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
2026-07-14T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsHR GeneralistFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)In-Depth ArticleFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)HR ManagementEnglishUSAFocus AreaHuman Resources
5 lesser-known FMLA requirements
Many employers have a process they follow when employees ask for leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). While each FMLA case can have its own quirks, employers might not be familiar with some of the law’s unique provisions.
What employers should know about the FMLA but might not
Here are five little-known FMLA requirements:
1. Poster: The FMLA poster has to be seen by applicants. Once employers are covered by the law, they must put the poster up where not only employees can see it, but applicants as well. This is true even if employers have no eligible employees.
If employers post job openings online and interview candidates electronically, they should place a prominent notice on the website where the job postings are listed stating that “Applicants have rights under federal employment laws” and link to the FMLA, EEO (Equal Employment Opportunity), and EPPA (Employee Polygraph Protection Act) posters.
825.300(a)(1)
2. Eligibility: The 1,250 hours worked that employees must meet to be eligible to take FMLA leave don’t include time not worked, like vacation, paid time off, and so forth. Employees must actually have worked the 1,250 hours, not just been paid for them. Therefore, when looking at whether an employee meets the 1,250 hours worked eligibility criteria, employers shouldn’t include hours that aren’t actually worked.
825.110.(c)(1)
3. Temp workers: Employers must include the time a temporary (“temp”) employee spent working for them toward their FMLA eligibility. As long as temp employees have worked for the company for at least 12 months and have performed at least 1,250 hours of work, they’re entitled to FMLA leave. If employers have temp employees that they then hire as regular employees, they must count all the time spent working as a temp employee toward their eligibility.
825.106 (OL FMLA-37)
4. Transferring: Employers may not transfer an employee to an alternative job during unforeseeable intermittent leave. The only time employers may transfer an employee to an alternate job is when the need for leave is foreseeable based on planned medical treatment. If employers allow employees to take bonding leave intermittently, they may also transfer employees.
825.204
5. Workers’ compensation: Employees on workers’ compensation (WC) can refuse light duty and remain on FMLA leave. They would lose their WC benefits. Employers may offer a "light duty" job to the employee to encourage them to return to work early, but if the employee is taking FMLA leave simultaneously, the employee isn’t required to end FMLA leave and accept the light-duty assignment. Employees who continue on FMLA leave may lose WC benefits, but may not be subjected to any form of disciplinary action for having exercised their FMLA rights.
825.207(e) (OL FMLA-38)
Key to remember: Employers won’t frequently run into the lesser-known FMLA provisions, but they must know what to do when they are in play.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-07-14T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsEnglishEnvironmental Management SystemsISO 14001EnvironmentalIn-Depth ArticleLifecycle AnalysisUSAEnvironmental Management SystemsFocus AreaEnvironmental Management Systems
ISO 14001:2026 arrives: Key changes for environmental management systems
Environmental management has changed significantly since ISO 14001 was last revised in 2015. Climate-related risks, resource constraints, supply chain challenges, and stakeholder expectations have reshaped how organizations manage environmental issues. In response, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) released ISO 14001:2026, the first major update to the environmental management system (EMS) standard in over a decade.
The revised standard does not change the purpose of ISO 14001. Organizations will continue to use an EMS to identify environmental aspects, meet compliance obligations, manage environmental risks, and improve environmental performance. However, the new edition clarifies requirements and places greater emphasis on measurable environmental results. ISO says the revision is intended to better align EMS programs with today's environmental challenges. Organizations certified to ISO 14001 may need to update procedures, documentation, audits, and management reviews.
Why was the standard updated?
When ISO published 14001:2015, many organizations focused primarily on regulatory compliance. While compliance remains a core component of an EMS, environmental managers today face a broader range of issues. Climate impacts, resource availability, supply chain disruptions, and stakeholder expectations can all affect environmental planning and performance. Rather than creating an entirely new framework, the 2026 version largely builds on concepts that already existed in the 2015 edition while expanding and clarifying expectations.
