Compliance Just Got Easier: Stay ahead of regulatory changes with instant notifications on updates that matter.
Copyright 2026 J. J. Keller & Associate, Inc. For re-use options please contact copyright@jjkeller.com or call 800-558-5011.
Regulatory Compliance News & Updates
Keep up to date on the latest
developments affecting OSHA, DOT,
EPA, and DOL regulatory compliance.
Safety & Compliance News
FEATURED NEWS
2026-09-10T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsSafety & HealthElectrical SafetyGeneral Industry SafetyElectrical SafetyOccupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), DOLIn-Depth ArticleEnglishFocus AreaUSA
Electrical safety: Facts about the flash
Arc flashes kill an average of 400 workers every single year when an electrical fault creates a sudden release of energy that sends extreme heat, intense light, and a powerful pressure wave blasting toward the worker. These events can also cause serious, and often permanent, injuries such as severe burns and hearing loss, as well as significant equipment damage that results in operational downtime. Understanding the risks and implementing preventive measures is essential for protecting workers and maintaining a safe work environment.
Where the danger lies
The three key terms in arc safety are electric arc, arc flash, and arc blast. These terms are often confused with one another or used interchangeably; however, they are quite different phenomena. Understanding their distinction is essential for effective safe work practices.
- Electric arc: The breakdown of electrical insulation allowing current to reach the air or take another unintended path.
- Arc flash: The intense light and heat generated during electrical arcing. The flash is essentially an electrical explosion that occurs when an electrical current leaves its intended path and travels through the air from one conductor to another or to the ground.
- Arc blast: The extreme pressure wave created from the electric arc. The blast follows shortly after the flash and is the result of vaporized copper expanding at an alarming rate.
An electrical arcing incident occurs when a short circuit an electric current is sustained outside of its normal conductive pathway like through the air (think: lightning). Although air is usually clean and non-conductive, it becomes conductive when particles gain or lose electrons while floating in the air. The change in electrons creates plasma, which gives the current a new and extremely dangerous path which results in a flash followed by a blast.
Respect the numbers[
The numbers associated with an electrical arcing incident should, alone, be enough to show why arc flash and blast safety matters:
- Temperatures during an arc flash can reach up to 35,000°F which is approximately 4 times hotter than the surface of the sun.
- During an arc blast, copper vaporizes and expands by a factor of 67,000 times.
- Pressure from an arc blast can reach up to 2,000 pounds of force which is the equivalent of a full-grown draft horse plowing into a person’s body.
- Blasts from an arc flash can propel molten metal and debris at up to 700 miles per hour, which is faster than the cruising speed of a commercial airplane.
- More than 2,000 people a year are treated in burn centers for arc flash-related injuries, resulting in 6 to 8 months of lost work time.
- Penalties for arc flash-related injuries can be over $160,000 per violation.
- Average medical expenses for an arc-flash survivor is $1.5 million with an additional $5 million to $10 million in litigation settlements.
Key Elements of Arc Flash Safety
Prioritizing arc flash and blast safety demonstrates a commitment to employee well-being and operational integrity. An effective arc flash safety program will include:
- Conducting a thorough arc flash risk assessment to identify potential hazards, calculate incident energy levels, and label equipment accordingly.
- Implementing engineering design solutions such as arc-resistant equipment;
- Maintaining electrical systems and good housekeeping to reduce the likelihood of faults that lead to arc flashes or dust accumulation that can provide a travel path for rogue arcs.
- Providing appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE), such as flame-resistant clothing, face shields, and insulated gloves, based on the calculated risk level and enforcing employee use.
- Delivering regular training on electrical hazards, safe work practices, and emergency response procedures.
- Encouraging employees to report electrical hazards, safety issues, near misses, and incidents so preventative measures can be taken.
- Ensuring compliance with OSHA and consensus standards like NFPA 70E so safety measures meet legal requirements and industry best practices.
Key to remember: Electrical arcing incidents kill hundreds of workers each year and can cause catastrophic injuries, property damage, and downtime. Understanding the hazards of electric arcs, arc flash, and arc blast is essential for implementing the right protective measures in the workplace.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-09-10T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsOn-duty time - Motor CarrierFleet Safety150 air-mile radius exceptionHours of ServiceHours of ServiceFocus AreaIn-Depth ArticleEnglishTransportationUSA
Playlist: Managing “150 air-mile” time records and ELDs
Many motor carriers rely on the short-haul, 150-air-mile exception to reduce driver recordkeeping requirements, but misunderstanding the rules can quickly lead to compliance violations. Questions often arise about air-mile limits, time restrictions, ELD requirements, and what happens when a driver occasionally exceeds the limits of the exception. Whether you're evaluating if your operation qualifies or trying to avoid costly mistakes during an audit, this playlist brings together key Compliance Network resources that answer the most common questions to help you understand and properly use the short-haul exception.
- Who qualifies for the 150-air-mile short-haul exception?
- How far can they go under the 150- air-mile exception?
- How much driving time is allowed?
- Do these drivers need an ELD?
