Regulatory Compliance News & Updates
Keep up to date on the latest
developments affecting OSHA, DOT,
EPA, and DOL regulatory compliance.
Copyright 2026 J. J. Keller & Associate, Inc. For re-use options please contact copyright@jjkeller.com or call 800-558-5011.
Safety & Compliance News
FEATURED NEWS
2026-04-02T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsEnglishHead ProtectionPersonal Protective EquipmentSafety & HealthConstruction SafetyGeneral Industry SafetyAgriculture SafetyIn-Depth ArticleEmployee Mental HealthWellnessWellnessFocus AreaUSA
From hard hats to headspace: Why mental health is critical for every worker
Protecting workers’ heads takes more than a hard hat. A 2017 National Institute of Health (NIH) study looked at employees across four Kansas worksites and found a clear link between stress and productivity. The study revealed that higher stress scores were significantly associated with lower productivity and greater job dissatisfaction. The result of this study suggests that employers who actively work to reduce stress are not just improving mental health and morale, but they’re boosting productivity as well.
Hidden in plain sight
When Sebastian walked into the office each morning, no one could see the weight he carried. Deadlines were met, meetings attended, yet his smile never faltered. Inside, stress and anxiety were taking a toll, and his story isn’t unique.
One study showed a very interesting contrast: most employees (about 77%) stated they were comfortable supporting a coworker’s mental health. However, when it comes to their own stress or burnout, 42% worry that opening up about it or seeking help could hurt their career or make them a target. Even more striking, one in four have thought about quitting because of mental health challenges. And it’s not just long-term stress. A recent Gallup poll found that 41% of workers felt highly stressed just “yesterday.”
These statistics underscore a troubling theme that employees value and wish to nurture mental wellness; however, stigma, insufficient support, and overwhelming stress persist. Employers need to begin recognizing and proactively addressing workplace mental health in order to cultivate resilient, productive teams.
What one state is doing
The state of Michigan is piloting a new initiative aimed at improving workplace mental health which is increasingly being recognized as an occupational safety and health issue. This expands the state’s historically stringent approach to reducing on-the-job risks.
Michigan’s LEADS program—short for Learn, Educate, Act, Deploy, Study—is a four-month initiative designed to give employers practical tools to tackle stress, burnout, and communication breakdowns that often lead to safety incidents. The idea is simple: when communication falters and stress goes unchecked, mistakes happen. Those mistakes can mean more human errors, higher injury rates, quiet quitting, and turnover.
One of the program’s key features is an evidence-based organizational assessment. Think of it like a safety audit that’s focused on mental health risks rather than physical hazards. Employers get a clear picture of issues such as heavy workloads, unclear roles, workplace conflict or bullying, and weak support systems that can quickly erode a strong safety culture.
The end goal of the LEADS program is not to replace existing safety programs but rather strengthen them. Consider joining Michigan in their effort to enhance communication, better define workers’ roles, support unfettered reporting, and more effectively engage employees.
Key to remember: Stress doesn’t just weigh people down; it can have significant safety and productivity consequences. Programs like Michigan’s LEADS pilot initiative are giving employers the ability to tackle stress and burnout before they lead to mistakes, injuries, or turnover.
Keep reading...Show less
RECENT INDUSTRY HIGHLIGHTS
2026-04-02T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsIndustry NewsFleet SafetyEnglishAnnual inspections - Motor CarrierOut-of-service criteria - Motor CarrierFocus AreaDaily vehicle inspectionsFleet OperationsUSAEnforcement - DOTTransportationCMV Inspections
17 new updates to the OOS Criteria now in effect
The Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance’s (CVSA’s) latest North American Standard Out-of-Service Criteria are now in effect, including 17 changes that took effect April 1.
Motor carrier enforcement personal and industry professionals use these criteria to determine if drivers or vehicles are posing a serious enough hazard to be placed out of service (OOS) during an inspection. Drivers and motor carriers should review the criteria so they’re aware of the safety violations that will put an immediate stop to a vehicle’s operation.
Consider the upcoming Roadcheck event
With International Roadcheck just around the corner on May 12–14 and its 2026 focus on electronic logging device (ELD) tampering and falsification, one particular addition to the criteria is worth noting.
