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
2026-05-26T05:00:00Z
NewsEnforcement and Audits - OSHAPesticidesWorker Protection from PesticidesIn-Depth ArticleHazard CommunicationHR ManagementEnglishUSAIndustry NewsOSHA InspectionsSafety & HealthContingent WorkforceConstruction SafetyGeneral Industry SafetyAgriculture SafetyMaritime SafetyEnvironmentalHazard CommunicationTemporary EmployeesFocus AreaPesticidesHuman Resources
OSHA packs new HazCom directive with enforcement clues
The first compliance date for the amended Hazard Communication (HazCom) standard has arrived, and OSHA finally issued its updated directive. The CPL instructs OSHA officers on how to conduct inspections and issue citations under the standard. However, it also provides chemical manufacturers, importers, distributors, and employers with insight into what officers will be assessing.
In effect, this CPL translates regulatory text into inspector expectations. It shows what adherence to the standard looks like in practice. That makes it a critical resource given recent and upcoming dates at 29 CFR 1910.1200(j).
CPL rewritten for the 2024 standard
On May 19, 2026, OSHA posted a revised CPL 02-02-079, “Inspection Procedures for the Hazard Communication Standard (HCS 2024),” replacing the July 9, 2015, version. The 132-page document reflects the reconfigured HazCom standard published May 20, 2024, effective on July 19, 2024, along with corrections issued through early 2026.
The agency designed this enforcement playbook to maintain uniform inspections during the transition period and after full implementation. Because of the extensive regulatory changes to definitions, hazard classification, labeling, safety data sheets, and trade secrets, the CPL is not a light refresh.
For those familiar with the rulemaking, the new CPL edits will not be surprising. Still, the directive should provide more clarity than the regulatory text.
Front matter and appendices
Updates to Sections I to IX are typical of a CPL, including:
- Cancellation of the 2015 CPL;
- A modified title and references to the 2024 final rule and corrections;
- Alignment with revisions 7 and 8 of the United Nations Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS); and
- A new summary of changes, historical background, and compliance dates.
OSHA also modernized appendices for dates, hazard lists, pictogram hazards, SDS review guidance, chemical resources, and related directives.
Reworked inspection guidelines
Section X outlines inspector instructions for paragraphs (b) through (j) of the standard. The latest modifications impact most sections:
- Scope, applicability, and exemptions — The directive offers new examples and expanded explanations, such as:
- A formaldehyde hazard example for hair smoothing products;
- An overview of pesticide labeling requirements and exemptions;
- Discussion of the EPA Agricultural Worker Protection standard preemption; and
- Greater detail about biological hazards from plants.
- Definitions — The document introduces terms and explains bulk shipment, immediate outer package, physical hazard, released for shipment, and more. It also revisits the terms combustible dust and manufacturer. Lithium-ion batteries are now referenced in the distributor context.
- Hazard classification — The directive instructs OSHA officers to consider the classification of:
- Hazards associated with a chemical’s intrinsic properties, including changes in physical form and reactions from known or reasonably anticipated uses; and
- Impurities, additives, and individual constituents.
- Written plan — The directive clarifies:
- Employers must revise programs by the compliance dates when new information is received from suppliers;
- The use of computers and third-party administrators of safety data sheets (SDSs); and
- The written program must describe how employees will be trained in a language and at a literacy level they understand.
- Labeling — The directive broadens the sections on Department of Transportation labeling, bulk shipments, and small container labeling. It incorporates final rule flexibility too:
- Phased-in compliance dates for labeling;
- Hazards not otherwise classified (HNOCs) and hazards identified and classified under 1910.1200(d)(1)(ii) don’t need to be addressed on the container;
- The exclamation mark pictogram is permitted (but not required) for HNOCs, under certain conditions;
- Minor textual variations for precautionary statements are allowed; and
- OSHA offers alternatives for chemical containers released for shipment.
- Safety data sheets (SDSs) — Amended text focuses on U.S. jurisdiction and technical provisions, such as:
- Phased-in compliance dates for SDSs;
- Importer SDS responsibilities;
- Using a U.S. address and phone number;
- The hazard class and category reflecting intrinsic properties;
- Required Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) number or other unique identifiers; and
- No need to obtain updated SDSs to replace already received SDSs.