Environmental context receives greater attention
A major theme of the revision is a stronger focus on organizational context. Organizations are expected to look beyond day-to-day compliance activities when identifying environmental risks and opportunities.
The revised standard emphasizes consideration of environmental conditions that may affect the EMS, including climate-related concerns, biodiversity, ecosystem impacts, and natural resource availability. Organizations are expected to evaluate how external issues and stakeholder expectations may influence environmental objectives and planning.
For environmental managers, this may mean expanding annual EMS reviews to evaluate emerging environmental issues that could affect operations, compliance obligations, permit conditions, or environmental objectives.
Change management moves into the spotlight
The revised standard also introduces a more structured approach to managing change. Many organizations already evaluate environmental impacts when making operational changes, but those reviews are often informal.
ISO 14001:2026 expects organizations to plan, manage, and evaluate changes that may affect environmental performance. Examples include:
- Installing new equipment,
- Expanding production capacity,
- Changing raw materials,
- Modifying waste management practices,
- Switching suppliers, or
- Adding new products or processes.
This requirement should sound familiar to many environmental professionals. Operational changes can affect air emissions, waste generation, wastewater discharges, stormwater exposure, and permit applicability. A structured review process can help identify environmental impacts before changes are implemented.
Lifecycle thinking and supply chains gain importance
Lifecycle thinking was already part of ISO 14001:2015, but the revised standard places greater emphasis on it. Organizations are expected to consider environmental impacts throughout the lifecycle of products and services, including activities involving suppliers, contractors, and externally provided products and services.
This requirement does not mean organizations are responsible for every environmental impact within their supply chain. Rather, it encourages organizations to understand how purchasing decisions, outsourced activities, and supplier relationships may affect environmental performance.
For some organizations, this could mean greater emphasis on supplier evaluations, procurement procedures, contractor oversight, or product stewardship initiatives.
Leadership involvement becomes more visible
ISO 14001:2026 also strengthens expectations related to leadership accountability. Environmental management is no longer viewed solely as the responsibility of the environmental department.
The revised standard emphasizes visible leadership involvement and broader organizational participation. Environmental responsibilities may extend beyond EHS personnel to departments such as operations, purchasing, engineering, and management. Organizations will need to demonstrate that leadership is actively engaged in environmental planning, resource allocation, and performance evaluation activities.
What should organizations do now?
Although organizations have time to prepare for the transition, environmental managers may want to begin evaluating their programs now. Early reviews can help identify gaps and reduce the likelihood of surprises during future audits.
Questions organizations may want to consider include:
- Does the EMS adequately address climate, resources, and other emerging environmental issues?
- Is there a documented process for evaluating environmental impacts before operational changes are made?
- Are lifecycle considerations incorporated into purchasing and contractor management activities?
- Can leadership involvement be demonstrated through documented actions and decisions?
- Do environmental objectives show measurable performance improvements?
While ISO 14001:2026 is an evolution of the existing standard rather than a complete overhaul, organizations should not assume existing EMS procedures will meet the revised expectations. Environmental managers may want to review how their systems address organizational context, change management, lifecycle considerations, and leadership involvement before their next audit.
Key to remember: For environmental professionals, the revised standard provides an opportunity to strengthen that connection and demonstrate the value that effective environmental management brings to the organization.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-07-13T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsViolations - HazmatHazmat SafetyHazmat: HighwayFocus AreaIn-Depth ArticleEnglishTransportationUSA
A midyear look at FMCSA's top hazmat violations
Roadside inspections are a fact of life for hazmat carriers. While inspectors encounter a wide range of compliance issues, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) data shows that a handful of violations account for a significant share of hazmat citations year after year. Understanding these trends can help carriers focus their compliance efforts where they're likely to have the biggest impact.
Here's a look at the five most frequently cited hazmat roadside inspection violations so far in 2026 and what you can do to stay off the list.
1. Cargo not properly secured
The most common hazmat violation so far this year involves hazardous materials that weren’t properly blocked, braced, or secured during transportation. Inspectors recorded more than 1,000 of these violations.