The criteria for placing drivers OOS for log falsification have been clarified to address situations where a record is falsified so much that the officer can’t determine when the driver was driving and/or resting. Drivers will be cited for violating 49 CFR 395.8(e)(2) and placed OOS for 10 hours (or 8 hours for passenger carriers) for ELD tampering that makes the entire record suspect. Officers will continue to cite 395.8(e)(1) for false logs when the officer can determine rest periods and drive time, and will place drivers OOS “until such time as eligibility to drive is re-established.”
Update categories
Changes were made to the following categories. Find more details at CVSA’s 2026 Out-of-Service Criteria.
For drivers
- ELD tampering
- English-language proficiency violations
- License-restriction violations
- In-state-restricted drivers
- Alcohol content threshold
For vehicles
- Air connections
- Brake pad thickness
- Parking brakes
- Log securement
- Wire rope
- Upper couplers
- Rims
- Wheel hub lubricant
- Emergency exit markings
- Placarding
Keep reading...Show less
2026-04-02T05:00:00Z
NewsAir QualityIndustry NewsIndustry NewsStationary Emission SourcesEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA)Hazardous Air PollutantsCAA ComplianceEnvironmentalFocus AreaEnglishAir ProgramsAir ProgramsUSA
EPA releases final NESHAP for area source chemical manufacturers
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a final rule on April 1, 2026, amending the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Chemical Manufacturing Area Sources (CMAS). The NESHAP controls hazardous air pollutant (HAP) emissions from facilities that manufacture a range of chemicals and products, such as inorganic chemicals, plastics, and synthetic rubber.
Who’s impacted?
The final rule applies to nine area source categories in the chemical manufacturing sector that are regulated by the CMAS NESHAP (40 CFR 63 Subpart VVVVVV).
What are the changes?
EPA’s final rule:
- Establishes leak detection and repair requirements for equipment leaks and heat exchange systems in organic HAP service,
- Adds detectable emissions monitoring standards for pressure vessels in organic HAP service and emission management practice standards for pressure relief devices (PRDs) in organic HAP service,
- Prohibits closed vent systems in organic HAP service from bypassing an air pollution control device (APCD), and
- Requires recurring performance testing of non-flare APCDs to demonstrate compliance with process vent and storage tank provisions.
The final rule also mandates electronic reporting for notifications of compliance status (NOCs), performance test reports, and periodic reports. Facilities must submit these reports through the Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI) on EPA’s Central Data Exchange.
What didn’t change?
Significantly, the final rule doesn’t add previously proposed regulations for area sources that use ethylene oxide (EtO) to produce materials described by code 325 of the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).
EPA states that it intends to address the regulation of EtO from area sources and major sources in one final action.
What are the compliance timelines?
Existing facilities must comply with the amendments by April 1, 2029.
New facilities (those that begin construction or reconstruction after January 22, 2025) have to comply with the changes by April 1, 2026, or upon startup, whichever is later.
Additionally, facilities must start electronically submitting:
- Performance tests by June 1, 2026;
- NOCs by August 31, 2026; and
- Periodic reports by April 1, 2029.
Key to remember: EPA’s final HAP emissions rule for chemical manufacturing area sources adds new requirements for certain processing equipment and systems.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-04-01T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsHR GeneralistFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)In-Depth ArticleFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)HR ManagementEnglishUSAFocus AreaHuman Resources
Breaking down the FMLA's 4 leave year options
The federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) entitles eligible employees of covered employers to take up to 12 weeks of job-protected, unpaid leave in a 12-month leave year period for qualifying reasons.
Employers generally get to decide how to calculate the 12-month leave year. They may choose from four options:
- The calendar year,
- Any fixed 12-month leave year, such as a fiscal year,
- The 12-month period measured forward from the date an employee's first FMLA leave begins, or
- A “rolling” 12-month period measured backward from the date an employee uses FMLA leave.
Calendar year
The calendar year is pretty self-explanatory. It begins on January 1 and ends on December 31. If an employee’s leave begins on December 15 and ends on February 2, the leave from December 15 until December 31 is in one leave year, and the rest is in a new leave year.
With this method, employees can “stack” leave. An employee could, for example, take 12 weeks of FMLA leave from mid-October until the third week of March. While the employee takes 24 consecutive weeks of FMLA leave, 12 of the weeks are in one leave year, and the other 12 weeks are in the following leave year. The employee would have no more FMLA leave available until January 1 of the next year.
