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
NewsHazardous WasteSARA ComplianceCommunity Right to KnowPesticidesBenzeneTSCA ComplianceWater ProgramsWater QualityPesticide Registration and LabelingSARA ComplianceSafety Data Sheet ReportingMiningWaste/HazWasteTier II Inventory ReportingEnforcement and Audits - OSHASafety & HealthToxic and Hazardous Substances - OSHAEnvironmentalAir ProgramsToxic and Hazardous Substances - OSHAVideoAir QualityCERCLA, SARA, EPCRAEnforcement and Audits - OSHAToxic Substances Control Act - EPAAir EmissionsMonthly Roundup VideoCAA ComplianceCWA ComplianceEnglishIndustry News
EHS Monthly Round Up - July 2026
In this July 2026 monthly roundup video, we'll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news.
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 past month.
OSHA published its 2026 regulatory agenda on July 3. Of note, the agency projects an April 2027 date for the Emergency Response final rule, and the Heat Illness proposal is slated to be finalized in October 2027. In November 2026, OSHA also expects to publish a final rule addressing the use of subpoenas during investigations.
OSHA reopened the comment period for 14 chemical-specific proposals. This allows the public 30 days to comment on recommendations made by OSHA’s Advisory Committee on Construction Safety and Health.
OSHA updated its Voluntary Protection Programs, which recognize workplaces with strong safety and health programs and low injury rates. The changes align with the seven core elements in the agency’s Recommended Practices for Safety and Health Programs.
The Mine Safety and Health Administration withdrew 4 regulations that it says address outdated effective dates and requirements for various industry equipment and procedures. These relate to conveyor belts, blacksmith shops, diesel emission limits, and permissible flame safety lamps.
Turning to environmental news, EPA released detailed instructions and deadlines for pesticide registrants to begin compliance with the bilingual labeling requirements in the My PeST application. The first compliance deadline was July 31.
EPA aligned regulations under EPCRA Sections 311 and 312 with OSHA’s Hazard Communication amendments for hazardous chemical reporting requirements. Facilities must use OSHA’s hazard classes with their categories for safety data sheet submissions and hazardous chemical inventory reports required under EPCRA Sections 311 and 312.
And finally, EPA published its 2026 regulatory agenda on July 3. Many of the proposed and final rules support the agency’s continued deregulatory efforts and may impact regulatory compliance with air, land, and water rules.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
Keep reading...Show less
NewsMonthly Roundup VideoFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)LeaveFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)USAHuman ResourcesLeaveHR ManagementEnglishTalent Management & RecruitingAssociate Benefits & CompensationDiscriminationGender DiscriminationDiscriminationIndustry NewsAffirmative ActionRetaliationWage and HourWage and HourPregnancy DiscriminationHR GeneralistAssociate RelationsFocus AreaVideo
HR Monthly Round Up - July 2026
In this July 2026 roundup video, we’ll review the most impactful HR news.
Welcome, everyone! In the next few minutes, we’ll review the latest HR news. Let’s get started.
On June 30th, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission announced that it voted to rescind two documents relating to permissible affirmative action under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The rescission doesn’t reverse the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions in two cases in which the Court recognized that Title VII may allow for certain voluntary affirmative action plans in limited circumstances.
In lieu of the EEOC’s actions, employers may want to assess whether any existing policies or programs could be affected by changes in the federal government’s approach to affirmative action.
One other quick EEOC update, the agency published its 2026 regulatory agenda on July 6th, indicating that it plans to publish a proposed rule in November that would change the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act regulations. The EEOC wants to revise the interpretation of the words “pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions.” Stay tuned for more on this in the coming months.
Also, on July 6th, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Wage and Hour Division published its 2026 regulatory agenda. The agency noted that a proposed rule on joint employer status was slated for July 2026, and a final rule on independent contractor status is expected in October 2026. However, these dates, like the EEOC one, are estimates and subject to change.
Our last HR update for this month is all about retaliation, specifically as it pertains to the Family and Medical Leave Act. Employers are prohibited from taking adverse employment actions because employees exercise their FMLA rights. For example, giving an employee who took FMLA leave a smaller pay increase or a lower bonus could be seen as retaliating against them.
That’s what the Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in June against an employer that had given an employee a more than 40 percent reduction in bonus and salary increase compared to previous years. The employer ultimately fired the employee who then sued.
The court found the timing of the lower amounts was unusually suggestive, as they happened right after he took FMLA leave, which implied it was retaliatory.
That’s all the HR news we have time for today. Thanks for watching. See you next month!
Keep reading...Show less
2026-08-06T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsAccident Investigation - OSHAAccident Investigation - OSHASafety & HealthConstruction SafetyGeneral Industry SafetyIn-Depth ArticleEnglishFocus AreaUSA
What near misses are trying to tell you
Nobody got hurt. Nothing was damaged. It's easy to shrug and move on. A near miss is still an incident. A hazard existed, someone was exposed to it, yet the exposure didn't result in injury, illness, or damage.
