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
2026-06-25T05:00:00Z
NewsTransportationEnglishCommercial drivers license CDLBusiness planning - Motor CarrierCMV InspectionsCommercial drivers license CDLIndustry NewsIndustry NewsFederal Motor Carrier Safety RegulationsElectronic logging device (ELD)Electronic logging device (ELD)Daily vehicle inspectionsFleet OperationsFocus AreaUSA
3 new DOT rules target paperwork requirements
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) has finalized three rule changes to remove what it calls “unnecessary” mandates.
The changes, all effective July 22, 2026, eliminate or scale back paperwork-related obligations for drivers and motor carriers.
ELD user manuals
One rule change removes the requirement that an electronic logging device (ELD) operator’s manual be kept inside the vehicle. The FMCSA says carrying the manual no longer provides a meaningful safety benefit, particularly given that most manuals are accessible online or are built into the devices themselves.
The rule doesn’t change any core ELD obligations, including the need to carry ELD malfunction instructions, data-transfer instructions, and at least eight blank logs.
Roadside inspection reports
Another rule revises how completed roadside inspection reports are handled. Previously, motor carriers were required to return all such reports to the issuing state agency. Under the new rule, carriers only need to return these reports if the issuing state agency specifically requests or requires it.
Most states don’t require roadside inspection reports to be returned, making the federal rule unnecessary.
Motor carriers are still required to fix any defects identified on the report, sign it, and retain it for at least 12 months, even if the state doesn’t want a copy.
CDL self-reporting
Finally, the FMCSA is removing the long-standing requirement that commercial driver’s license (CDL) holders self-report out-of-state traffic convictions to their state of domicile.
The agency concluded that this requirement is now redundant, and has been unnecessary in most cases since 2013. In addition, since 2024, states have exchanged conviction data electronically, ensuring violations are automatically transmitted between licensing agencies. Under 49 CFR 383.31, drivers must continue to report traffic convictions to their employers within 30 days.
Two of the three rule changes were proposed in May 2025 as part of a slate of deregulatory actions by the new Trump administration, most of which have been finalized. The change to roadside inspection reporting was in response to a petition from the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance.
Keep reading...Show less
RECENT INDUSTRY HIGHLIGHTS
2026-06-24T05:00:00Z
NewsGroundwaterSafe Drinking WaterWater ProgramsWater QualityWater ProgramsCWA ComplianceEnglishWater PermittingMunicipal WastewaterChange NoticesChange NoticeWater ReportingIndustrial WastewaterEnvironmentalNew HampshireFocus Area
New Hampshire updates sludge management rules
Effective date: May 15, 2026
This applies to: Owners and operators of drinking water and wastewater treatment plants that generate sludge; land application sites; and facilities that treat, manage, or dispose of sludge
Description of change: The New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services amended sludge management rules. Major changes include:
- Reinstating 5-year site and facility permit renewals (instead of 10 years),
- Adding annual reporting requirements for sludge haulers (which already apply to septage haulers), and
- Requiring all applications to be submitted electronically.
The rule also codifies per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) sampling (implemented in 2019 for the sludge quality certificate program).
Keep reading...Show less
2026-06-24T05:00:00Z
NewsEnforcement and Audits - OSHASafety and Health Programs and TrainingLockout/TagoutLockout/TagoutErgonomicsSafety and Health Programs and TrainingIn-Depth ArticleEnglishHeat StressOSHA Violations and PenaltiesErgonomicsIndustry NewsHeat and Cold ExposureSafety & HealthConstruction SafetyGeneral Industry SafetyAgriculture SafetyMaritime SafetyFocus AreaUSA
Congress pushes OSHA and workplace safety in competing directions
A divided Capitol Hill is sending mixed signals on workplace safety policy. Some lawmakers are pressing for greater worker protection while others seek to block new rulemaking. Yet there is agreement that emerging safety challenges are on the rise. How these competing priorities will influence the OSHA landscape remains to be seen.