Fixed 12-month period
This method operates much like the calendar year method, but doesn’t start on January 1. If employers choose an employee’s anniversary date, for example, each employee will have a different leave year, which could make tracking leave a bit of a challenge. Selecting a more unified option, such as a company’s fiscal year, makes leave tracking easier.
Either way, this method also allows employees to stack their leave.
Measured forward
With this method, when an employee takes FMLA leave for the first time, that’s when each employee’s individual leave year begins. If, for example, an employee first took FMLA leave on March 12, 2026, their leave year would run from that date to March 12, 2027.
Just because the employee first took leave on March 12 doesn’t mean that the leave year will always begin on that date. The leave year could change. If that same employee subsequently took leave beginning July 22, 2027, the new leave year would run to July 22, 2028.
Rolling backward
Under this method, the 12 months aren’t static — they “roll.” Each day begins a 12-month new leave year. Every time an employee takes FMLA leave, the employer looks back 12 months and determines how much leave the employee took in those 12 months. That amount is subtracted from the 12-weeks of FMLA leave. The balance is how much FMLA leave the employee has available on that particular day. The next day, the employer makes the same calculation.
While the rolling backward method is the most employer-friendly of the four choices, and it avoids the stacking of leave, it makes calculating leave amounts more challenging because it’s always changing.
State laws
While these four leave-year options apply to federal FMLA leave, states with their own leave programs in place might have different requirements. Wisconsin, for example, has a state family and medical leave law that requires employers to use a calendar year. According to the U.S. Department of Labor, employers in Wisconsin that are covered by both laws must, therefore, use the calendar year method.
Key to remember: Employers may choose from four methods to identify the 12-month leave year during which eligible employees may take FMLA leave.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-04-01T05:00:00Z
NewsIndustry NewsIndustry NewsAssociate Benefits & CompensationAssociate RelationsHR GeneralistFamily and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)HR ManagementEnglishFocus AreaHuman ResourcesUSA
Even essential workers get FMLA leave
Bill was the county sheriff. Albert, who worked for the sheriff’s department, was considered an “essential” employee as part of the county’s emergency response plan.
As an essential employee, Albert was expected to remain on shift during emergency events, such as hurricanes. Albert also had a wife with serious health conditions. County employees were expected to notify Risk Management when the need for leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) arose.
Hurricane Irma
Before Hurricane Irma in September 2017, Albert asked for “special consideration” so that he could be allowed to stay home with his wife during hurricanes. The sheriff’s office approved of this.
Thereafter, Albert took FMLA leave to care for his wife. But around February 2022, Albert no longer needed intermittent FMLA leave because he had more work flexibility as a supervisor and was able to provide care for her around his work schedule.
Hurricane Milton
Then came Hurricane Miton in October 2024. Albert requested the time off but was denied, as he was an essential employee. He was told to report to work, or the case would be taken to HR, and his job could be at risk.
On October 9, during his shift, Albert’s wife called about the threat of a tornado and thought she was having a heart attack. Albert decided to leave work to go home and told a manager that he was leaving. He never contacted Risk Management regarding his need to leave, as no one from that office was there.
On October 11, the employer fired Albert for abandoning his job during an emergency event.
The complaint and the result
The following January, Albert filed a complaint asserting FMLA violations.
The employer argued that Albert:
- Didn’t qualify for or wasn’t entitled to FMLA benefits because his wife only thought she was having a heart attack,
- Didn’t provide adequate notice for leave, and
- Was fired for a legitimate reason unrelated to his request for FMLA leave.
The court didn’t buy the employer’s arguments. The first argument failed because the evidence was sufficient to allow a jury to find that Albert’s wife suffered from a serious health condition without actually having a heart attack.
The court also found that the evidence showed that Albert gave enough notice of his need for unforeseeable leave. The employer was well aware of his wife’s condition.
The last argument failed because the employer allowed other employees to be absent during hurricanes, contradicting its claim of abandonment; others who didn’t report to work during Hurricane Milton had their badges revoked, but Albert was fired, and the employer fired Albert soon after his leave request.
Therefore, the court denied the employer’s request to have the case dismissed and allowed it to proceed to a jury.
Burrows v. Prummell (Sheriff of Charlotte County, Florida), Middle District of Florida, No. 2:25-cv-11, January 26, 2026.
Key to remember: Even if employees are essential for a particular function, even during emergencies, they are entitled to take FMLA leave for a qualifying reason.
