FREE TRIAL UPGRADE!
Thank you for investing in EnvironmentalHazmatHuman ResourcesHuman Resources, Hazmat & Environmental related content. Click 'UPGRADE' to continue.
CANCEL
YOU'RE ALL SET!
Enjoy your limited-time access to the Compliance Network!
A confirmation welcome email has been sent to your email address from ComplianceNetwork@t.jjkellercompliancenetwork.com. Please check your spam/junk folder if you can't find it in your inbox.
YOU'RE ALL SET!
Thank you for your interest in EnvironmentalHazmatHuman ResourcesHuman Resources, Hazmat & Environmental related content.
WHOOPS!
You've reached your limit of free access, if you'd like more info, please contact us at 800-327-6868.
News Page, Top Banner, Guests

Regulatory Compliance News & Updates

Keep up to date on the latest
developments affecting OSHA, DOT,
EPA, and DOL
regulatory compliance.

Regulations change quickly. Compliance Network ensures you never miss a relevant update with a personalized feed of featured news and analysis, industry highlights, and more.

RECENT INDUSTRY HIGHLIGHTS

Court: Employer didn’t owe overtime it didn’t know about
2026-03-17T05:00:00Z

Court: Employer didn’t owe overtime it didn’t know about

Ignorance is bliss, even when it comes to keeping an accurate payroll.

Employers must pay nonexempt (“hourly”) employees overtime — time and one-half their regular rate of pay — for any hours worked beyond 40 in a workweek. Employers don’t have to pay overtime, however, if they don’t know that employees are working any extra hours. In this case below, ignorance saved the employer in court.

Keep reading...Show less
OSHA sidelines $40K-plus penalty case data
2026-03-17T05:00:00Z

OSHA sidelines $40K-plus penalty case data

OSHA recently removed a link from its Data topic page. The missing link went to a webpage that displayed a growing list of almost 15,800 “high-penalty cases” at or over $40,000 since 2015. The move coincides with the agency’s revamp of the Data page in December.

Background

In August 2015, OSHA announced a new “high-penalty map.” The agency remarked, “For the first time, this map shows high-penalty cases in states that operate under federal OSHA as well as in states that operate under OSHA-approved state plans.” An alternative “table view” was also available. It could be sorted by initial penalty amount, date, case number, employer name, state, and city.

Data are not lost

While the data have disappeared from OSHA’s Data page, they’re archived here, here, here, and here. Frozen in time, the data reveals 15,797 cases spanning from January 1, 2015, to June 20, 2025.

The introduction to the $40,000 or Above page said the data “includes citations issued starting January 1, 2015.” The table view tallies 16,119 cases. However, 322 of them had an issuance date prior to 2015, and we do not analyze them here.

Some employers are listed more than once if they had more than one penalty case at or over $40,000.

Top high-penalty cases

Single inspections with the highest initial penalty figures include:

  1. $4.13 million for an auto parts manufacturer in Nevada.
  2. $2.89 million for an auto parts manufacturer in Ohio.
  3. $2.81 million for a frozen food manufacturer in Illinois.
  4. $2.51 million for an auto parts manufacturer in Alabama.
  5. $2.47 million for a sawmill in Alabama.
  6. $2.03 million for a fruit farm in Washington state.
  7. $1.92 million for a meat processor in Ohio.
  8. $1.92 million for a metal-product manufacturer in New Jersey.
  9. $1.86 million for a utility construction company in North Dakota.
  10. $1.84 million for a milk manufacturer in Washington state.
  11. $1.84 million for a long-distance trucking company in Washington state.

Most inspections did not reach millions of dollars

The majority (about 79 percent) of inspections on the list have under $100,000 in initial penalties:

  • 0.2 percent ranged from $1 million to over $4.13 million.
  • 0.5 percent ranged from $500,000 to under $1 million.
  • 5 percent ranged from $200,000 to under $500,000.
  • Almost 16 percent ranged from $100,000 to under $200,000.
  • Almost 14 percent ranged from $75,000 to under $100,000.
  • Almost 65 percent ranged from $40,000 to under $75,000.

“Initial penalty” amounts are not necessarily the current penalty amounts. Some cases might have even ended up with a final total penalty under $40,000.

