be made on an annual basis and include such things as field of vision, hearing, depth perception, and reaction timing."
Employers should consider OSHA PIT regulations and the General Duty Clause, ANSI standards, and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements when evaluating physical qualifications. In short, if a worker demonstrates the visual, auditory, and mental ability to safely operate PITs, he or she is permitted to operate them.
OSHA requires employers ensure the safe use of forklifts and other powered industrial vehicles. Employers must ensure operators have the knowledge, skills, and physical ability to safely operate PITs.
From worker absences to paperwork slowdowns and violations, employers need to understand how immigration enforcement will impact their business’s ability to keep operating.
Employers face three primary workforce continuity challenges relating to the government’s emphasis on employment authorization, notes John Mazzeo, an attorney for i9Success who worked for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE):
Government policy is not the only reason more workplaces are hearing from ICE. Artificial intelligence (AI) models that can draw trends from numerous data sets, including Forms I-9, E-Verify data, and wage and tax information, make ICE enforcement more efficient.
“We will see more notices of inspection and fines because AI can do it faster,” said Mazzeo, who spoke at the 2025 Society for Human Resources Management (SHRM) annual conference.
Agents who previously relied on intuition and a phone book when selecting businesses for audits and worksite enforcement now have advanced AI tools at their disposal. A workplace may be targeted because of its prior violations, industry, geographic location, or job type.
Immigration enforcement can lead to fines for employers as well as workplace disruptions. Noncompliance can result in fines of:
In addition, employers can face criminal sanctions and may be removed from the E-Verify program, which is required for federal contractors.
To mitigate penalties and ensure they can continue to operate, employers need to think about what it would mean if ICE appeared on their doorstep.
In terms of business continuity, they not only need to consider the raid itself, Mazzeo said, but what happens the next day. The question, he noted, becomes, “How do I operate tomorrow?”
It’s not only the business visited by ICE that may lose workers. Workplaces near a business that has been targeted, or those in a similar industry, may also experience the loss of workers who are afraid to come to work.
To continue to operate in an era of increased immigration enforcement, Mazzeo advises employers to prepare with these six steps:
Key to remember: Employers need to understand how an emphasis on immigration enforcement impacts their workforce and create a plan for continuing to operate if their workers are impacted.
The federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) has been around since 1938. The reason the FLSA was enacted was to establish employment standards on wages, overtime pay, recordkeeping, and child labor.
It requires, for example, covered employers to pay nonexempt (“hourly”) employees at least the federal hourly minimum wage for all hours worked, as well as overtime pay for work performed beyond 40 hours in a workweek.
On the surface, that sounds fairly straightforward; however, employers have violated the FLSA numerous times over the past 87 years. Here are the top five violations we’ve seen over the years and what to do to avoid them:
1. Violation: Inaccurately classifying employees. To classify employees as exempt, they must meet three FLSA criteria: Be paid on a salary basis, be paid at least a certain salary for every week worked, and perform certain job duties. Some employers classify employees as exempt if they pay them on a salary basis, but neglect the other two criteria.
What to do: Ensure that all employees classified as exempt meet all three FLSA criteria. In addition to being paid on a salary basis, they must also be paid at least $684 per week every week they perform any work ($35,568 per year) and perform certain duties.
2. Violation: Not paying overtime. Nonexempt employees must receive overtime pay for hours worked over 40 in a workweek at a rate not less than one and one-half times the regular rate of pay.
What to do: Look at the records of when nonexempt employees have worked and ensure that any time beyond 40 hours is paid as overtime. Employers that don’t want to pay overtime can have policies restricting working extra hours. If employees do work the extra hours, they must be paid overtime, but they can be disciplined for violating an applicable policy.
3. Violation: Not paying employees for all hours worked. Employers violate the FLSA if they fail to pay nonexempt employees for all hours worked. This includes breaks, business travel time, mandatory training, and so on.
What to do: Be familiar with what the FLSA considers hours worked and pay employees for those hours. This includes paying overtime for any hours over 40 in a workweek.
4. Violation: Making improper deductions. The FLSA prohibits employers from making certain types of deductions from employees’ paychecks that would reduce their pay below minimum wage or reduce overtime compensation. Common examples of improper deductions include deductions for uniforms, tools, or other job-related expenses.
What to do: Employers should ensure that any deductions made from employees’ pay are lawful and do not result in the employee receiving less than minimum wage or overtime pay.
5. Violation: Not keeping records. Employers must keep records related to wages and hours for a pre-determined amount of time.
