NHTSA Final Rule: Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Child Restraint Systems, Child Restraint Anchorage Systems, Incorporation by Reference

What’s changing and why it matters

Although EPA has been deregulating or loosening some requirements, there are still some standards being tightened across multiple fronts in the coming year:

• Renewable fuel standards (RFS): The EPA proposed higher volume requirements for 2026, including 24.02 billion renewable identification numbers (RINs), up nearly 8% from 2025. This increase pushes stricter expectations on fuel producers and organizations purchasing renewable fuels.
• Stormwater multi-sector general permit (MSGP): A new MSGP set to take effect by February 2026 will require quarterly PFAS indicator monitoring, expanded benchmark sampling, and resiliency measures in stormwater control designs.
• PFAS Reporting under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA): TSCA Section 8(a)(7) mandates PFAS manufacturing and import data collection beginning in April 2026, through October 2026, with extended deadlines for certain small manufacturers.

Failure to prepare could lead to fines, reputational damage, supply chain disruptions, and permit delays. Companies that weave compliance planning into their 2026 strategy will be positioned not just to meet legal deadlines but to sustain operations smoothly.

Key areas of impact

• Renewable fuel standards (RFS) and air emissions The proposed increase in 2026 Renewable Identification Numbers (RIN) volumes, from 24.02 billion to 24.46 billion for 2027, signals tightening air and fuels policy that affects fuel use and emissions accounting.
• Stormwater management The upcoming 2026 MSGP requires expanded quarterly PFAS monitoring, new benchmark triggers, corrective action plans, and integration of climate resilience in design standards.
• PFAS disclosure (TSCA Section 8(a)(7)) Manufacturers and importers of PFAS must submit electronic reporting of usage, volumes, disposal, and exposure data between April and October 2026, with extensions available for smaller operations.

Steps to take now

• Audit compliance programs: Cross-check operations against RIN inventory, stormwater permits, and TSCA reporting duties.
• Upgrade monitoring and recordkeeping: Implement robust electronic systems to track PFAS, stormwater quality, fuel volumes, and emissions.
• Staff training: Educate teams on PFAS obligations, new stormwater protocols, and RFS structures.
• Engage regulators early: Comment on proposed rules, consult during permit drafting, and flag issues during the notice-and-comment period.

Looking ahead

The EPA’s 2026 updates reflect a trend toward increased transparency and environmental accountability. Companies that treat compliance as strategic will not only avoid enforcement but also gain resilience and stakeholder trust.

Key to remember: Start planning now. Early action on EPA rule changes will save time, money, and headaches when enforcement begins.

What does this mean?

Manufacturers (including importers) of motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines no longer have future obligations to measure, control, report, or comply with federal GHG emission standards for any highway vehicle or engine, including for previously manufactured MYs.

Specifically, the final rule removes the requirements for controlling GHG emissions, which include:

• Emission standards;
• Test procedures;
• Averaging, banking, and trading requirements;
• Reporting requirements; and
• Fleet-average emission requirements.

Additionally, the final rule eliminates off-cycle credits for manufacturers that added certain technologies to their vehicles and engines (like waste heat recovery) and EPA’s incentives for manufacturers to install a start-stop system (which automatically shuts off a vehicle’s engine when idling).

When do the changes apply?

The final rule takes effect on April 20, 2026. However, a legal challenge has already been brought against the rulemaking, and more litigation is likely.

It’s important to keep an eye on the status of the rule. Legal challenges could result in changes to the rule, such as delaying its effective date.

What regulations were removed?

The final rule repeals all GHG emission regulations in 40 CFR:

• Parts 85, 86, and 600 (light- and medium-duty vehicles);
• Part 1036 (heavy-duty vehicle engines); and
• Part 1037 (heavy-duty vehicles).

Why did EPA remove the standards?