Pushback over Heat proposal
Dominating the pack of recent legislation affecting safety and health is the Heat Workforce Standards Act (S. 4427). The bill, introduced on April 29 by Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-LA) seeks to stop OSHA from finalizing, implementing, or enforcing a Heat Injury and Illness Prevention standard based on or similar to the August 30, 2024, proposal. This legislation underscores how OSHA rulemakings can face resistance around feasibility and cost.
The Senator calls the OSHA proposed rule burdensome, overly prescriptive, one-size-fits-all, and nearly impossible for employers to comply with. The lawmaker also argues that the rule would raise costs for small businesses. He adds that the proposal, if promulgated, would cause confusion.
It should be noted that a companion bill in the House (H.R. 6213) was introduced last November. In addition, two bills (H.R. 4443 and S. 2298) introduced last July would require OSHA to issue a standard to protect workers from heat-related injuries and illnesses.
Efforts to expand worker protection
To commemorate Workers’ Memorial Day on April 28, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) introduced the Protecting America’s Workers Act (S. 4413). The legislation would reform the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act) to:
- Impose higher monetary penalties and criminal charges;
- Protect whistleblowers who report unsafe working conditions;
- Mandate that OSHA investigate all cases of workplace deaths or serious injuries;
- Require employers to inform workers of their right to a safe workplace; and
- Extend safety and health protections to federal, state, and local public employees.
This bill is a companion to last year’s House bill (H.R. 3036) by the same name. Both bills work to expand OSHA’s authority.
Emerging safety and health challenges
The House Workforce Protections Subcommittee held a hearing on May 14 to help shape the conversation about evolving workplace safety and health issues. Subcommittee Chairman Ryan Mackenzie (R-PA) explained that the idea was to “better prevent serious injuries and fatalities in the modern workplace.” Those who testified spoke about:
- Leading indicators,
- Safety and health management systems,
- Artificial intelligence,
- Advances in lockout/tagout systems,
- Worker wellbeing,
- Work violence,
- Opioid overdoses,
- Cannabis impairment,
- Silica dust exposure,
- New chemical exposures,
- Heat illness,
- Vehicle driving risks,
- Performance-based OSHA standards rather than prescriptive ones, and
- An accelerated OSHA variance program for new technologies.
Information from the hearing may shape future legislation or OSHA regulations.
Worker safety in meat plants
Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) and four other legislators sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) on April 30. The letter opposes the department’s proposed rules that would increase line speeds for poultry and swine processing plants. The lawmakers also oppose the removal of requirements for these establishments to submit annual worker safety data called attestations.
The letter urges USDA not to move forward with the proposals. It points to the USDA’s research on musculoskeletal disorders among poultry and swine slaughter workers. The letter also spotlights amputations in poultry facilities and meatpacking.
When USDA issued its research in 2025, Acting Labor Secretary Julie Su stated, “The findings in USDA's report on worker safety in poultry and swine plants show that injuries, including chronic pain and musculoskeletal disorders are too common. These kinds of injuries often go unreported. The study found that the increased risk of injuries created by increasing line speeds could be mitigated with other controls, specifically having more workers on the line and having effective ergonomic plans.”
While OSHA does not set line speeds in food plants, the issue illustrates how workplace safety is related to policy decisions in other agencies.
Consensus standards targeted
Another piece of legislation introduced March 19 seeks to provide public access to incorporated by reference consensus standards without requiring payment. Some standards are made freely available online, but not all.
The Pro Codes Act (S. 4145), if passed, would ensure that a consensus standard does not lose its copyright protection simply because it is incorporated by reference into law or regulation. However, the catch is the standard must be available for free viewing on a publicly accessible website. That website would be searchable. Plus, the standards organization could not use any personally identifiable information of site visitors without their consent.