What to do: Double-check what records are being kept. In addition to nonexempt employee personal information, the FLSA mandates that employers keep the following information:
The FLSA is the baseline standard for federal wage and hour laws. Some states have higher standards, such as higher salary thresholds, that employers must follow. Whichever standard is most beneficial to employees is what employers need to comply with.
Key to remember: Employers can avoid some of the more common FLSA violations with some careful review and consideration.
On July 4, 2024, President Trump signed HR 1, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (OBBBA), into law. The measure includes several provisions related to the workplace and ties into federal employment laws like the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
One such provision gives employees a tax break on the overtime they work between 2025 through 2028 tax years. This break impacts employers’ FLSA compliance.
Employers will need to report the total amount of qualified overtime compensation on their employees’ Forms W-2. They will also need to report the amount of qualified overtime compensation for non-employees (e.g., independent contractors) on the applicable Forms 1099, even though the FLSA only applies in employer/employee relationships, generally.
To accomplish this reporting, employers must:
Employers may approximate an amount designated as qualified overtime compensation by any reasonable method specified by the Treasury Secretary for the 2025 tax year.
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) will provide employers with more details in the future, including updated procedures and related forms to reflect this new deduction. The IRS is also tasked with crafting rules to prevent abuse of this deduction. Intentional or not, potential missteps, like reclassifying employee salaries as overtime, could trigger FLSA or IRS audits.
The deduction doesn’t apply to overtime premiums that aren’t required by the FLSA. This could include pay under a contract, for example, like those found in collective bargaining agreements.
States often have their own overtime rules. Federal deductions don’t override state obligations, so employers will still need to be aware of related state laws. The federal deduction won’t apply to overtime that is required only under state law.
Employers that get questions from workers can share the following information:
To prepare for this change, employers might want to:
Key to remember: Employers must prepare for the new reporting requirements under the “no tax on overtime” provisions of the OBBBA.
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.
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.
Training forklift operators is an OSHA requirement per 1910.178(l). Do you want to do it in house? If you said yes, follow this step-by-step guide.
It all starts with a competent trainer. OSHA’s view is that all operator training and evaluation must be conducted by persons who have the “knowledge, training, and experience” to train operators and evaluate their competence. The standard doesn’t go into any more detail. It’s up to the employer to ensure trainers meet these general qualifications, but OSHA has no requirements for trainers to take certain classes, hold any sort of certifications, or be re-certified as trainers at specified intervals.
Need more information on OSHA’s Forklift Standard? See our ezExplanation on Powered Industrial Trucks. |
The only aspect that OSHA has clarified is that the trainer does need to have experience operating the equipment and attachments. However, the standard doesn’t require that the trainers operate a forklift regularly (that is, outside of their operator training duties) as part of their job function or responsibility.
First, OSHA requires that all operators must be trained prior to being allowed to operate forklifts. And the same thing goes for pallet trucks, order pickers, and stand-up units…. Any powered type of material handling equipment requires training.
But what does training entail? Well, the OSHA regulations are very specific. All operators must receive a combination of training. Training must consist of formal training, which is a lecture, discussion, interactive computer learning, video tape, written material, and so on.
They must also receive practical training, which means demonstrations performed by the trainer and practical exercises performed by the trainee.
And the third component is that operators must receive a performance evaluation. So, they must operate the equipment and be observed and evaluated before being considered trained per the OSHA standard.
Usually, you’ll introduce the concepts during the classroom portion of training, the more informational aspects, such as the OSHA requirements. Then you’ll use the practical part of training to familiarize trainees with controls, talk about load handling, and so on. With the practical part, it’s usually best to ramp up the training, meaning start with simple skills and then build on those.
Aside from requirements for how to do the training, OSHA gives us a detailed list of topics to cover during the training.
The main categories are truck-related and workplace-related topics. And remember that OSHA does require you to include information on OSHA’s forklift standard as part of the training program. This requirement can be easy to overlook, but a good way to approach it is in the classroom portion of the program.
Keep in mind that if a topic doesn’t apply to your trucks or workplace, you don’t have to train on it. For example, if you don’t have any ramps or hazardous (classified) locations in your facility, your forklift operators don’t need training on these topics.
Truck-related topics include the following:
Workplace-related topics are examples like these:
The trainees must successfully complete the formal and practical instruction, but how you determine success is up to you. For the classroom portion, you could give a written or oral test or otherwise evaluate the trainees’ knowledge. For the practical training, the trainee must be able to safely perform all the operations used on the job.
