SAFETY & COMPLIANCE NEWS
Keep up to date on the latest developments affecting OSHA, DOT, EPA, and DOL regulatory compliance.
Copyright 2025 J. J. Keller & Associate, Inc. For re-use options please contact copyright@jjkeller.com or call 800-558-5011.
FEATURED NEWS
2025-12-11T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsIndustry NewsFleet SafetyElectronic logging device (ELD)Electronic logging device (ELD)Focus AreaFleet OperationsEnglishTransportationUSA
3 ELDs removed from FMCSA’s list
Three devices were recently removed from the FMCSA’s list of registered electronic logging devices (ELDs):
- PSS ELD (from Pioneer Safety Solutions LLC)
- Black Bear ELD (from Black Bear ELD)
- RT ELD Plus - ACCURATE ELITE (from Rollingtrans)
Due to a failure to meet the minimum requirements of 49 CFR 395, Subpart B, Appendix A, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) has moved these devices to its “revoked devices” list as of December 8, 2025.
Many ELD providers remove their devices from the list voluntarily, but the FMCSA has the authority to remove any ELD that does not comply with regulations.
Next steps for commercial carriers
Commercial carriers and drivers who use the above-listed devices must stop using the devices and switch to paper logs or logging software to record their hours of service.
In addition, before February 7, 2026, they must replace the devices with ELDs listed on the FMCSA’s ELD registry and begin using those compliant devices.
ELD providers who correct device deficiencies can be placed back on the list of registered devices. The FMCSA will inform the industry when revoked devices are compliant again.
ELD compliance standards
During the 60-day replacement period, the FMCSA has instructed safety officials to review affected drivers’ hours-of-service data using logging software, paper logs, or the ELD display.
After February 7, 2026, any motor carrier that continues to use the revoked devices will be considered operating without an ELD. Drivers will be placed out of service and cited for “No record of duty status” (395.8(a)(1)).
Review the full list of registered devices at https://eld.fmcsa.dot.gov/List.
Keep reading...Show less
RECENT INDUSTRY HIGHLIGHTS
2025-12-11T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsHazmat SafetyHazmatIn-Depth ArticleFocus AreaUSAEnglishTransportationHazmat Rulemaking procedures
Preparing the HMR for the age of automation
Imagine a drone delivering a package that contains hazmat, or a driverless truck hauling chemicals down the interstate. These scenarios aren’t science fiction, they’re closer than you think. The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) is asking a critical question: how do we keep hazmat transportation safe in an era of automation?
PHMSA has issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) to gather input on updating the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR) to accommodate highly automated transportation systems. These systems include technologies like unmanned aircraft, automated driving systems, and even autonomous ships. The goal is to modernize regulations without sacrificing safety, while supporting innovation that could reshape how hazardous materials move across the country.
Why now?
Current regulations were designed for traditional transportation human drivers, crewed aircraft, and manual loading. Automation changes everything. It’s intended to improve efficiency and have fewer human errors, but it also introduces new challenges:
- How do emergency responders access shipping papers when there’s no driver?
- What happens if a drone carrying hazmat crashes in a neighborhood?
PHMSA officials indicate they want to support innovation without compromising safety. To do that, they need input from the hazmat community.
Areas under review
PHMSA’s ANPR outlined several topics where automation could impact compliance:
- Special permits — Should the process be adopted for automated systems like drones?
- Shipping papers and emergency response — How do we provide critical information when no one is on board?
- Hazard communication — Labels and placards work for trucks and railcars, but what about drones?
- Training — If automation reduces human involvement, what does hazmat training look like?
- Security — Cybersecurity risks are now part of the equation.
- Packaging and handling — New platforms may require new packaging standards.
Mode-specific considerations
PHMSA is also looking at how automation affects each mode of transportation:
- Rail — No automated hazmat rail yet, but waivers for automation exist.
- Air — Drones and advanced air mobility systems are already moving toward package delivery.
- Vessel — International efforts are underway for autonomous ships.
- Highway — Driverless trucks could change everything from loading to emergency response.
Your voice matters
PHMSA’s not making changes yet. However, they are gathering input. They want to know:
- What safety concerns and benefits do you see?
- Are current packaging and hazard communication rules adequate?
- How should cybersecurity risks be addressed?