To avoid this issue, verify that hazmat packages are adequately secured before departure and periodically check cargo during transit. Drivers should never assume a load was secured properly without conducting their own inspection.
2. Failure to produce a current hazmat registration
More than 400 violations were issued for failing to produce a current Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration (PHMSA) hazmat registration certificate or registration number during an inspection.
Usually, the company is registered but can’t provide proof of registration. Make sure registrations are renewed on time, current certificates are maintained, and employees know where the documentation is located.
3. No required shipping paper
FMCSA reported more than 360 violations involving vehicles operating without a required hazmat shipping paper.
Before a vehicle leaves the facility, confirm that the required shipping paper is present and complete. A simple shipping paper review as part of the pre-trip process can help prevent this violation.
4. Damaged or obscured placards
Nearly 350 violations involved placards that were damaged, faded, dirty, or otherwise difficult to read.
Include placards in routine vehicle inspections and replace them when necessary. Also ensure mud, snow, road grime, or other materials aren't obstructing their visibility.
5. Shipping paper accessibility
Rounding out the top five is shipping paper accessibility, with more than 340 violations reported so far this year.
Having a shipping paper isn't enough. It also has to be readily accessible. Drivers should be trained on accessibility requirements and consistently store shipping papers in the designated location. The best place for hazmat shipping papers in a vehicle is in a holder on the inside of the driver’s door.
A common theme
What's striking about the top violations so far this year is that most involve basic compliance fundamentals rather than complex regulatory requirements. Cargo securement, documentation, and placarding remain the areas where inspectors are finding the most problems.
Key to remember: Don't overlook the basics. Regular pre-trip inspections, refresher training, and periodic compliance reviews can go a long way toward preventing the violations that inspectors continue to find most often on the road.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-07-13T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsEmployee RelationsEmployee RelationsHR GeneralistIn-Depth ArticleUSAAssociate RelationsEnglishHR ManagementFocus AreaHuman Resources
Human factors will set companies apart in the age of AI
In the midst of the AI revolution, Brad Rencher and Simon Sinek contend that a company’s success will hinge on human factors.
“Some of the headlines make it sound like by Thursday we’re all going to be reporting to a chatbot named Ethan,” quipped Rencher, Bamboo HR CEO, as he spoke to nearly 20,000 HR professionals at the Society for Human Resources Management (SHRM) annual conference in mid-June.
He contends that AI alone won’t define a company’s success, however. The decisions leaders make that keep employees informed and allow workers to learn and grow will allow companies to set themselves apart.
“At the end of the day, we are human beings who work with human beings who sell to human beings,” noted Sinek, author of “Start with WHY” and host of the “A Bit of Optimism” podcast, who presented “The Future of Work is Still Human” with Rencher.
Workers need context
Leaders need to acknowledge the emotions generated by a company’s approach to AI, Sinek noted, and be open about the reasons for business decisions.
AI anxiety is due in part to layoffs blamed on the technology, but if layoffs are actually needed because of over-hiring, companies should be open about this to avoid heightening AI fears. “Be honest and transparent,” he said. “Give people context.”
Toxic positivity should be avoided when talking about AI, he added, as that will make employees think there is something their employer isn’t telling them, but it’s also wrong to take a doomsday approach.
Instead, leaders should project confidence and be transparent about what is not known. Workers are wondering how the technology will affect them, and leaders can let them know that no decisions will be made until the company understands how the use of AI will play out.
Soft skills make companies stand out
Great companies have both technology and the human element, Sinek pointed out.
Those that invest in soft skills training, such as empathy, conflict resolution, difficult conversations and implementing change, will outperform those that don’t.
Redesign needed
Rencher pointed out that while the majority of companies are using AI, more than half have not provided guidance to their employees. In addition, half of companies say AI has not proven its value, and half of workers say AI hasn’t improved their work.
This is like introducing forklifts into a warehouse where the aisles have not been widened to accommodate them, Rencher commented. New tools have been layered on top of old systems, and they are bound to get stuck rather than operate efficiently.