Number of high-penalty cases per month

Taking the number of high-penalty cases in a year and dividing by the number of months gives us a case rate per month. The case rate increased over the 10.5-year period. This may be associated with the maximum civil penalties at 29 CFR 1903.15 that were increased annually per 28 U.S.C. 2461 statutory notes. Yet, you’ll see the rate of high-penalty cases decreases during the pandemic and last year:

  • 2015 — 82.9 cases per month.
  • 2016 —101.5 cases per month.
  • 2017 —122.25 cases per month.
  • 2018 —126.9 cases per month.
  • 2019 —131.4 cases per month.
  • 2020 —97.3 cases per month.
  • 2021 —108.8 cases per month.
  • 2022 —128.4 cases per month.
  • 2023 —170.2 cases per month.
  • 2024 —180.5 cases per month.
  • 2025 —140.1 cases per month.

States with the most high-penalty cases

Thirteen states had the greatest number of cases at or over $40,000 in initial penalties. They made up over 70 percent of all high-penalty cases on the list:

  1. California with about 1,850 cases.
  2. Ohio with about 1,530 cases.
  3. Texas with about 1,280 cases.
  4. New Jersey with about 1,190 cases.
  5. Illinois with about 1,000 cases.
  6. Florida with about 630 cases.
  7. New York with about 620 cases.
  8. Georgia with about 560 cases.
  9. Wisconsin with about 560 cases.
  10. Pennsylvania with about 550 cases.
  11. Massachusetts with about 500 cases.
  12. Washington state with about 500 cases.
  13. Missouri with about 380 cases.

The remaining states and territories had under 300 high-penalty cases each.

Key to remember

Data for the over $40,000-plus penalty cases slid off the OSHA Data page. The agency says it discontinued and removed it in December. The data is frozen and archived elsewhere.

Keep reading...Show less
Bring some green indoors to enhance job performance and employee well-being

Bring some green indoors to enhance job performance and employee well-being

Green is the color of March, as it signals the St. Patrick’s Day holiday as well as the emergence of spring. Did you know that bringing some green into your workplace can have benefits year-round?

A Harvard Business Review study found that bringing small pieces of nature into the workplace positively impacts employee performance and well-being.

Keep reading...Show less
Safety pays – Or else you might!
2026-03-16T05:00:00Z

Safety pays – Or else you might!

Justification for safety-related cutbacks are plenty — inflation, scheduling, etc. You may have even heard things like, “This is how we’ve always done things,” “There’s no way that could happen here,” or “OSHA doesn’t have enough people to inspect us.” However, not only is providing a safe workplace the right thing to do even during tight constraints, but it has also been proven time and time again that safety does pay. Let’s explore how!

The cost of non-compliance

Lack of time is often cited as rationale for bypassing safety protocols. However, while time pressures are a reality in every workplace, a proactive approach to safety helps prevent incidents and minimize potentially devastating long-term results.

A free tool for cost impact

Not sure how these stories apply to you in a fiscal way? OSHA has a tool to help! Their Safety Pays Program offers a way for employers to assess the impact workplace injuries and illness would have on their bottom line. Though not a detailed analysis tool, the estimator casts some light on the cost of injuries, illness based on your profit margin and an indirect cost multiplier showing how much your sales department would need to generate to cover those costs.

Once you’ve seen the costs of non-compliance for yourself, you can start working toward improving safety compliance. This can be done through fostering a proactive safety culture that benefits from:

  • Leadership commitment through visibly supporting safety initiatives and allocating necessary resources to ensure compliance.
  • Employee engagement where workers feel free to report hazards or safety concerns, participate in safety committees, and contribute ideas for improvement.
  • Clear policies and procedures that are regularly reviewed and updated to ensure alignment with regulatory standards and easily accessible to all employees.
  • Regular audits and inspections to identify hazards, verify compliance, and address gaps before they lead to incidents.
  • Training and education so employees understand their roles, exposures, and risks while ensuring employees understand both the “how” and “why” of safe practices.
  • Leveraging technology for assessing risks, tracking incidents, managing corrective actions, and analyzing safety data to guide decision-making.

Key to remember: Investing as much time, money, and resources into workplace safety not only protects employees, but it also reduces operational risks and helps organizations avoid costly regulatory citations.

Keep reading...Show less
Key questions in industrial stormwater compliance
2026-03-16T05:00:00Z

Key questions in industrial stormwater compliance

Industrial stormwater compliance can feel complex for facilities balancing operations, employees, and shifting permit requirements. Many questions center on the federal general permit, pollution prevention plan expectations, monitoring, and what to do in everyday situations where stormwater risks arise. The following sections summarize core topics and practical concerns.

What is the current status of the federal 2021 Multi-Sector General Permit (MSGP)?

