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
2026-07-29T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsCriteria Air PollutantsEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA)CAA ComplianceEnvironmentalIn-Depth ArticleFocus AreaEnglishAir PermittingAir ProgramsStationary Emission SourcesUSA
EPA updates preconstruction permitting guidance: What are the impacts on major sources?
Where there’s construction, there are permits, and where there are permits, there are usually delays. For major construction projects in areas with poor air quality, the delay could be due to emission credits. New federal guidance, however, may help reduce those delays.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently released guidance clarifying that Nonattainment New Source Review (NNSR) preconstruction permits may be issued to applicants before they obtain the required offsetting emission reduction credits (ERCs) if certain conditions are met.
The new guidance for permitting authorities (usually state or local air agencies) is a change in the agency’s recommended approach, designed to help prevent preconstruction permitting delays for applicants that haven’t yet formally secured ERCs. So, what does this mean for facilities? Let’s take a look!
Which construction projects could be affected?
EPA’s new guidance impacts construction projects in nonattainment areas. These are areas where emissions exceed the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for any of the six regulated criteria air pollutants.
You need an NNSR permit to build a new major stationary source or make major modifications to an existing major stationary source if:
- The new or modified source is located in a nonattainment area, and
- The new or modified source emits or has the potential to emit a regulated pollutant in amounts that meet the applicable major source or major modification thresholds.
You must obtain an NNSR permit before construction begins. NNSR permits can be issued only if the applicant meets certain conditions, one of which is meeting emission offset requirements.
What are emission offsets?
Emission offsets are reductions in emissions from existing sources that can be used to compensate for emissions from a new or modified source. The Clean Air Act requires new and modified major sources to offset emissions by obtaining sufficient ERCs from existing sources located in the same nonattainment area.
In other words, a new or modified major source must get enough credits from existing nearby sources to cover the total amount of emissions that the facility will add to the area.
How does the guidance impact permitting?
EPA’s previous guidance recommended that NNSR permits generally shouldn’t be issued until ERCs are actually secured. As a result, permitting agencies require applicants to obtain ERCs before issuing an NNSR permit to start construction on a facility, even if the facility won’t immediately begin operations.
Guidance on Clean Air Act Nonattainment New Source Review Emissions Offsets (ERC guidance), issued by EPA on July 1, 2026, changes the agency’s recommended approach. It clarifies that permitting authorities may issue NNSR permits before applicants specifically secure the required ERCs if the permit contains:
- A federally enforceable commitment by the permit applicant to obtain the needed ERCs before starting operations, and
- An express ban on starting operations until the required ERCs are obtained with appropriate permit restrictions on the sources providing the ERCs.
What’s the possible impact on facilities?
Permitting authorities that apply ERC guidance to permitting decisions can issue NNSR permits to qualifying sources before they secure ERCs. This would allow applicants to start construction on or modifications to a major source without delay, provided the enforceable permit conditions are met.
Here's an example:
A business is ready to build a manufacturing plant in a nonattainment area, but operations at the new facility won’t begin until a year after construction is complete.
Under previous guidance, the business couldn’t begin construction on the manufacturing plant until it formally secured the required ERCs upfront for operations that won’t start until a year after the facility is complete.
EPA’s ERC guidance would allow the permitting authority to issue the business an NNSR permit before it obtains the ERCs. That means the business could build the manufacturing plant right away and then secure the ERCs later, closer to the time the facility starts operating.
Keep these points in mind!
Consider the following when determining how EPA’s updated NNSR policy may impact your construction project:
- The ERC guidance is nonbinding, meaning that permitting authorities aren’t required to implement the guidance. Permitting authorities can still require applicants to secure ERCs before issuing NNSR permits.
- Facilities may be able to start construction without first securing ERCs, but facilities can’t begin operating until they secure the required ERCs.
- Most NNSR permits are issued on a state or local level. Confirm the specific requirements that apply to your major source construction project with the relevant state or local permitting authority.