AI integration is a leadership issue, not a productivity issue, he pointed out. “Workers want candor and transparency around uncertainty,” he said. “The technology is here, the question is, what do leaders do next?”
Change without clarity around future improvements leads to “dignity debt,” Rencher noted, leaving workers wondering what happens after part of their work is automated.
Rather than simply asking how much cost AI can remove from the current system, employers should create a new system that addresses what parts of work will stay human and how people will grow as jobs change. “Redesign work so people become more capable alongside the technology,” he suggests.
Key to remember: SHRM26 conference keynote speakers Brad Rencher and Simon Sinek told the crowd that AI may change how work gets done, but success will hinge on human factors. Leaders need to give employees context, communicate with transparency, and redesign work so people can grow alongside the technology.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-07-10T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsElements of a General Duty Clause ViolationSafety & HealthConstruction SafetyGeneral Industry SafetyAgriculture SafetyMaritime SafetyGeneral Duty ClauseGeneral Duty Clause Enforcement AreasIn-Depth ArticleEnglishGeneral Duty ClauseFocus AreaUSA
Don’t forget the General Duty Clause when identifying workplace hazards
What do heat stress, ergonomics, and struck-by hazards have in common? When employees aren’t adequately protected from these and other serious, recognized hazards for which there’s no OSHA standard, the agency can use the General Duty Clause (GDC) to cite employers. However, the agency must prove four things:
- That a hazard exists,
- That it’s recognized,
- That it’s causing or likely to cause serious physical harm or death, and
- That feasible abatement is available.
As an example, a hazard exists when employees work in extreme heat. It’s recognized because the hazard is widely known by employers, safety professionals, and industry. Extreme heat can pose harm because employees are at risk of heat illness or even death. And, it can be feasibly abated by providing water, rest breaks, and shade. Without all four of these elements, OSHA can’t use the GDC. But when they’re present, it’s a strong enforcement tool.
Recognized hazards
OSHA determines whether a hazard is “recognized” by looking at several sources, including:
- Industry consensus standards like the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) or the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA);
- An employer’s own safety rules and training materials;
- Previous incidents involving the hazard; and
- Industry recognition of the hazard, such as statements by safety or health experts who are familiar with the relevant conditions, and evidence of implementation of abatement methods to deal with the particular hazard by other members of the employer's industry.
Examples of recognized hazards include:
- Employees operating forklifts without wearing available seat belts;
- Damaged warehouse racks that could collapse;
- Workplace violence risks in certain settings, such as healthcare or gas stations, where the hazard is well documented; and
- Employees riding on the exterior rear step of refuse-collection trucks while vehicles are in transit.
Struck-by hazards and combustible dust are also recognized hazards. Recent cases where OSHA cited the GDC include:
- Employees walking in poorly illuminated areas on a jobsite where heavy vehicle traffic was present, and
- Employees exposed to fire and explosions associated with combustible dust generated during the manufacturing of dietary supplements.
Ergonomic hazards include strain from activities such as lifting, pushing, or repetitive motion. Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) like tendonitis, carpal tunnel syndrome, and back injuries can result from these exposures.
Identifying and controlling recognized hazards
A proactive approach is the best defense against a GDC citation. Conducting a job hazard analysis (JHA) helps identify hazards that might otherwise be missed. Observe employees as they perform tasks and ask for their input. They may identify hazards that employers or safety professionals don’t recognize, especially with tasks that occur infrequently or only under specific conditions.
In addition to JHAs, reviewing injury and illness records, near-miss reports, incident investigations, equipment manuals, workers’ compensation claims, industry guidance, and consensus standards can also provide insights.
Once you identify hazards, determine which ones don’t have an OSHA standard, like heat or ergonomics, and prioritize those that could cause serious physical harm or death. Consider the hierarchy of controls and whether the hazard can be eliminated or reduced.
Put reasonable controls in place (such as water, rest breaks, and shade for heat, or lift-assist devices for repeated manual lifting) and keep records showing what’s been done. Documented JHAs, training records, inspection logs, and corrective action reports can all help show that you took the hazard seriously and acted to protect employees.