- What economic impacts could these changes have, especially for small businesses
Comments are due by March 4, 2026, and can be submitted via regulations.gov under Docket No. PHMSA-2024-0064 (HM-266).
Key to remember: Automation is coming, and it’s coming fast. Whether you’re a carrier, shipper, emergency responder, or safety advocate, your input will help PHMSA find a balance.
Keep reading...Show less
2025-12-11T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsHR PoliciesPolicies and ProceduresHR GeneralistIn-Depth ArticleUSAAssociate RelationsEnglishHR ManagementFocus AreaHuman Resources
Has remote work killed the snow day?
When a business shuts down because of severe weather, it affects productivity and revenue. Conversely, staying open can put employees’ safety at risk.
The increase in remote work, however, may mean fewer employees calling out when they’re snowed in, mitigating both revenue loss and risk for employers.
Whether or not remote work is an option, employers should address concerns that can accompany bad weather in an inclement weather policy. The policy should include contingencies for both closing and remaining open during storms, as well as other disasters (natural or otherwise). It should specify if those who can’t make it in are expected to work remotely.
The policy can be in an employee handbook, but it’s also a good idea to provide employees with a reminder at the beginning of every severe weather season, or when severe conditions are forecast.
What to include in an inclement weather policy
For employees who always work from home: Specify that it’s business as usual unless the severe weather somehow impacts their ability to do their jobs remotely. For example, an employee who experiences a power outage at their remote location can’t be expected to work during the outage. Or, if coworkers and systems they depend on to do their jobs are affected by the storm, they may not be able to work.
For hybrid employees: If bad weather occurs on a day they were scheduled to come in, they should opt to work from home that day instead.
In-office employees able to work from home: Providing an option for telecommuting on bad weather days could help alleviate issues. Your policy should outline which employees are allowed to work from home if they feel it’s unsafe to travel to work, and which positions are essential, meaning they must report to the physical workplace. Those who are able to work from home must take their laptops and other necessary tools home with them every night to ensure they’re able to work from home should a storm blow in overnight.
Defining inclement weather: Your policy should indicate who decides whether to remain open, close early, or close all day. Provide this person with guidelines for what constitutes “inclement weather” in your area. It’s usually defined as weather that causes major disruption to transportation, businesses, and schools. While 3 inches of snow may shut down roads in Texas, it would not likely cause alarm in Minnesota.
Assessing liability risk: The decision maker should also understand the liability risks your company faces if it stays open during severe weather. For example, with the onset of winter, employers in northern climates can expect snow to occasionally create hazardous traveling conditions. While there are always exceptions to the rule, commuting to and from work — even in a blizzard — isn’t generally covered by workers’ compensation. Employers aren’t typically liable for accidents that may occur during an employee’s regular commute. However, employers can be liable for accidents, such as slips, trips, and falls, on company property caused by weather conditions. When evaluating whether to close, employers will want to consider their ability to provide a safe working environment (including parking lots and sidewalks) during inclement weather.
Notifying employees: The policy should clearly outline how closures will be communicated to employees. Companies might notify employees via email or text message or provide a telephone number for employees to hear a recorded message. Some companies also submit notices to the local radio and television stations to be included with school and community closures.
Paying employees: The obligation to pay employees during a shutdown depends on whether the employees are exempt (“salaried”) or nonexempt (“hourly”). Under federal law, for nonexempt employees, the answer is simple; they’re paid only for hours actually worked. If they don’t work because the business is closed or the employer sends them home early, they need not be paid (state laws may vary). They could, perhaps, use paid time off (i.e., PTO, vacation time, etc.) to cover an absence. Exempt employees must generally be paid their normal weekly salary, unless the business is closed, and no work is performed for a full workweek. Federal regulations prohibit salary deductions for exempt workers for days when work isn’t available, including weather closings. In most states, exempt employees could be required to use PTO.
Impact on morale: Staying open during hazardous weather could negatively impact employee morale. If schools are closed, parents will have an unexpected need for childcare, and poor driving conditions may result in more stressful commutes. It could also give employees the impression that you aren’t concerned about their safety and well-being.
Key to remember: Before the snow flies, make sure your inclement weather policy is ready. In addition to creating a policy, you might need to communicate with managers on how to address essential employees who choose not to report during inclement weather, even when the business remains open.