An evaluation of the operator’s performance in the workplace must be conducted at the time of initial training. And an evaluation is required to determine the effectiveness of any refresher training.
Also, you must conduct an evaluation at least every three years. This means that at least once every three years every operator must be observed while they operate in the workplace under actual workplace conditions. During the evaluation, the operator must also be able to answer pertinent questions to demonstrate they have the knowledge to operate the forklift safely.
A key point to note here, this evaluation must be more than just a written or verbal test. The employer must observe the operator in action performing all typical tasks related to running the forklift. And, going back to where we started, the evaluation must be conducted by someone who has the knowledge, training, and experience to evaluate the truck operator’s competence.
Document the evaluation — this means placing a record in your training file that includes the name of the operator, the date of the training, the date of the evaluation, and the identity of the person(s) performing the training or evaluation.
This may be a good time for you to review your options for training forklift operators to ensure they’re meeting these guidelines. And, it’s always a great idea to have all your training procedures in written format for consistency.
Training forklift operators is an OSHA requirement. Follow this step-by-step guide and you can do it in-house.
Think of the 1970s, and images of disco, bell-bottoms, and fringe jackets come to mind. However, smack dab in the middle of that decade, the OSHA Safety Color Code was born. We may never know if it inspired the tie-dyed shirts of the day, but the code put in place employer compliance obligations for the use of red, orange, yellow, green, blue, purple, black, and white.
By 1978, in another OSHA rulemaking, the color code shed all its colors except red and yellow. Now, decades later, an OSHA proposal, if finalized, intends to close the chapter on the remaining colors in the code.
During World War II, the U.S. War Department recognized that safety colors needed to be standardized. It approved an American War Standard for safety colors before the war’s end.
The American Standards Association (ASA) spearheaded work on a Safety Color Code in 1946. This was an attempt to revise the American War Standard and broaden it for peacetime operations. In 1953 the ASA approved the Safety Color Code for publication, with more defined colors and their limits.
ASA became the USA Standards Institute (USASI) in 1966, and the organization modified the Safety Color Code in 1967. It’s this version entitled, Safety Color Code for Marking Physical Hazards (USAS Z53.1-1967), that OSHA used word-for-word to create 29 CFR 1910.144 on June 27, 1974.
The USASI then became the American National Standards Institute (ANSI), and subsequent versions of its Safety Color Code were published under a different number — ANSI Z535.1. These later versions adjusted the color specifications to accommodate color-blind people. In the seventh edition, the color definitions were removed, focusing only on the color specifications, not their meaning or application.
The current (tenth) iteration of the original American War Standard is ANSI Z535.1-2022, American National Standard for Safety Colors.
The original 1910.144 defined the designation of:
Today’s 1910.144 no longer designates orange, green, blue, purple, black, white, or black and white. On October 24, 1978, OSHA revoked them so that it could “concentrate its enforcement resources on hazards which have greater significance and impact on exposed employees.”
At the time, the majority of commenters objected to the revocations. Yet, OSHA disagreed, saying:
Back in 1978, OSHA said it would NOT revoke the red and yellow designations “in the best interest of worker protection.”
Today, OSHA says the hazards that red and yellow designations are intended to identify are sufficiently addressed by OTHER federal, state, and local requirements. Examples include 1910.145 (Specifications for Accident Prevention Signs and Tags) and state and local building and fire codes. OSHA does not list the building and fire codes, however.
OSHA explains that flagging hazards by color alone may be ineffective for color-blind workers. Also, the agency cites employers for 1910.144 only about four times per year, which tells us the 7.45 million covered employers are mostly following 1910.144, or OSHA inspectors are not looking for color-code violations.
OSHA proposes to remove not only 1910.144, but also regulatory sections or paragraphs that refer to that regulation. Those include 1910.262(c)(8) for textiles, 1910.265(c)(11) for sawmills, and 1915.90 for shipyards. OSHA calculates the likely cost savings to be $51.9 million.
The proposal asks for public comments by September 2, 2025, on questions about:
Even if the rule is finalized, state-plan states may keep the color code requirements. OSHA seeks comment on this too.
Finally, September 2 is also the deadline for anyone to submit a request to OSHA to hold an informal public hearing on the proposal. If a hearing is requested, the agency will announce the hearing in the Federal Register.
OSHA proposes to remove 1910.144 from the Code of Federal Regulations, along with a few regulatory sections and paragraphs that refer to 1910.144. The change, if finalized, would be deregulatory. The agency says other requirements address the same hazards.