Senator Chris Coons (D-DE) said of his bill, “This bipartisan legislation … will make the public safer by ensuring non-profits know they can develop better standards without fear of losing them.”
A companion House bill (H.R. 4072) by the same name was introduced in June last year.
Key to remember
In recent months, lawmakers have turned their attention to five areas impacting safety — blocking OSHA’s Heat proposal, strengthening the OSH Act, exploring emerging workplace safety issues, opposing faster line speeds, and increasing access to consensus standards.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-06-24T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsIndustry NewsAssociate Benefits & CompensationHR GeneralistFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)Associate RelationsEnglishHR ManagementFocus AreaHuman ResourcesUSA
Did the employer fire an employee for marijuana use or FMLA leave?
In 2014, the employer hired Amanda, who had a medical condition that affected her walking, sitting, and standing. The employer knew about her condition when it hired her.
In 2020, Amanda began using prescribed medical marijuana as allowed under state law and told her employer about it. The employer allowed her to use her vacation time when her pain worsened.
On July 31, 2023, the employer asked that Amanda take an impromptu drug test. She told the employer that she:
- Wouldn’t pass due to her lawful medical marijuana use,
- Never smoked marijuana before going to work,
- Didn’t possess medical marijuana, and
- Wasn’t under its influence while at work.
Amanda also asked for paperwork for leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) on the same date.
On August 10, the employer told Amanada that she failed the drug test, which violated the company’s drug- and alcohol-free workplace policy, but that she could continue working.
On August 14, Amanda gave her employer the FMLA certification. Two days later, the employer fired Amanda for failing the drug test.
Amanda sued, claiming the employer violated the FMLA.
The employer argued that Amanda was fired because of her failed drug test rather than the FMLA request.
The court found that the short amount of time between Amanda’s FMLA leave request and her termination was enough to demonstrate a connection between them, particularly since the employer told her she could continue working.
Because of that, the court denied the employer’s request to have the case dismissed, and a jury will have to decide this case unless it settles first.
Everitt v. Luzerne County, Middle District of PA, No. 3:25-CV-00404, June 12, 2026.
Key to remember: Firing an employee shortly after they ask for FMLA leave can be risky, even if the employee violates a company policy, but much would depend on the reason for the firing.
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
2026-06-24T05:00:00Z
NewsIndianaSafe Drinking WaterChange NoticesChange NoticeWater ProgramsEnvironmentalCWA ComplianceEnglishUnderground Injection ControlFocus Area
Indiana adds permanent underground carbon dioxide storage rules
Effective date: June 10, 2026
This applies to: Entities that seek to participate in carbon sequestration projects
Description of change: The Natural Resources Commission adopted rules for permanent underground carbon dioxide storage, establishing:
- The applicability of carbon sequestration projects, and
- The rules for the Department of Natural Resources issuing involuntary integration orders and certificates of project completion.
The rules impact entities seeking to participate in carbon sequestration projects under IC 14-39. The regulations also affect pore space owners and surface owners.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-06-24T05:00:00Z
NewsHazardous WasteWaste HandlersChange NoticesChange NoticeWasteWaste/HazWasteWaste ManagementEnvironmentalNevadaEnglishFocus Area
Nevada adds requirements for hazardous waste recyclers
Effective date: June 8, 2026
This applies to: Hazardous waste recyclers
Description of change: The State Environmental Commission adopted regulations to add requirements for entities that recycle certain hazardous waste, including compliance with:
- Certain federal requirements;
- Local zoning requirements, if applicable;
- Specific reporting and notification requirements; and
- Other particular regulations of the commission.
The rules also:
- Exempt owners and operators of certain facilities that recycle certain hazardous materials without storing those materials before they’re recycled from the above requirements, and
- Add fees for written determinations (required to construct or operate a facility or mobile unit for hazardous waste recycling) and for the facilities that recycle certain hazardous materials without storing those materials before they’re recycled.
Keep reading...Show less
Search all news
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.