Keep reading...Show less
2025-12-11T06:00:00Z
NewsAir QualityIndustry NewsEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA)CAA ComplianceEnvironmentalIn-Depth ArticleFocus AreaEnglishAcid RainAir ProgramsStationary Emission SourcesUSA
Acid Rain Program compliance: SO2 vs. NOx
Did you know that the federal government regulates the power sector’s impact on rain? The Acid Rain Program limits the amount of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) — the main causes of acid rain — that fossil fuel-fired electric generating units (EGUs) may emit. However, the SO2 and NOx reduction programs operate differently, and the ways that facilities can meet the SO2 and NOx limits are distinct.
It's essential to know the compliance options because facilities that don’t meet the SO2 and NOx standards must pay penalties for their excess emissions. And in November 2025, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) set higher penalties for the next two compliance years.
So, what are the differences?
Who’s affected?
The first thing to confirm is whether your facility is subject to the Acid Rain Program (40 CFR 72.6). The program regulates fossil fuel-fired power plants. It applies to:
- EGUs that serve generators with an output capacity of more than 25 megawatts, and
- All new EGUs.
Note that the NOx program applies to a specific subset of coal-fired boilers.
SO2 reduction program
EPA operates the SO2 reduction program through an allowance trading system (Part 73). The agency sets a cap on the total SO2 emissions for the year and then allocates SO2 allowances to regulated units. One allowance represents 1 ton of SO2 emissions.
For each compliance year, a facility must show that it has enough allowances to cover its emissions of SO2. It’s similar to EPA’s hydrofluorocarbon allowance program.
There are multiple compliance options. Facilities may:
- Sell extra allowances if they have more allowances than needed,
- Save extra allowances if they have more allowances than needed (and use them in the future), or
- Buy extra allowances if they can’t keep emissions below their allocated level.
Facilities can purchase allowances from or sell allowances to individuals, companies, groups, or brokers. Additionally, facilities may bid on allowances at EPA’s annual Acid Rain Program SO2 Allowance Auction.
NOx reduction program
EPA sets annual emission limits for the NOx reduction program (Part 76), which applies to these types of boilers:
- Dry bottom wall-fired boilers,
- Tangentially fired boilers,
- Cell burner boilers,
- Cyclone boilers,
- Vertically fired boilers, and
- Wet bottom boilers.
Like the SO2 program, the NOx program offers multiple compliance options. Facilities can:
- Meet the standard annual emission limitations,
- Average the emissions rates of two or more boilers, or
- Apply for an alternative emission limit (AEL) if they can’t meet the standard emission limit.
Additional requirements apply to facilities that use options other than complying with the limits:
- Facilities that want to average emissions rates must submit an averaging plan that’s approved by the permitting authorities (76.11).
- Facilities that apply for an AEL are required to use the NOx emission control technology used as the basis for the emission limit and must demonstrate that the unit can’t comply using the technology (76.10).
It pays (or, at least, costs less) to comply!
Excess emissions penalties can add up quickly. That’s why it’s vital to ensure your facility understands how to comply with the SO2 and NOx reduction programs properly.
The adjustment rates that EPA set for compliance years 2025 and 2026 (2.5265 and 2.6001, respectively) are used to calculate the total penalties a facility must pay if it exceeds SO2 or NOx limits during these compliance years.
Here are the formulas:
- Penalty for excess SO2 emissions = $2,000/ton x annual adjustment factor x tons of excess SO2 emissions
- Penalty for excess NOx emissions = $2,000/ton x annual adjustment factor x tons of excess NOx emissions
Let’s run through a couple of examples of what noncompliance could cost.
| Factors | Penalty Per Ton | Total Penalties |
|---|---|---|
| $2,000 x 2.5265 = $5,053 | $5,053 x 10 = $50,530 |
| $2,000 x 2.6001 = $5,200.20 | $5,200.20 x 5 = $26,001 |
As shown in the example above, excess emissions can cost facilities a lot in penalties. Just 1 ton of excess emissions will result in more than $5,000! Knowing your compliance options for the Acid Rain Program’s SO2 and NOx reduction programs can help your facility avoid steep fines.