A worker who is required to use a respirator must first be medically evaluated to determine whether that worker is able to wear it safely. The Respiratory Protection standard at 29 CFR 1910.134 applies to all types of respirators. However, a recent proposed rule would remove the medical evaluation requirement where workers are required to use just filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs), such as N95s and P100s, and/or loose-fitting powered air-purifying respirators (PAPRs).
Medical evaluations would still be required for tight-fitting and supplied-air respirators. Other elements of the Respiratory Protection standard, such as hazard assessments, fit testing, training, and maintenance, would also remain in effect.
OSHA developed the Respiratory Protection standard at 1910.134 in the 1990s. Back then, the use of medical evaluations was a well-accepted best practice to identify underlying conditions where respirator use of any kind could cause adverse health or functional effects. Based on studies and comments OSHA received when developing the standard, the agency concluded that the use of any respirator requires a prior medical evaluation to determine a worker’s physical fitness.
Fast forward 30 years, OSHA says it now believes that this approach is too broad in practice for several reasons:
OSHA seeks feedback on all aspects of the July 1, 2025, proposed rule. However, particular key points are of interest to the agency:
Even if the rule is finalized, state-plan states may keep their existing medical evaluation requirements; OSHA seeks comment on this, too.
Interested parties may comment by September 2, 2025. Search for OSHA-2025-0006 at regulations.gov to read and enter public comments. If an informal public hearing on the proposed rule is requested by the September 2 deadline, OSHA will schedule one and announce it in the Federal Register.
Note that 1910.134 is a general industry standard. Yet, OSHA recognizes that if the revisions become final, they would also impact the construction and maritime industries. That’s because the standards for those industries reference 1910.134. See 1926.103 (construction), 1915.154 (shipyards), 1917.92 (marine terminals), and 1918.102 (longshoring).
Key to remember: Under a recent proposed rule, OSHA would remove the medical evaluation requirement for workers who are required to use FFRs and loose-fitting PAPRs. Stakeholders have until September 2 to comment on the proposal.
Our experts regularly receive questions on loading docks and fall protection, particularly since OSHA revised the regulations in 2017. Here are answers to some of common questions.
Yes, if you install it correctly. Most docks are four feet or higher and require fall protection if the door is open without a trailer in place. Rope or chain must be equivalent to a guardrail, which requires a top rail and mid rail. A single chain is not acceptable.
Per 1910.29(b), the material must be at least one-quarter inch in diameter. The top rail must be 42 inches high, plus or minus 3 inches, for a range of 39 to 45 inches. The top rail cannot sag or deflect to within 39 inches of the surface under 200 pounds of force, and should be tight enough to prevent a worker from falling between the chains and the dock edge.
Employers must use some method to prevent the trailer from moving. OSHA gives examples of wheel chocks, but other options can work, such as dock locks. Even if the dock ramp is inclined downward, OSHA still requires chocks.
Note that OSHA’s directive STD 01-11-007 uses the term “mechanical means” instead of the term “dock locks.” Also, a Letter of Interpretation dated March 7, 2011, clarified that the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMSCA) provision for relying on trailer brakes applies only to employers that are motor carriers. Other employers must ensure that forklift operators secure the trailer from movement before entering.
Fixed ladders over 24 feet high that were installed prior to November 19, 2018, must have a personal fall arrest system, ladder safety system, cage, or well per 1910.28(b)(9)(i)(A). Employers must update those ladders with a fall arrest or ladder safety system by November 18, 2036.
OSHA previously required cages or wells on fixed ladders over 20 feet but removed that requirement in 2017. Employers often install cages on ladders under 24 feet for various reasons, such as limiting access, but OSHA does not require this. For related information, see our article, Planning fixed ladder fall protection upgrades.
A personal fall arrest or travel restraint system is required for work within 6 feet of the edge, but a designated area can be an option for work further from the edge. It can be used on low-slope roofs in two situations:
Surprisingly, if employees will be at least 15 feet from the edge and the work qualifies as infrequent and temporary, no fall protection is required (not even a designated area). OSHA offered clarification on the terms “infrequent” and “temporary” in a Letter of Interpretation dated June 12, 2020.
Key to remember: The fall protection requirements in the Walking-Working Surface regulations raise many questions, but OSHA has published some clarifying guidance.
Lockout/tagout (LOTO) won’t work for us, so let’s just use alternative procedures! Sounds great, right? Be warned — just because lockout doesn’t seem to work for you, doesn’t mean alternative procedures can be used as a work-around.