- What time records are required?
- What if they exceed the limits?
- How do you avoid mistakes?
This playlist highlights essential Compliance Network resources to help you determine whether your operations qualify for the short-haul exception and how to maintain compliance when using it. For additional guidance, explore related topics such as Hours of Service, Electronic Logging Devices (ELDs), Driver Records, Time Records, and FMCSA Audits within Compliance Network.
A Compliance Network playlist is a curated collection of practical resources designed to help you quickly address a specific event, task, or compliance challenge. Each playlist brings relevant guidance together in one place so you can spend less time searching and more time taking action. Stay tuned — more practical, ready-to-use collections are coming soon.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-09-10T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsIndustry NewsFleet SafetyAnnual inspections - Motor CarrierFocus AreaUSAFleet OperationsEnglishTransportationCMV Inspections
2026 Roadcheck results you ‘auto’ know
The 2026 3-day International Roadcheck results are out, offering snapshot insights for all industry personnel on truck/motorcoach safety performance.
The Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance’s (CVSA’s) three-day event took place May 12–14, 2026. There were 54,575 total inspections across Mexico, the U.S., and Canada. The areas of focus for this year’s event included a closer look at cargo securement, which ranked fourth out of all vehicle out-of-service (OOS) violations, and electronic logging device (ELD) tampering or manipulation, which ranked as the seventh most cited driver OOS violation.
International Roadcheck 2026 results
Approximately 81 percent of commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) and 94.2 percent of CMV drivers got through the inspection with no OOS violations. In contrast:
- 19 percent (10,350) of inspected vehicles were placed OOS, and
- 5.8 percent (3,184) of CMV drivers were placed OOS.
In total, inspectors identified 13,924 vehicle OOS violations, 3,806 driver OOS violations, and 431 vehicle/driver hazardous materials/dangerous goods OOS violations.
2026 focus results
The 2026 vehicle focus area was on cargo securement. In total, inspectors discovered 1,724 OOS cargo securement violations, making up 12.4 percent of all vehicle OOS violations. A cargo securement violation happens when freight isn’t properly secured, tied down, immobilized, restrained, packed, or locked, which can cause dangerous highway debris, vehicle rollovers, and jackknifes.
The 2026 driver focus area was on ELD manipulation, tampering, or falsification, which are all tactics used to hide hour-of-service violations. Hiding hours raises the risk of fatigue, which can lead to more frequent or severe highway accidents. ELD violations accounted for 3.7 percent (146) of all driver OOS violations.
Inspections by level
The 54,575 total inspection levels break down as follows:
- Level I Inspections: 31,241
- Level II Inspections: 11,502
- Level III Inspections: 10,528
- Level V Inspections: 1,304
Level I Inspections include a 37-step process that checks the driver’s credentials and the vehicle’s components while a Level II Inspection is a less-comprehensive walk-around driver and vehicle inspection. A Level III Inspection is a driver-only inspection and checks credentials, Clearinghouse status, and hours-of-service records. Finally, a Level V Inspection is a comprehensive vehicle-only inspection.
Top 5
Top 5 North American vehicle OOS violations:
- Brake Systems: 3,379
- Tires: 2,914
- 20% Defective Brakes: 2,072
- Cargo securement: 1,724
- Lights: 1,659
Top 5 North American driver OOS violations:
- No medical card: 1,072
- Hours of service: 929
- No commercial driver’s license: 620
- English proficiency: 361
- False logs: 266
The top 5 North American hazardous materials/dangerous goods OOS violations:
- Placards: 40
- Loading: 38
- Shipping papers: 25
- Training certification: 17
- Markings: 15
Keep reading...Show less
2026-09-10T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsHR GeneralistFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)In-Depth ArticleFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)Associate RelationsEnglishUSAHR ManagementFocus AreaHuman Resources
Unplanned FMLA leave and getting the job done
The federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) entitles eligible employees to job-protected, unpaid time off for certain qualifying reasons. Sometimes, employees can take the leave if it’s unplanned, which can put employers in a tough position finding worker coverage. Last-minute, unforeseeable, intermittent time off for FMLA issues, such as flare-ups, often poses the biggest challenge in FMLA administration.
Some of the ways employers can manage unpredictable leaves are by:
- Cross-training employees,
- Having backup staff ready,
- Tapping into float pools, or
- Offering voluntary shift swaps.
Keeping schedules updated and assigning temporary responsibilities can also help ensure there are employees available to help get the work done.
Managers can coordinate with other managers to share workload and avoid overburdening any one employee.
The more intermittent leave employees are taking, the more beneficial these types of tactics are.
Employers that aren’t familiar with the FMLA regulations might think that they can transfer an employee who needs intermittent leave (or leave on a reduced leave schedule) to a different job. The regulations state, however, that’s allowed only when the leave is foreseeable based on planned medical treatment.
Call-in policy
Employers may hold employees to their usual and customary call-in policies. Employers may, for example, require employees to call a designated number or a specific individual to request leave.