Key to remember: EPA’s guidance allows permitting authorities to issue preconstruction permits for new major sources and major modifications in nonattainment areas before the sources secure emission reduction credits.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-07-28T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsFleet SafetyDefensive drivingCMV drivingFocus AreaIn-Depth ArticleEnglishTransportationUSA
Report highlights visibility risks for large trucks
A new government report is shining a spotlight on a growing safety challenge: what truck drivers can’t see may be putting more pedestrians and cyclists at risk.
The report from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) comes as pedestrian and cyclist fatalities remain far above historical levels, with nearly 9,200 pedestrians and cyclists killed on U.S. roadways in 2024, a 65 percent increase since 2010.
3 key factors
The GAO report concludes that larger vehicles, certain vehicle design features, and turning maneuvers can reduce a driver’s ability to see vulnerable road users and may contribute to these fatal crashes.
Larger vehicles, including SUVs and commercial trucks, generally have larger blind zones and more visibility limitations than smaller vehicles, the GAO says. Features such as longer hoods, larger mirrors, thicker A-pillars, and higher front-end profiles can obstruct a driver’s view of pedestrians and cyclists.
Turns elevate risk 16x
The report also found that turning maneuvers create elevated risk. GAO’s analysis showed that, among fatal pedestrian crashes, larger vehicles had significantly higher odds of being involved in a turning crash compared to passenger cars. Heavy-duty trucks had the greatest association, with more than 16 times the odds of involvement in a turning-related fatal pedestrian crash compared to cars in similar scenarios.
The GAO is asking the DOT to develop a reliable method for measuring driver visibility and blind zones in passenger vehicles and commercial trucks, and to analyze and find solutions for the risks that limited driver visibility poses to pedestrians and cyclists.
Policy and carrier implications
The report signals growing interest from policymakers and safety advocates in truck visibility, blind-zone measurement, direct-vision standards, and technologies designed to detect vulnerable road users.
While regulators continue studying the issue, motor carriers don’t have to wait to improve safety for pedestrians and cyclists. Consider the following practices:
- Reinforce training on right-turn and intersection hazards.
- Require drivers to slow significantly before turns in urban areas.
- Encourage active mirror scanning and head movement before and during turns.
- Evaluate side-object detection systems, blind-spot monitoring technologies, and camera systems when purchasing equipment.
- Review pedestrian and cyclist crash locations to identify recurring operational risks.
- Incorporate vulnerable-road-user awareness into onboarding and annual driver training.
- Emphasize extra caution when operating near schools, downtown districts, transit hubs, and bicycle corridors.
Drivers can also help reduce risk by remembering that mirrors and cameras are aids, not substitutes for careful observation. A pedestrian, cyclist, or child can move into a blind zone quickly, particularly when a truck is starting from a stop or making a turn.
Key to remember: As pedestrian and cyclist fatalities mount, a new GAO report points to limited driver visibility around large trucks as part of the problem.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-07-28T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsIndustry NewsToxic Substances Control Act - EPAToxic Subtances Control Act - EPATSCA ComplianceToxic Substances - EPAEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA)EnvironmentalEnglishFocus AreaUSA
EPA extends PCE and CTC compliance deadlines
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has extended the compliance dates of certain Workplace Chemical Protection Program (WCPP) requirements for perchloroethylene (PCE) and carbon tetrachloride (CTC) established under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).
Published on July 28, 2026, EPA’s final rule changes specific compliance dates but doesn’t alter the underlying WCPP requirements or the agency’s determination that PCE and CTC present unreasonable risks.
Who’s impacted?
The revised deadlines affect facilities subject to the TSCA PCE and CTC risk management rules finalized in 2024. These include entities that manufacture (including import), process, distribute in commerce, use, or dispose of:
- PCE,
- CTC, or
- Products containing PCE or CTC.
What are the new PCE and CTC compliance dates?
EPA’s final rule extends compliance deadlines for various WCPP requirements, including:
- Conducting initial monitoring,
- Meeting the existing chemical exposure limit (ECEL),
- Establishing a regulated area,
- Providing any required respiratory personal protective equipment (PPE) and establishing a respiratory PPE program,
- Implementing a workplace information and training program, and
- Establishing and implementing an exposure control plan (ECP).