OSHA’s LOTO standard at 1910.147(f)(1) allows temporary removal of LOTO devices and the re-energization of equipment only if it’s necessary to perform specific tasks that require energization. Typical tasks requiring re-energization include troubleshooting, testing, or positioning machines or their components.
OSHA considers minor servicing activities to be clearing jams or scrap material, lubricating machine parts, adjusting dials, or inspecting certain parts or sections of a machine. To be exempted from the LOTO standard, tasks must be:
The final requirement for this exception is that the work must be performed using alternative measures which provide effective employee protection that is equivalent to the standard energy control procedures. Examples of alternative methods technology include:
Ideally, a combination of alternative methods should be used to provide a multi-layered protective process that would protect workers even if one layer of the process fails.
OSHA does recognize that in certain situations properly developed and implemented alternatives to control hazardous energy are feasible instead of complete energy isolation. However, there are limits to the temporary removal of LOTO devices and re-energization of equipment. LOTO should always be the default unless it can be clearly demonstrated that a well-established alternative method will ensure equivalent, effective worker protection from hazardous energy. This is especially important when risks are high, or the task or activity is not well understood.
Utilizing alternative procedures under OSHA’s temporary exception applies only for the limited time required for testing, troubleshooting, or repositioning of the equipment, machinery, or components. Once testing or repositioning is completed, and an energized state is no longer required, complete de-energization under LOTO is again required by authorized workers.
Remember, the goal is to increase efficiency without compromising safety!
If employees can’t be removed from areas with the potential for re-energization during temporary removal of LOTO devices, they must be protected during all phases of the testing or positioning activities. These protections can be in the form of machine guarding, the use of tools such as push sticks, or other methods and must be accompanied by procedures. These alternative procedures must establish a sequence of actions that will maintain appropriate, consistent employee protection.
Alternative procedures must be communicated and implemented prior to re-energization:
Once testing or positioning is complete:
6. De-energize the equipment;
7. Isolate the equipment from all energy sources; and
8. Reapply LOTO devices per normal procedures.
Key to remember: Alternative procedures to LOTO are permitted only when minor servicing that is routine, repetitive, and integral to operations is performed, and protections are as effective as a full energy control procedure (LOTO).
The U.S. Bureau of Labor statistics reported in July 2024 that there are 8.2 million job openings in the U.S., but only 7.2 million unemployed workers.
With that in mind, employers might choose to hang onto employees even if they’re under performing. But what about when complaints are rolling in from different angles? Take, for example, a lackluster supervisor who’s annoying employees and disappointing customers.
An employer could be hesitant to let the supervisor go, especially if there’s no documentation backing up claims of misconduct. The employer must weigh their options to decide if putting the supervisor on a performance improvement plan (PIP) or moving right to termination is the ideal choice.
At-will employment
For starters, in most states employers may terminate an employee at-will, meaning they can fire employees for pretty much any reason as long as it doesn’t discriminate against someone in a protected class based on sex, age, race, religion, etc. Employers also cannot terminate in retaliation for an employee making a claim of harassment, discrimination, or safety concerns.
Aside from these limits, employers can terminate employees for good cause, bad cause, or no cause at all.
PIP or terminate
Deciding whether to put an employee on a PIP or terminate must be decided on a case-by-case basis.
A PIP is usually for job performance issues (hence, performance improvement plan). This could mean anything from not making enough sales to being inept at the job’s essential functions. If job performance doesn’t improve under the PIP, termination may be the end result depending on company policies and practices.
Even if an employee has job performance issues, the employer can terminate without going through the PIP process first, unless the usual process is to implement a PIP with employees who have had similar problems. In that case, not doing a PIP could be seen as discrimination against an employee, especially if the person falls into a protected class.
Workplace misconduct, however, is another situation altogether. This could be anything from a one-off poor joke to pervasive harassment. Snapping at customers or coworkers (or worse), for example, is a conduct issue. An employer could issue a warning or move right to termination if the behavior is clearly illegal or a serious threat to workplace safety.
Read more: ezExplanation on discharging employees |
Termination tips
If an employer decides to terminate, they should treat the employee as respectfully as possible during the termination process. Also, an employer should carefully and clearly communicate the job-related reasons for the termination to avoid any hint of discrimination. Lastly, an employer should document the reasons and reiterate the steps taken leading up to the termination and keep those records handy in case the employee files a wrongful termination lawsuit.
Key to remember: Employers sometimes struggle when making termination decisions. Having a process in place and documenting steps along the way can help if a case lands in court.