- Employee information/training — The directive references a temporary workers bulletin. It also emphasizes:
- Phased-in compliance dates for necessary training adjustments; and
- Delivering training in a language employees understand.
- Trade secrets — The instruction aligns with the 2024 rule:
- Allows the exact percentage, exact concentration range, or CAS number to be withheld if certain criteria are met; and
- Addresses the use of confidentiality agreements.
- Dates — The directive overhauls compliance timelines and discusses documentation of due diligence and good faith efforts.
In addition, the directive softens citation language with phrases like “should normally cite” instead of “shall cite.” This shift suggests inspectors may have greater discretion based on case-specific circumstances.
Key to remember
While 1910.1200 remains the baseline for employers and chemical manufacturers, importers, and distributors, the revised CPL 02-02-079 provides an enforcement lens. With implementation underway, regulated entities can use the CPL to steer their efforts and conform with how OSHA will inspect them in the field.
Keep reading...Show less
RECENT INDUSTRY HIGHLIGHTS
2026-05-26T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsFleet SafetyTrainingTrainingTraining & DevelopmentFocus AreaIn-Depth ArticleUSAEnglishTransportationHuman Resources
From orientation to on-road excellence: Build a training program that delivers results
Effective driver training programs are not built on ride-alongs alone. They are built on structure, consistency, and measurable outcomes. Carriers that develop a formal, written approach to training create a program that is repeatable, defensible in an audit, and capable of producing safe, professional drivers over time. Here’s how they do it.
Start with written policies that define the trainers’ roles and goals
Every trainer should operate from a clear policy that outlines expectations. This includes the trainer’s responsibility to model compliant behavior, document progress, and coach drivers. Goals should be specific and measurable, such as ensuring learners demonstrate proficiency in pre-trip inspections, hours-of-service (HOS) compliance, backing maneuvers, and defensive driving techniques. When trainer expectations are written and standardized, the carrier reduces inconsistency and ensures every learner receives the same level of instruction.
Build written program guidelines that define how training is delivered
A strong program includes documented procedures for each phase of training. This should cover classroom instruction, yard skills, and on-road driving. Guidelines should define required skills demonstrations, and the sequence in which training occurs. They should also clearly distinguish between observation, supervised practice, and independent performance. This structure ensures that training is not rushed and that drivers build skills progressively rather than being pushed through to fill seats.
Establish clear written criteria for driver certification
Certification should not be based on time alone. It should require demonstrated competency. Written guidelines should define what a driver must do to be released, such as completing a compliant pre-trip inspection without assistance, maintaining lane control and proper following distance, executing safe backing maneuvers, and adhering to company policies. Documentation should support each certification decision, creating a record that the driver met objective standards.
Adapt training as hiring criteria evolve
As hiring standards shift, training must be adjusted accordingly. Less experienced drivers require more foundational instruction, longer training periods, and greater emphasis on basic vehicle control and compliance habits. Experienced hires may need shorter programs focused on company-specific policies and correcting bad habits. A training program will fail if it does not reflect the actual skill level of incoming drivers.
Measure results beyond program completion
Completing training does not equal success. Carriers need a system to evaluate whether training is effective in the real world. This includes tracking key performance indicators such as preventable accidents, roadside inspection violations, HOS compliance errors, and telematics data (speeding, hard braking, lane control). These metrics should be tied back to individual drivers and training to identify trends.
Define what “good” looks like and measure behavior in the field
Drivers need clear expectations. Define “good” in observable terms such as consistent mirror usage, proper following distance, smooth braking, accurate log entries, and thorough inspections. Follow-alongs or ride-alongs can then be used to verify these behaviors in real operating conditions. These evaluations should be structured with scorecards or checklists to ensure consistency and provide objective feedback.
Continuously improve trainers and the program itself
Trainer development is just as important as driver development. Trainer certifications should be reviewed and updated regularly, ensuring trainers stay current on regulations, company policies, and coaching techniques. Additionally, data gathered from driver performance should be fed back into the training program. If certain violations or risky behaviors appear repeatedly, the program should be updated to address those gaps directly.
Key to remember: With written standards, measurable outcomes, and continuous improvement, carriers can move beyond basic compliance and build a program that truly reduces risk and develops professional drivers.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-05-26T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsDiscriminationDiscriminationPregnancy DiscriminationAssociate RelationsHR GeneralistIn-Depth ArticleUSAHR ManagementEnglishFocus AreaHuman Resources
5 potential PWFA employer pitfalls
Employer challenges with the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) continue to evolve as they respond to employees exercising their rights under this fairly new federal law (since 2023).