That doesn't mean the hazard is gone. If it's ignored, the risk remains, and the next incident could have a very different outcome. If you see a close call, say something. If you hear about one, act on it. That's what turns a near miss from a warning sign into an opportunity for prevention.
Same hazard, different outcome
The problem with ignoring a near miss is that the hazard is often still there. Consider this common workplace situation.
A ceiling pipe had been dripping in a lobby corridor for three weeks. A repair ticket sat in the backlog, and custodial staff mopped the puddle every morning before the building filled. Since the leak wasn’t viewed as urgent, nothing changed.
A week before anyone got hurt, a worker slipped on the wet floor but caught the handrail and walked away unharmed. The near miss went unreported, the leak continued, and conditions remained exactly the same. Then another worker slipped in the same location, fell, and injured an ankle.
The hazard, exposure, and circumstances were nearly identical. One incident ended as a near miss and the other resulted in an injury. The difference was the outcome, not the hazard.
Had that first near miss been reported and investigated, important questions would’ve surfaced immediately. How long had the leak existed? Why was the area not marked? Why was the repair request still sitting in the backlog? The real issue wasn’t the worker who slipped. It was a system that failed to recognize and prioritize a safety critical repair.
Turning near misses into prevention
Most near misses go unreported for a handful of predictable reasons. Employees may fail to report incidents because they don’t view them as significant, are concerned about potential repercussions, are unsure of the reporting process, or doubt that any action will be taken. That last reason can be the most damaging because it teaches people that speaking up is pointless.
The question is not whether near misses happen in your workplace. They do. The question is whether people report them and whether anything happens when they do.
Creating a strong reporting culture starts with action, not just encouragement.
- Make reporting easy. If reporting is difficult, people will not do it. Use simple tools such as a paper form, anonymous drop box, or QR code linked to a reporting form.
- Respond every time. Not every reported incident requires a full investigation, but every report deserves acknowledgment. Silence quickly kills reporting culture.
- Investigate for causes, not blame. Focus on what allowed the hazard to exist rather than who made a mistake.
- Assign owners and deadlines. Every corrective action should have a responsible person and a due date. Simply telling employees to "be careful" isn’t a corrective action.
- Fix it now and for good. Put interim controls in place immediately, such as signage, barriers, or containment measures, while working toward a permanent solution.
- Close the loop. Verify the fix worked and share what was learned. One incident may reveal a hazard that exists elsewhere in the organization.
Prevention starts here
While OSHA doesn’t require employers to report every near miss, the agency recognizes the value of identifying and correcting hazards before they cause an injury. Near miss investigations are included in OSHA's Recommended Practices for Safety and Health Programs and are a required element of OSHA's Voluntary Protection Program (VPP).
Some OSHA approved state plans go even further and specifically require employers to investigate workplace incidents and identify underlying causes as part of their injury and illness prevention efforts. These requirements reinforce the value of investigating near misses to identify hazards and take corrective action before someone gets hurt.
Key to Remember: A near miss is an incident without an injury, but it is not an incident without value. Investigate it, identify the root cause, and fix the hazard before the next incident has a different outcome.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-08-06T05:00:00Z
NewsHuman Resource ManagementHuman Resource ManagementFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)In-Depth ArticleUSAHR ManagementEnglishDiscriminationIndustry NewsDiscriminationHR PoliciesRecruiting and hiringGenetic Information Nondiscrimination ActPolicies and ProceduresRecruiting and hiringHR GeneralistFocus AreaMedical ExaminationsAssociate RelationsDisabilities and ADAHuman Resources
Remember GINA? Don’t forget this genetic rule when making employment decisions
GINA is short for the federal Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008. The law generally prohibits employers from asking employees or job applicants about their family medical history.
The GINA doesn’t come up every day in the workplace, but employers should still be familiar with its requirements. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which enforces the workplace part of the law, recently sued an employer over a GINA violation. The case is a helpful reminder of what employers should avoid.
In the lawsuit, the EEOC said the employer asked job applicants for genetic information from at least January 2022 through October 2024. During a pre-employment physical, applicants had to say whether their parents, siblings, or grandparents ever had certain health conditions, including cancer, tuberculosis, diabetes, epilepsy, asthma, or mental illness.
Don’t ask
The basic GINA rule is simple: Employers may not generally ask for, require, or buy genetic information about an employee or job applicant.
That includes information about diseases or health conditions in an employee’s or applicant’s family members’ medical history.
Don't use
The GINA also says employers shouldn’t treat someone differently because of genetic information. That rule applies to every aspect of employment, including hiring, firing, pay, job duties, promotions, layoffs, training, benefits, and other work terms. In short, genetic information should never be used to make a job decision because it doesn’t show whether someone can currently perform the job.
Employers also need to watch for harassment based on genetic information. The harasser could be a supervisor, another manager, a coworker, or even someone outside the company, such as a client or customer.