If, however, an employee requires emergency medical treatment, they wouldn’t have to follow the call-in procedure until:
- Their condition is stabilized,
- They have access to a phone or other means of communication, and
- They’re able to use a phone or other communication method.
If an employee doesn’t comply with the employer's usual notice and procedural requirements, and no unusual circumstances justify the failure to comply, the employer may delay or deny FMLA-protected leave.
It’s still FMLA leave
If an employee needs FMLA leave and follows the proper call-in procedures, the employer must count that time as FMLA leave. The employer isn’t allowed to claim that an employee’s FMLA leave poses an undue hardship, even if they’re managing a heavy workload. The FMLA doesn’t have an undue hardship defense; that falls under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Employers that fail to provide the leave risk a claim that they interfered with the employee’s FMLA rights.
Key to remember: The FMLA doesn’t dictate how employers get the job done when employees take FMLA leave, and employers can’t deny the leave, but can take some steps to mitigate potential issues.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-09-10T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsIndustry NewsHeat and Cold ExposureSafety & HealthConstruction SafetyGeneral Industry SafetyAgriculture SafetyMaritime SafetyEnglishHeat StressFocus AreaUSA
OSHA’s proposed heat rule debated during House subcommittee hearing
OSHA’s proposed heat illness and prevention rule took center stage during a September 2 hearing held by the House Workforce Protections Subcommittee.
Elizabeth Milito of the National Federation of Independent Business urged Congress to pass a bill that would prevent OSHA from issuing a permanent heat rule, citing the General Duty Clause already protects workers from heat-related hazards. Rebecca Reindel, director of occupational safety and health for the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) countered that the clause has a “broader, higher burden of proof” than a regular OSHA standard, including the need to satisfy a four-part test to issue a citation.
The rule, originally published in the Federal Register on August 30, 2024, would apply to employers conducting outdoor and indoor work in general industry, construction, maritime, and agriculture sectors where OSHA has jurisdiction and require them to implement a heat injury and illness prevention plan, along with other provisions.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-09-09T05:00:00Z
NewsFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)LeaveFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)Time offHuman ResourcesLeaveHR ManagementEnglishUSAAssociate Benefits & CompensationIndustry NewsIndustry NewsHR GeneralistFocus AreaAssociate RelationsDisabilities and ADADisabilities and ADAReasonable Accommodations
Employee’s leave protected by ADA
In October 2023, Stephen received a call from his doctor telling him that he tested positive for colon cancer. Stephen told his boss and HR that he needed to take 3 days off because of his cancer diagnosis, and he presented a medical note from his doctor.
His boss said to Stephen, “Are you f** kidding me? Your obligations are here.” HR reminded Stephen that the company is in “peak workload season.”
Four days after requesting leave, and on Stephen’s first day back to work, the employer fired him. Afterward, Stephen’s follow-up tests showed that he didn’t have colon cancer and that the test produced a false positive.
Stephen sued his former employer, arguing that the employer violated both the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA).
The employer argued in court that, because Stephen didn’t actually have cancer, he didn’t have ADA job protections.
The court disagreed. It said that there was evidence that the employer regarded or perceived Stephen as being impaired by cancer. It didn’t matter whether the impairment limited or was perceived to limit a major life activity; it was enough that the perceived impairment would be expected to last longer than 6 months and wasn’t otherwise minor. Colon cancer is neither minor nor would an employer expect colon cancer to only last a few months.
The court considered that the employer fired Stephen only 4 days after he announced his medical issue. The employer claimed it had a legitimate reason for firing Stephen: He performed poorly at his job, and sales records supported that claim.
But a jury could find this as pretext for the termination. The supervisor’s and HR’s response to Stephen’s announcement didn’t help the employer’s argument.
The court did, however, rule in the employer’s favor, saying that it didn’t violate the FMLA. Stephen didn’t have a serious medical condition as defined under the FMLA because he didn’t actually have cancer, so his FMLA claims failed.
Lishego v. Tri Star Motors, Inc., Western District of Pennsylvania, No. 2:24-CV-1458, August 5, 2026.
Key to remember: The ADA protects employees even if they don’t have a disability when the employer thinks they’re impaired and takes a negative employment action because of it.
Court decisions are based on the specific facts presented and each court’s interpretation of the law. Because courts may reach different conclusions, similar situations can lead to different outcomes. Employers should avoid relying on a single case as definitive guidance and instead assess each situation carefully, considering applicable laws and seeking advice when needed.
Keep reading...Show less
Got a Compliance Question?
We’ve Got You Covered!
Get clear, reliable answers from experts with 500+ years of combined experience.
J. J. Keller is the trusted source for DOT / Transportation, OSHA / Workplace Safety, Human Resources, Construction Safety and Hazmat / Hazardous Materials regulation compliance products and services. J. J. Keller helps you increase safety awareness, reduce risk, follow best practices, improve safety training, and stay current with changing regulations.
Copyright 2026 J. J. Keller & Associate, Inc. For re-use options please contact copyright@jjkeller.com or call 800-558-5011.