Keep reading...Show less
2026-03-31T05:00:00Z
NewsTier II Inventory ReportingIndustry NewsCERCLA, SARA, EPCRACommunity Right to KnowEmergency Release PlanningEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA)EnvironmentalIn-Depth ArticleEnglishSARA ComplianceFocus AreaUSA
EPCRA inventory reports: A case study in federal, state, and local collaboration
Environmental regulations require many facilities to report annual inventories of the hazardous chemicals they use or store. Have you ever considered the impact that this information has beyond regulatory compliance? Reporting facilities, whether they realize it or not, serve an essential role in local emergency response planning.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Hazardous Chemical Inventory Reporting program under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) offers a prime example of how collaboration among the federal, state, local, and facility levels supports safer communities.
What’s EPCRA's inventory reporting program?
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requires facilities to keep Safety Data Sheets (SDSs) for any hazardous chemical used or stored in the workplace. Facilities that use or store the chemicals on-site at or above certain thresholds at any one time are subject to EPCRA’s Hazardous Chemical Inventory Reporting program. Regulated facilities must report information about the hazardous chemicals to the:
- State Emergency Response Commission (SERC),
- Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC), and
- Local fire department.
What’s reported?
EPA’s EPCRA inventory program consists of two reporting requirements under Sections 311 and 312 of EPCRA.
SDSs/lists
Section 311 of EPCRA requires facilities to submit the SDSs for or a list of the hazardous chemicals used or stored on-site at or above the reporting thresholds to the SERC, LEPC, and local fire department.
SDSs usually include comprehensive information, such as:
- The composition of ingredients,
- Physical and health hazard information, and
- First aid and firefighting measures.
If a facility opts to list the chemicals, it must group them by hazard categories and include each chemical’s name and any hazardous components as identified by the SDS. This is generally a one-time submission for each hazardous chemical. However, if a facility submits an SDS for a hazardous chemical and later discovers significant new information about it, the facility has to send an updated SDS to the SERC, LEPC, and local fire department.
Annual inventories
Under Section 312 of EPCRA, facilities must also submit an annual inventory (known as the Tier II inventory report) of the hazardous chemicals used or stored on-site at or above the reporting thresholds to the SERC, LEPC, and local fire department by March 1.
Facilities should check state regulations to confirm Tier II reporting thresholds, as they may be more stringent.
The Tier II inventory report requires information on the covered hazardous chemicals used or stored at the facility during the previous calendar year, including:
- The locations of the chemicals,
- The amounts of the chemicals, and
- The potential hazards of the chemicals.
How do inventories support emergency planning?
Inventory reports provide information that’s vital to effective emergency response planning. Specifically, the inventories tell state and local officials about where hazardous chemical releases may occur and the risks that such releases may pose. Equipped with an accurate view of these hazards, officials can build and maintain effective emergency response plans for their communities.
Each participant in the emergency planning effort plays a distinct role:
- Reporting facilities provide the SERCs, LEPCs, and local fire departments with the information they need to build effective response plans, such as the types of chemicals on-site and their quantities, locations, and possible hazards.
- SERCs designate local emergency planning districts and appoint and supervise LEPCs. They also establish the inventory reporting procedures, review local emergency response plans, and process information requests from the public.
- LEPCs use inventory reports to develop and update emergency response plans that address each community’s unique risks.
- Local fire departments use the inventory reports to understand the potential chemical-related risks they may encounter at specific facilities. By knowing where the chemicals are and the potential hazards they pose, fire departments can improve personnel training and identify the most appropriate ways to respond to chemical emergencies.
Ultimately, reporting facilities aren’t just meeting a compliance requirement; they’re also supporting safer communities.
Key point: EPCRA’s hazardous chemical inventory requirements provide an example of effective collaboration between EPA, state and local officials, and facilities to prepare communities for chemical emergencies.
Keep reading...Show less
Search all news
Got a Compliance Question?
We’ve Got You Covered!
Get clear, reliable answers from experts with 500+ years of combined experience.
J. J. Keller is the trusted source for DOT / Transportation, OSHA / Workplace Safety, Human Resources, Construction Safety and Hazmat / Hazardous Materials regulation compliance products and services. J. J. Keller helps you increase safety awareness, reduce risk, follow best practices, improve safety training, and stay current with changing regulations.
Copyright 2026 J. J. Keller & Associate, Inc. For re-use options please contact copyright@jjkeller.com or call 800-558-5011.