Key to remember: The Acid Rain Program limits SO2 and NOx emissions from fossil fuel-fired power plants, but the compliance options for each type of emission differ. Understanding the distinct options can help facilities avoid penalties for excess emissions.
Keep reading...Show less
2025-12-10T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsFleet SafetyDriver qualificationsDrivers qualification (DQ file)Driver qualification and hiringFocus AreaIn-Depth ArticleFleet OperationsEnglishTransportationUSA
Leveraging AI for DQ and driver management - benefits, prep steps, and risks
Artificial Intelligence (AI) can significantly improve driver qualification (DQ) processes when applied correctly. Drivers’ files and performance must always remain compliant with federal regulations and company safety standards. Traditional methods — paperwork, manual checks, and time-intensive verification — degrade onboarding, performance management, and other administrative processes.
Proper use of AI offers potential efficiency, but preparation and oversight are key to avoiding the pitfalls.
The benefits
By leveraging AI, fleets can:
- Reduce the administrative burden through automation.
- Accelerate onboarding by minimizing manual data entry.
- Improve accuracy by eliminating human error in document review.
- Enhance compliance and safety behavior monitoring with real-time alerts for expiring certifications, missing documents, or elevated safety risk.
Specific AI applications include:
- Machine learning automation of document verification, license checks, and other repetitive tasks;
- Chatbots to guide drivers through onboarding and document preparation with increased engagement and minimal confusion; and
- Predictive analytics to target high-risk drivers from camera-detected unsafe driving patterns and incident history.
Maintaining company safety standards is just as critical to driver retention as compliant DQ files. Even with the vast amount of data from cameras and vehicle telematics, AI can quickly identify the drivers who need interventions to avoid future crashes and violations.
Preparatory actions
Before deploying AI, companies should take several preparatory steps:
Data quality assessment: AI systems rely on accurate data. Ensure all driver records, compliance documents, and historical data are digitized and standardized. Consider transitioning to an online fleet management system (FMS) ahead of using AI.
Regulatory alignment: Confirm how AI tools will help maintain compliance with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) regulations and privacy laws.
Stakeholder training: Educate human resources teams, safety managers, and operations on how AI will integrate into workflows.
Vendor evaluation: Choose AI solutions with proven success in transportation organizations, robust security features, and transparent algorithms. Where possible, avoid using multiple AI vendors’ offerings where one cohesive product could be more efficient. Where possible, integrate AI with the FMS and current workflows, instead of using AI as standalone software with one more login to remember.
Pilot testing: Start with a small-scale implementation on a narrow DQ file task or driver safety performance area to identify gaps and refine processes before full deployment.
Watchouts
While AI tools offer significant benefits, there are critical considerations:
Bias and fairness: AI models trained on incomplete or biased data can lead to discriminatory outcomes. Regular audits in this area are essential.
Over-reliance on automation: Automated systems may incorrectly flag drivers as non-compliant or miss issues. AI should assist, not replace, compliance experts. Promoted as a decision-support tool without the intention of replacing decision-makers, can help build trust and reduce concerns about an "AI takeover."
Data privacy risks: Sensitive driver information must be protected with strong encryption and access controls. Adhere to biometric information privacy laws where digital fingerprints, iris scans, voice recognition, or other biometrics are in use.
Regulatory changes: AI systems must adapt ahead of and be ready for FMCSA and state-specific requirement changes. Use experts to ensure regulatory changes are incorporated by the effective dates of changes to avoid costly penalties.
Keys to remember: Success using AI to ensure only qualified drivers work for a carrier depends on careful planning, data accuracy, and ongoing subject matter expert oversight. By addressing these prerequisites and watchouts, fleets can harness AI responsibly to build safer, more efficient operations.
Keep reading...Show less
2025-12-10T06:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsEnglishFleet SafetyDrug testing - Motor CarrierDrug and Alcohol Testing - DOTRandom alcohol and drug testing- Motor CarrierFocus AreaIn-Depth ArticleSafety-sensitive function - Motor CarrierAlcohol testing - Motor CarrierRefusal to be tested - Motor CarrierTransportationUSA
Timing drug and alcohol tests is not a random act
The element of surprise built into DOT random testing helps catch impaired drivers. So, the timing of driver notifications is vitally important.