The PWFA provides many opportunities for missteps, particularly if employers aren’t aware of its provisions. One employer’s misstep risk might be different than another's, but here are five pitfalls all employers should watch for.
- 1. Delaying an accommodation
Once an employee asks for a workplace change because of a limitation related to, affected by, or arising out of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions, employers should act quickly. Employers that drag their feet when providing a reasonable accommodation risk a PWFA violation. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) — the federal agency that enforces the PWFA — could see an unnecessary delay as a failure to provide a reasonable accommodation.
- 2. Asking for documentation when not allowed
When employees ask for workplace accommodations, employers may require them to provide reasonable documentation from a health care provider. But what is “reasonable” can be narrowly defined under the PWFA. This means that employers may ask for documentation only if the need for accommodation isn’t obvious and the employer doesn’t already have enough information.
If, for example, the employee is pregnant, employers may not ask for documentation if the employee needs extra bathroom breaks or time to eat or drink. The same applies if the pregnant employee needs to carry water with them to drink, or needs to stand if their job requires sitting or to sit if their job requires standing.
Employers also may not ask for documentation for lactation-related accommodations.
- 3. Requiring leave
Employers may not mandate that employees take leave if another accommodation would enable the employee to continue working. Put simply, leave from work (paid or unpaid) should be a last-resort accommodation, not something they turn to right away. Employers must investigate alternative accommodations before suggesting leave. Pregnant employees will, of course, need time off for delivery and recovery.
- 4. Skipping the interactive process
Employees don’t have to accept an accommodation that wasn’t reached through an interactive process between the employer and the employee. Employers who miss this step could increase their challenges and risks. However, employers generally get to have the final say on what accommodation is selected, as long as it’s effective.
- 5. Enforcing production standards
The idea that employers don’t have to waive a production standard as a reasonable accommodation doesn’t always apply. When the accommodation is the temporary suspension of an essential function(s) or leave, employers must adjust production standards.
If, for example, as a reasonable accommodation, an employee isn’t working overtime, and production is measured by an employee working overtime, the employer shouldn’t penalize the employee for lower production.
These are only 5 ways employers could be tripped up under the PWFA; there are others, and they depend on each situation.
Key to remember: The PWFA offers employers numerous opportunities for mistakes and, therefore, violations.
Keep reading...Show less
NewsIndustry NewsEnglishHR GeneralistIn-Depth ArticleUSAHR ManagementWellnessWellnessFocus AreaHuman Resources
Bring some green indoors to enhance job performance and employee well-being
Green is the color of March, as it signals the St. Patrick’s Day holiday as well as the emergence of spring. Did you know that bringing some green into your workplace can have benefits year-round?
A Harvard Business Review study found that bringing small pieces of nature into the workplace positively impacts employee performance and well-being.
The potted plant test
Researchers tested their theory by going into an office at night and placing potted plants by the desks of some employees. They placed office supplies on other employees’ desks.
The employees who were exposed to this small dose of nature displayed higher job performance, an increased desire to help, and enhanced creativity. No one was negatively impacted.
Bringing nature indoors
Live plants can’t be part of every work setting, but they’re not the only way to bring the benefits of nature indoors.
Nature-related elements can include:
- Windows with views of nature
- Indoor water features
- Murals of natural scenes
- Artificial plants or flowers
- Fish aquariums
Design features related to nature can also be more significant and included in building plans. For example, investing in landscaping designs outside office windows or having an indoor garden are ways to positively impact employees.
These options don’t have to break the bank or require a pot of gold, however. Simply allowing employees to place potted plants by their desks is an inexpensive way to enhance the workplace.
With a little luck, everyone will reap the benefits for having a little more green nearby.
Key to remember: Bringing natural touches to the workplace can have a positive impact on job performance, cooperation, and creativity.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-05-22T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsHazmat PlacardingHazmat SafetyExpert InsightsFocus AreaHazmat markings, Placards, and LabelsEnglishTransportationUSA
Expert Insights: Common hazmat placarding mistakes
Placards are one of the most visible parts of hazmat compliance. Anyone on the road can see them, including drivers, enforcement officials, and emergency responders. Because of that visibility, most people I talk to assume that placarding is simple. In reality, it’s one of the areas where small oversights show up fast and can create major compliance issues.