Below is a summary of the new compliance deadlines.
| WCPP requirement | New compliance deadline | PCE applicability | CTC applicability |
|---|---|---|---|
| June 21, 2027 | Non-federal facilities | Non-federal facilities |
| September 20, 2027 | Non-federal facilities | Non-federal facilities |
| September 20, 2027 | Federal and non-federal facilities | Non-federal facilities |
| December 20, 2027 | Non-federal facilities | — |
* EPA maintains the CTC rule’s WCPP compliance date of December 3, 2027, to establish and implement an ECP.
Key to remember: EPA has extended compliance dates for certain PCE and CTC Workplace Chemical Protection Program requirements into 2027.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-07-28T05:00:00Z
NewsDrug and Alcohol TestingIndustry NewsDrug and Alcohol TestingReturn to Work ProgramsHR GeneralistFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)In-Depth ArticleFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)Associate RelationsEnglishUSAHR ManagementFocus AreaHuman Resources
May employers drug test employees returning from FMLA leave?
Employers in safety-sensitive industries, such as health care, construction, and transportation, often have drug-testing policies. These policies may require testing when employees return to work after a long leave due to their own medical condition.
The purpose is to get an objective medical opinion about whether employees can safely do the essential duties of their job.
Before an employee returns from leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), an employer may require a “fitness-for-duty” (FFD) certification. This means the employee must provide information from a health care provider showing they’re able to return to work.
Employers may require this only if they have the same rule for all similarly situated employees who take FMLA leave for their own serious health condition. The certification may address only the health condition that led to the FMLA leave. Employers must include this requirement with the designation notice.
Employers may also require the FFD certification to address whether the employee can perform the essential duties of the job, but only if they gave the employee a list of those duties with the FMLA designation notice. This part of the process could include a drug test.
The FMLA doesn’t prohibit employers from requiring drug testing after an employee has returned to work. But the considerations don’t end there.
Remember the ADA
After an employee has returned to work and the FMLA leave is over, the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) applies. The ADA limits when employers may require medical exams of employees.
This is where the testing rules can be confusing. A test for illegal drugs isn’t considered a medical exam under the ADA. An alcohol test, however, is.
Under the ADA, employers may require a medical exam, including an alcohol test, of employees at certain times. Employers may require such exams only when they have a reasonable belief based on objective evidence that a particular employee can’t perform the essential duties of the job because of a medical condition or the employee will pose a direct safety threat because of a medical condition.
If a drug test also includes alcohol, the test is treated as a medical exam and is limited by the ADA.
Because of this, a policy that requires employees to take drug tests after returning from FMLA leave needs to consider the ADA’s restrictions.
Key to remember: Drug testing an employee after an employee has returned from FMLA leave doesn’t violate the FMLA. But if the test includes alcohol, it might violate the ADA.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-07-28T05:00:00Z
NewsDrug and Alcohol TestingMarijuanaSafety & HealthChange NoticesChange NoticeGeneral Industry SafetyAssociate Benefits & CompensationHR GeneralistNew JerseyAssociate RelationsEnglishHR ManagementFocus AreaHuman Resources
New Jersey state court rules in cannabis law
Effective date: May 26, 2026
This applies to: Employers in New Jersey doing drug testing
Description of change: A New Jersey state court ruled in May 2026 that the state’s cannabis law allows individuals to bring a private lawsuit against an employer alleging discrimination because of marijuana use. This is contrary to federal court decision issued in 2024 which determined that the state’s Cannabis Regulatory, Enforcement Assistance, and Market Modernization Act (CREAMMA) didn’t create a private right of action.
While the state court acknowledges that it reached a different conclusion than the federal court, it noted in the decision that state courts aren’t bound to federal court decisions with respect to state law.
In light of the court’s decision, employers in New Jersey shouldn’t base employment decisions only on an individual’s use of cannabis.