EPA issued the current MSGP in 2021, and it remains in effect beyond its February 28, 2026 expiration until EPA finalizes the proposed 2026 MSGP. Because the proposed 2026 permit is still under review, the 2021 MSGP continues to govern covered facilities.

Why has the proposed 2026 MSGP not taken effect?

EPA released the proposed 2026 MSGP in December 2024. Public comments, including an extended comment period ending May 19, 2025, must be reviewed before finalizing the permit. Since the existing MSGP remains valid until replaced, the 2021 permit stays in force while EPA completes its process.

What is a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)?

A SWPPP outlines how a facility prevents pollutants from reaching stormwater. It identifies pollutant sources, control measures, inspection routines, monitoring steps, and staff training. A SWPPP must be written before submitting a Notice of Intent (NOI) for permit coverage and updated when operations or stormwater risks change.

What are the requirements for authorized state stormwater permits?

Most states issue their own industrial stormwater permits modeled on the federal MSGP. These permits typically require:

  • Preparation and maintenance of a SWPPP;
  • Inspections and monitoring (such as benchmark, effluent, or visual monitoring);
  • Corrective actions when control measures fail; and
  • Reporting through state online systems.

States may add requirements based on local conditions. When EPA updates the MSGP, states often revise their permits to align with new federal standards.

Who needs coverage under the MSGP?

Industrial facilities that discharge stormwater to waters of the United States generally need permit coverage unless they qualify for a no‑exposure exclusion. The federal MSGP applies in areas where EPA, not the state, holds National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) authority.

How does a facility obtain coverage?

To obtain coverage, a facility must:

  • Prepare and implement a SWPPP;
  • Put pollution controls in place, such as good housekeeping and spill prevention;
  • Identify sector specific requirements based on the permit; and
  • Submit a Notice of Intent through EPA’s online system.

The proposed 2026 MSGP includes updated forms and appendices, but current requirements remain based on the 2021 version until a new permit is published.

What monitoring is required?

Under the 2021 MSGP, required monitoring may include:

  • Quarterly visual assessments,
  • Benchmark monitoring in designated years, and
  • Effluent limitations monitoring for specific regulated discharges.

The proposed 2026 MSGP would expand per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) sampling, increase benchmark monitoring frequency, and add requirements for impaired waters. These changes remain pending.

What happens if benchmark thresholds are exceeded?

A benchmark exceedance requires the facility to investigate causes, improve control measures, and document actions in the SWPPP. The proposed 2026 MSGP would formalize additional implementation measures and reporting steps, but these wouldn’t apply until the new permit takes effect.

What about common real world compliance scenarios?

Industrial stormwater issues often arise from everyday activities. Consider these examples:

Employees’ vehicles leaking oil in parking lots

Leaks from employee vehicles can contaminate stormwater. While the MSGP does not regulate personal vehicles directly, the facility is responsible for any pollutants that enter stormwater from its property. Good housekeeping practices include absorbent stations, spill kits, drip pans, and designated parking areas with routine inspection.

Nonroutine outdoor maintenance

Temporary outdoor activities such as conducting maintenance, unloading equipment, or staging materials, can introduce pollutants. The SWPPP should address nonroutine tasks by requiring temporary controls like tarps, containment pads, or scheduling activities during dry weather. Documentation of these activities is also part of good recordkeeping.

Outdoor waste storage or scrap piles

These materials should be covered or sheltered, kept away from storm drains, and inspected frequently. If runoff contacts industrial materials, the discharge becomes regulated and must be managed under the permit.

These scenarios reinforce the need for strong housekeeping practices, staff training, and prompt corrective actions.

What documentation must facilities keep?

Facilities must maintain monitoring records, inspection logs, SWPPP updates, and corrective action reports. EPA may request these documents at any time. Appendices in the proposed 2026 MSGP preview updated forms, but the 2021 requirements remain in place for now.

What should facilities do while waiting for the 2026 MSGP?

Facilities should continue full compliance with the 2021 MSGP, track regulatory updates, and prepare for more frequent monitoring and PFAS sampling likely included in the 2026 permit. Reviewing proposed changes now helps facilities plan needed SWPPP updates in advance.

Key to remember: Industrial facilities covered under the 2021 MSGP or a state equivalent must continue following that permit until EPA issues a new federal MSGP. Staying informed, maintaining strong housekeeping, and keeping SWPPP documentation current remain the most effective strategies for compliance.

Keep reading...Show less
Search all news