To ensure random selections are kept confidential and unannounced, DOT regulations specify how to carry out testing. A misunderstanding of these requirements can create a messy situation and may inadvertently create a violation.
Consider the following random-notification scenarios and the issues each produces.
‘Go when you have time’
Scenario: Samantha was selected for a random DOT drug and alcohol test. Her supervisor informed her about the test at the beginning of her shift. She was told she had two hours to show up for her appointment at a clinic that’s 15 minutes away.
Notification error: Drivers don’t have a “window of time” to show up for random tests. The regulations require that drivers immediately proceed to the collection site once they’re notified of a random drug or alcohol test. Giving drivers a cushion (other than travel time) is considered advance notice. In fact, this type of heads-up could:
- Provide a driver with enough time to come up with a substituted urine sample or consume a drug-masking substance.
- Keep a driver from engaging in prohibited behavior (e.g., drug or alcohol use) that they would have otherwise.
- Allow enough time for alcohol to metabolize in the driver’s body.
Drivers CANNOT be given an hour or two to show up at the collection site, and they can’t wait until later or at the end of their shift when it’s more convenient.
Alcohol tests and SSFs
Scenario: Phil is a warehouse employee who occasionally fills in as a driver. He’s in the random pool and was selected for alcohol testing.
Today, Phil is scheduled to work solely in the warehouse operating a forklift. The safety manager approaches Phil and instructs him to go for a DOT alcohol test. Phil goes for testing and blows 0.00% BAC, indicating he was not impaired. All’s good, right? Not quite.
Notification error: Since alcohol is a legal substance, prohibited use is timed around performing safety-sensitive functions (SSFs). A random alcohol test can only be requested right before, during, or right after performing SSFs.
If a driver is working in another capacity at the motor carrier (e.g., working in the warehouse) with no expectation of operating a CDL vehicle, they’re not performing SSFs. The motor carrier is unable to arrange DOT alcohol testing during this shift. The notification must wait until the driver is scheduled to operate or is in readiness to operate a vehicle requiring a CDL.
In this case, the safety manager caught a break — the test was negative. Had Phil’s test result been at least 0.04% BAC, the error would have resulted in a DOT testing violation. The carrier’s designated employer representative (DER) would decide whether to report the failed test to the Clearinghouse or work to cancel the test due to the error.
‘I never received a text’
Scenario: Robert, the company’s DER, received the quarterly list of randomly selected drivers. Randy was selected for drug testing, and Robert knows Randy should be available for testing shortly. Randy just dropped off his load and is on his way back to the terminal, which is about an hour’s drive. Robert texts Randy with instructions to immediately proceed to ABC Clinic which is close to the drop off. Randy doesn’t respond to the text.
The clinic calls Robert stating that Randy never showed up. An hour later, Randy shows up at the motor carrier and is clocking out for the day. Robert asks Randy, “Why didn’t you go for your random drug test? I texted you!” Randy states, “I never got a text.”
Best practice: The regulations don’t restrict the use of electronic notifications. However, in this scenario, Robert is in a difficult position. Does he consider this a refusal to test or take Randy’s word? As DER, he must decide.
Use of text, voicemail, or email isn’t the best choice for remote notifications of random testing. A documented phone call where you speak with the driver backs up any claims of refusal to test.
Notification tips
Your random drug and/or alcohol notifications may require planning. You don’t want to set your driver up for failure or to create a motor carrier violation through improper procedures.
Avoid messy situations:
- Instruct front-line managers on the regulatory basics.
- Prevent scheduling conflicts (e.g., childcare, personal appointments):
- Don’t notify drivers at the end of their shift if the test may extend into the driver’s free time;
- Check the driver’s time-off requests (e.g., doctor’s appointment, leaving early for the day, etc.); and
- Avoid an off-duty notification policy.
- Remind drivers during notification to immediately proceed to the clinic, so there is never a doubt.
- Use the company policy to ensure:
- Drivers know what “immediate” means, and
- The DER knows what constitutes a refusal to test.
Key to remember: The element of surprise for random tests helps uncover CDL drivers’ drug use or alcohol misuse. But your timing of these random tests should be far from random.
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 2025 J. J. Keller & Associate, Inc. For re-use options please contact copyright@jjkeller.com or call 800-558-5011.