The GDC and “inherently risky professions”
On July 1, 2025, OSHA issued a proposed rule that would limit the scope of the GDC. If finalized, OSHA could no longer use the GDC to cite employers of “inherently risky professions,” which includes such activities as motor sports, animal handling and performance, and combat simulation training. (See our related article, “OSHA proposes giving employers with ‘inherently risky professions’ a free pass.”) The agency’s most recent regulatory and deregulatory agenda, published July 3, 2026, reveals OSHA intends to hold public hearings on the proposal starting mid-August.
Key to remember: OSHA uses the General Duty Clause to cite serious, recognized hazards for which there’s no OSHA standard. When you identify and control these hazards and document your actions, OSHA may find it more difficult to establish the four elements necessary for a GDC citation.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-07-09T05:00:00Z
NewsWasteTSCA ComplianceWater ProgramsEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA)CAA ComplianceWater ProgramsCWA ComplianceWaste/HazWasteEnglishAir ProgramsIndustry NewsIndustry NewsWasteEnvironmentalFocus AreaSARA ComplianceAir ProgramsUSA
EPA releases 2026 regulatory agenda
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published the 2026 Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions on July 3, 2026. The agenda outlines the agency’s upcoming regulatory actions and their status in the rulemaking process. Many of the proposed and final rules support EPA’s continued deregulatory efforts.
Significant updates on EPA’s docket include the following:
- Proposing risk management regulations under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) for various chemical substances, such as formaldehyde, diisodecyl phthalate (DIDP), and diisononyl phthalate (DINP);
- Aligning the definition of “waters of the United States” with the Supreme Court’s Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency (2023) decision, which narrowed the definition under the Clean Water Act;
- Finalizing the part 2 risk management regulations for asbestos, including use and associated disposal requirements for legacy asbestos, asbestos-containing talc, and asbestos fibers other than chrysotile;
- Repealing the Carbon Pollution Standards (CPS) that limit greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel-fired plants (or repealing a narrower set of requirements under the CPS); and
- Establishing a federal permitting program under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) for the disposal of coal combustion residuals (CCR).
Additionally, EPA continues to conduct rulemaking related to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), such as:
- Revising existing effluent limitations guidelines and standards (ELGs) to address PFAS discharges from PFAS manufacturing facilities and chromium electroplating facilities;
- Extending the compliance deadlines for Maximum Contaminant Levels established by the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWRs) for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS); and
- Rescinding the regulations for four PFAS established under the NPDWRs.
This article highlights some of the major rules we’re monitoring closely. You can review the entire agenda to learn about all the rulemakings EPA plans to review, propose, and finalize. Please note that the agenda dates are tentative, indicating when the agency seeks to publish the rulemakings in the Federal Register.
| Final Rule Stage | |
| Projected publication date | Title |
| July 2026 | Reconsideration of the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program |
| August 2026 | 1-Bromopropane (1-BP); Regulation Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) |
| October 2026 | Revisions to Standards for the Open Burning/Open Detonation of Waste Explosives |
| October 2026 | Secondary Lead Smelting: National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) Technology Review and Reconsideration |
| January 2027 | Listing of Specific PFAS as Hazardous Constituents |
| Proposed Rule Stage | |
| Projected publication date of notice of proposed rulemaking | Title |
| August 2026 | Improving Recycling and Management of Renewable Energy Wastes: Universal Waste Regulations for Solar Panels and Lithium Batteries |
| September 2026 | Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Oil and Gas Extraction Category (40 CFR 435 Subpart E) |
| October 2026 | Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Centralized Waste Treatment Category (40 CFR 437) |
| December 2026 | Clean Water Act Hazardous Substance Facility Response Plans; Amendment Reconsideration |
| December 2026 | National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Stationary Combustion Turbines; Amendments |
| Pre-Rule Stage | |
| Projected publication date or other action | Title |
| January 2027 (final rule) | Risk Management Program, CAA Section 112(r)(7) (Section 610 Review) |
| August 2026 (begin review) | Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources (Section 610 Review) |
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.