The road to reversal begins in 2009. That’s when EPA issued two findings: the Endangerment Finding and the Cause or Contribute Finding. Collectively, these findings are referred to as the 2009 Endangerment Finding. The agency used the 2009 Endangerment Finding as the legal basis under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) to regulate GHG emissions from new motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines based on global climate change concerns.

However, upon reconsideration, EPA no longer believes that it has the statutory authority under Section 202(a) of the CAA to regulate GHG emissions from new motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines in response to global climate change concerns. The agency bases its determination on three factors:

• EPA concludes that the best reading of Section 202(a) of the CAA authorizes the agency to regulate air pollution that threatens to endanger health and welfare through local and regional exposure. Therefore, the CAA doesn’t give EPA the authority to regulate GHG emissions based on global climate change concerns. The agency conducted the “best reading” by using standard interpretation principles and being informed by the Supreme Court’s overturning of “Chevron deference” in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (2024).
• EPA lacks the congressional authorization required to regulate GHG emissions based on global climate change concerns. The agency determined that the major questions doctrine (i.e., federal agencies may not decide issues of major national significance without clear authorization granted by Congress) applies to the 2009 Endangerment Finding and that Congress doesn’t give EPA the authority under Section 202(a) of the CAA to decide a national policy response to global climate change concerns.
• The GHG emission regulations don’t and can’t have a meaningful impact on the identified health and welfare dangers that the 2009 Endangerment Finding attributed to global climate change. EPA based this conclusion on the results of climate impact modeling that the public submitted in response to the proposed rule and on the agency’s modeling analysis used to evaluate the submissions.

By rescinding the 2009 Endangerment Finding, EPA has no legal basis to regulate GHG emissions from new motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines. Accordingly, the final rule also repeals all GHG emission standards for light-, medium-, and heavy-duty vehicles and heavy-duty engines.

Key to remember: EPA’s final rule eliminates the 2009 Endangerment Finding and the related GHG emission requirements for on-highway vehicles and vehicle engines.

What is used oil?

The EPA defines used oil as any petroleum-based or synthetic oil that has been used and is contaminated by physical or chemical impurities. Common sources of used oil in industrial operations include:

• Motor oil and lubricants from vehicle maintenance
• Hydraulic fluids used in heavy machinery
• Metalworking fluids and coolants
• Compressor oils used in air compression systems

According to EPA regulations (40 CFR Part 279), used oil is presumed to be managed under the less stringent used oil management standards unless it meets hazardous waste criteria.

Used oil becomes hazardous waste if:

• It is mixed with hazardous waste (e.g., solvents or heavy metals)
• It contains more than 1,000 parts per million (ppm) of total halogens, unless proven otherwise, or
• It is disposed of improperly, leading to environmental contamination.

If used oil is classified as hazardous waste, it must be managed in accordance with the applicable solid and hazardous waste requirements.

EPA requirements for used oil disposal

The EPA requirements for used oil consist of three different aspects, as outlined below.

1. Storage Requirements

Use leak-proof tanks and containers made of durable, non-earthen materials (e.g., steel, plastic, or concrete). Label all used oil containers with the words "Used Oil" to prevent misidentification. Prevent leaks and spills by using secondary containment systems and regularly inspecting tanks. Never mix used oil with hazardous waste unless authorized.

2. Transportation and Disposal

Used oil generators may transport up to 55 gallons of used oil to a registered collection center without an EPA ID number. If contracting a used oil transporter, ensure they have an EPA Identification Number.

Used oil must be:

• Recycled or re-refined into new oil.
• Burned for energy recovery in approved furnaces or boilers.
• Disposed of at an authorized hazardous waste facility if deemed hazardous.

3. Spill Prevention and Cleanup

Facilities storing large amounts of used oil must have a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan. SPCC plans establish procedures, methods, and equipment requirements to prevent oil from reaching waterways, and to contain discharges of oil.

Any spills must be cleaned up immediately, and absorbent materials must be disposed of properly. Rags and shop towels contaminated with hazardous materials may be classified as hazardous waste.