In my experience, most violations don’t come from a lack of effort. They usually come from assumptions, habits, or misunderstandings about how the rules apply in real-world operations. When I take a closer look at placarding issues, the same patterns tend to show up. Once you start recognizing those patterns, it becomes a lot easier to catch issues early and avoid problems during inspections or incidents.
Using the wrong placard or using it at the wrong time
One of the most common mistakes I see is using a placard that doesn’t match the material being transported. This usually happens when someone relies on memory instead of verifying the hazard class, or when subsidiary risks get overlooked. Even experienced employees fall into this habit when things start moving too fast.
I also see situations where the placard is technically correct but used at the wrong time. A placard might be left on from a previous load or put on in anticipation of a future shipment. Placards aren’t general warnings. They need to reflect exactly what’s in the vehicle at that moment.
Failing to remove placards
Another issue I run into a lot is failing to remove placards when the hazard is no longer present. This tends to happen when equipment is reused frequently or when operations are trying to keep things moving. It may seem like a small detail, but it creates real risk.
If a placard is displayed, responders are going to assume the hazard is there. That can impact how they respond in an emergency and lead to unnecessary precautions. From a compliance perspective, displaying a placard that doesn’t match the contents of the vehicle is a violation and usually draws unwanted attention during inspections.
Misunderstanding when placards are required
Placarding decisions aren’t always straightforward, especially when packaging types and quantities vary. I usually see teams assume that placards are always required any time hazmat is present. That approach can lead to over-placarding and send the wrong message.
On the other side, I also see required placards get missed because quantities aren’t evaluated correctly. Smaller packages can still trigger placarding when they’re combined. Taking a few extra minutes to verify packaging type and total quantity can make all the difference.
Placement and visibility issues
Even when the right placards are selected, they’re not always displayed properly. Placards need to be clearly visible and in good condition, but this is something I see get overlooked in day-to-day operations. Dirt, damage, and equipment can all block or reduce visibility.
If a placard can’t be easily seen, it’s not doing its job. I always recommend building placement and condition checks into routine inspections, not just focusing on whether the correct placard was chosen. This becomes even more important in environments where equipment sees heavy use.
What this means in the real world
When I look at placarding overall, I don’t see it as just a basic requirement. It’s a real-time communication tool that people rely on to make decisions. Every incorrect, missing, or unnecessary placard sends the wrong message and increases risk.
The good news is that most of these mistakes are preventable. Clear procedures, consistent training, and routine checks go a long way. When teams start treating placarding as an active part of hazard communication instead of just another requirement, I see better decisions and fewer mistakes.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-05-22T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsIndustry NewsToxic Substances Control Act - EPAToxic Subtances Control Act - EPATSCA ComplianceEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA)EnvironmentalEnglishFocus AreaUSA
Final rule extends TSCA Section 8(d) health and safety reporting deadline
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a final rule on May 22, 2026, extending the reporting deadline for the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Section 8(d) Health and Safety Data Reporting Rule from May 22, 2026, to May 21, 2027.
Who’s impacted?
The TSCA Section 8(d) Health and Safety Data Reporting Rule applies to manufacturers (including importers) of any of the 16 chemical substances listed at 40 CFR 716.120(d), including:
- Entities that currently manufacture (including import) any of the chemicals; and
- Entities that have manufactured (including imported) or have proposed to manufacture (including import) any of the chemicals since January 13, 2015.
What’s required?
The rule requires covered manufacturers (including importers) to submit a one-time report of data on the chemicals from unpublished studies on:
- Health and safety;
- Environmental effects; and
- Occupational, general population, and consumer exposure.
Which chemicals are covered?
The TSCA Section 8(d) Health and Safety Data Reporting Rule applies to:
|
|
Why the delay?
EPA has extended the deadline to allow additional time to reconsider the rule’s scope and possibly propose revisions to the regulations. Once any major changes are finalized, EPA will communicate the updated reporting requirements and timelines accordingly.
Key to remember: EPA has extended the submission date for the TSCA Section 8(d) Health and Safety Data Reporting Rule’s one-time report to May 2027.
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.