6 exceptions
There are a few narrow exceptions when it comes to GINA rules. Employers may receive genetic information in these six situations:
- They receive it by accident. For example, a manager might overhear an employee talking about a family member’s illness.
- The information comes through health or genetic services, such as a voluntary wellness program, and they follow the required rules.
- The information is part of a certification supporting leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act, a similar state or local leave law, or a company leave policy, when an employee asks for leave to care for a family member with a serious health condition.
- They find the information in a public source, such as social media, as long as they weren’t looking for genetic information or searching places where that information is likely to appear.
- They collect the information through a genetic monitoring program that checks the effects of toxic substances at work if the program is required by law or follows the rules for voluntary programs.
- They do DNA testing for law enforcement or to identify human remains. In that case, employee genetic information may be used only for quality control and to spot sample contamination.
EEOC v. Dana Sealing Manufacturing, LLC, U.S. Eastern District of Kentucky, No. 5:26-cv-00233.
Key to remember: Employers shouldn’t ask for family medical information when not allowed, and they shouldn’t use it when making employment decisions.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-08-06T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsIndustry NewsFleet SafetyClassification - HazmatMaterials of trade - HazmatHazmat: HighwayHazmatFocus AreaHazmat EnforcementEnglishTransportationUSA
PHMSA finalizes HM-268 series of rules
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) has finalized the HM-268 rulemaking package, turning many of its 2025 proposals into regulatory changes affecting a wide range of hazardous materials transportation requirements. The final rules were published on August 4, 2026, with most becoming effective on September 3, 2026.
HM-268 Final rules at a glance
- HM-268A – Revised the definition of an aerosol to include gas-only aerosols, harmonizing with international standards.
- HM-268B – Authorized a reduced-size limited quantity marking for certain domestic shipments.
- HM-268C – Increased lithium battery limits under the Materials of Trade exception.
- HM-268D – Allows the use of electronic emergency response information.
- HM-268E – Removed PHMSA's duplicate hazardous substance list and references EPA's list instead.
- HM-268F – Allows continued use of qualifying special permit packaging after permit expiration under specified conditions.
- HM-268G – Allows special permit and approval renewal applications to be filed any time before expiration.
- HM-268H – Requires electronic payment of PHMSA registration fees.
- HM-268I – Allows motor and vessel carriers to carry PHMSA registration documents electronically.
- HM-268J – Increased the farmer security training exemption threshold to reflect inflation.
- HM-268K – Removed outdated rail-related reporting requirements and updated tank car unloading provisions.
- HM-268L – Incorporated long-standing special permit provisions allowing certain drums and Intermediate Bulk Containers (IBCs) to be unloaded while remaining on a vehicle.
- HM-268M – Expanded relief for refrigerating machines containing flammable refrigerant gases.
- HM-268N – Authorized transportation of larger refrigerating machines containing low-flammability refrigerants under specified conditions.
- HM-268O – Adopted Special Permit 14175, allowing a 10-year requalification interval for certain DOT 3A and 3AA cylinders.
- HM-268P – Reduced paperwork requirements for qualifying empty residue IBCs.
Collectively, the HM-268 final rules update a range of hazardous materials transportation requirements affecting aerosols, lithium batteries, special permits, registration documents, rail operations, refrigerating machines, cylinders, and residue packagings.
2026-08-06T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsEnglishAssociate RelationsEmployee RelationsHR GeneralistExpert InsightsEmployee RelationsUSAHR ManagementCommunication ToolsFocus AreaHuman Resources
Expert Insights: How to fix a ‘failure to communicate’
"What we've got here is failure to communicate." You might recognize this line from the 1967 film Cool Hand Luke. It’s frequently cited as one of the most memorable movie lines in cinema history and is often quoted by people who have never even seen the movie.
The line also applies to workplace situations because the importance of communication is timeless, while a failure to communicate can be detrimental to a team's success.
Despite the importance of communication, employees are sometimes reluctant to ask supervisors for guidance. Asking coworkers, however, may not yield the correct answer.
If team members are asking questions of each other that should be asked of a supervisor (such as policy questions or even how to fill out a timecard), this may indicate a communication barrier between supervisor and employees.
While it might be natural for employees to feel more comfortable asking questions of one another, the answer received might be “how things have always been done,” and it may not be the correct answer.
The result of inaccurate coworker answers might range from a loss of efficiency (maybe tasks could be done better) to a potential for liability (safety procedures aren’t followed).
There are many reasons that employees might avoid communicating with a supervisor, such as if the supervisor doesn’t:
- Know or give the answer,
- Enforce a policy, or
- Respond appropriately.
If a supervisor doesn’t know the answer, or tells the employee to figure it out, that employee is less likely to ask questions in the future. This creates a barrier to communication, and overcoming it won’t be easy.
If a supervisor promptly investigates the matter, however, and provides a response in a reasonable time, the employee should feel more comfortable asking questions that pop up in the future. And unlike the movie quote, a decades-long “failure to communicate” won’t be created.
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.