View related state info: Marijuana – New Jersey
Keep reading...Show less
2026-07-28T05:00:00Z
NewsDrug and Alcohol TestingDrug and Alcohol TestingDrug Free WorkplaceMarijuanaIn-Depth ArticleHR ManagementEnglishHuman ResourcesIndustry NewsSafety & HealthGeneral Industry SafetyHR GeneralistAssociate RelationsFocus AreaUSA
Federal marijuana changes mean it’s time for a drug and alcohol policy review
If you haven’t looked at your drug and alcohol policy lately, it’s time to schedule a review. A change in the way the federal government views medical marijuana could mean it needs to be refreshed.
Federal medical marijuana change impacts accommodations
In April, medical marijuana was reclassified as a Schedule III drug under the Controlled Substances Act, meaning that under federal law it’s considered to have a low potential for dependence. Products containing marijuana approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and marijuana products regulated by state medical marijuana laws are now in the lower drug category.
State medical marijuana laws still need to be followed, but the reclassification gives some federal protections to individuals who legally use medical marijuana under a state law or who use a federally approved drug containing marijuana.
To avoid the risk of a discrimination claim under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), employers in states where medical marijuana is legal should review their workplace policy to make sure it treats individuals using medical marijuana the same way it treats any individual using a prescription medication.
Employers with employees covered by federal drug and alcohol testing regulations for workers in safety-sensitive positions, such as Department of Transportation regulations, must continue to follow those federal laws and forbid marijuana use for covered employees. There are other considerations for employees who only fall under a workplace drug and alcohol policy, however.
A positive test for marijuana should not automatically lead to termination or a decision not to hire. Employers should consider additional factors before making a decision.
What does it mean to accommodate medical marijuana use?
When an employee tests positive for marijuana, an employer should check to see if the positive test is the result of legal off-duty use of medical marijuana. If that is the case, accommodation should be considered.
Accommodating medical marijuana use doesn’t mean an employee must be allowed to use it in the workplace or be impaired on work time. Instead, it means pausing to consider a workplace change because of the employee’s medical condition.
In general, this begins with a discussion with the employee about accommodations, including the legal off-duty use of medical marijuana. In states where medical marijuana isn’t legal, employers would only need to consider accommodations for use of marijuana products approved by the FDA. If an employee with a medical marijuana card asks that off-duty use be accommodated, the information-gathering phase could include documentation of the disability and the need for accommodation.
When deciding whether off-duty medical marijuana use is an appropriate accommodation, safety concerns may be considered. An employer can ask the employee to present their doctor with a list of their job duties and concerns to determine whether a genuine risk of substantial harm exists if the employee were to use cannabis while off duty.
If the off-duty use of medical marijuana presents a risk, other reasonable accommodations should be discussed. Perhaps the employee can work with their doctor to find another medication that will not present a safety risk. Other considerations could include moving the employee out of a safety-sensitive position, using alternative scheduling, or changing the way the work is done.
After the accommodation has been agreed upon, a trial period can be used to determine whether it is working.
Federal recreational marijuana changes under consideration
Additional changes to the way the federal government views marijuana could be coming soon. Recreational marijuana is still categorized as a Schedule I drug, but the federal government is considering moving it to a lower drug schedule.
The Drug Enforcement Administration held hearings on this proposal between June 29 and July 15, and those who spoke at the hearing can submit briefs through August 17. After the hearing process is completed, the federal government could issue a final rule rescheduling recreational marijuana.
More will be known about how this could influence workplace drug policies after a final rule is issued. It’s likely that state laws will continue to make an impact on how employers handle marijuana in the workplace, although rescheduling could also mean that the federal Food and Drug Administration plays a larger role in how marijuana is handled.
For now, employers should continue to follow state recreational marijuana laws and consider accommodations for medical marijuana as required.
Key to remember: Employers should review drug and alcohol policies to make sure medical marijuana is handled appropriately and watch for changes in the way the federal government classifies recreational marijuana.
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.