OSHA regulations for handling used oil

While the EPA focuses on environmental compliance, OSHA (29 CFR Part 1910) regulates worker safety when handling used oil. Key OSHA requirements include:

1. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)

Workers handling used oil must wear gloves and protective clothing to prevent skin exposure. Safety goggles or face shields are also important to avoid eye contact.

2. Hazard communication (HazCom) program

Employers must label all used oil containers with appropriate hazard information and train employees on safe handling procedures and emergency response.

3. Fire and Explosion Safety

Always store used oil away from ignition sources to prevent fire hazards. Ensure storage areas are ventilated to avoid vapor buildup.

State-Specific used oil disposal regulations

Many states have stricter used oil regulations than federal laws. For example:

• California classifies used oil as hazardous waste unless it meets specific recycling criteria.
• Texas requires additional storage permits for large generators.
• New York mandates annual reporting on used oil disposal activities.

To ensure compliance, check with your state’s environmental agency for state-specific used oil disposal rules and whether used oil is considered hazardous. Additional permits for transporting or processing used oil may be necessary.

Staying compliant with used oil disposal requirements

Ensuring compliance with EPA, OSHA, and state laws is essential for safety managers and shop supervisors handling used oil. By following proper storage, transportation, and disposal practices, businesses can reduce environmental risks, improve workplace safety, and avoid costly fines.

Key to remember: By staying informed and proactive, your facility can maintain safe, sustainable, and compliant used oil management practices.

But which crashes?

According to the FMCSA’s internal auditing guidelines, a motor carrier needs to be investigated if there has been a “significant” crash involving a commercial motor vehicle (CMV).

Under the agency’s definition, a significant CMV crash is one that:

• Involves three or more fatalities,
• Results in an unusually high number of injuries,
• Gets extensive national media coverage, or
• Is being investigated by the National Transportation Safety Board (the agency charged with investigating highway crashes of national significance).

Red flags

The preliminary crash investigation will guide the FMCSA’s next steps. The FMCSA will take particular interest if:

• The CMV driver’s actions may have contributed to the cause of the crash;
• Findings reveal possible pre-crash violations of DOT safety or hazmat regulations; or
• The motor carrier was unregistered or is based in Mexico.

If any of these conditions are found, it will lead to a review or inspection of:

• The driver’s qualification file, including his or her driving record and drug/alcohol testing record;
• The driver’s hours of service during the eight-day period leading up to the crash;
• The CMV involved in the crash, if no state inspection report is available; and
• The inspection and maintenance records for that vehicle.

At this point, your company or driver could become the subject of an enforcement action — such as a fine — without further investigation. However…

Things may escalate from there

The next step could be a comprehensive on-site audit of all your CMV operations. How does the FMCSA decide when to send in the auditors after a significant crash? You can expect DOT investigators to come knocking if your company:

• Is considered high-risk* or has a less-than-satisfactory safety rating and has not been investigated on-site in the past nine months;
• Is an unrated passenger carrier; or
• Has CSA scores above the intervention threshold and driver or vehicle violations were discovered during the post-crash investigation.

*High-risk carriers include those with at least two CSA scores above 90 percent under the categories of Unsafe Driving, HOS Compliance, Vehicle Maintenance, or Crash Indicator.

Keep in mind that FMCSA investigators have a lot of discretion when it comes to deciding whether and how to investigate, and what the penalties should be. No motor carrier is completely immune, no matter how minor the crash.

Key to remember: Post-crash audits or investigations by the FMCSA are not random. You could be the subject of a post-crash investigation if certain criteria are met.

What is “readily available”?

OSHA defines “readily available” as accessible within three to five minutes and warns that locking first aid supplies, whether kits or cabinets, may limit employee accessibility per the standard. The agency advises that if an employer was relying on first aid services not provided by a clinic, infirmary, or hospital and adequate first aid supplies were not available when needed, then the employer would be in violation of 1910.151(b).

But my supplies are disappearing at an alarming rate!

If you’re concerned with supplies being used in a manner not intended by the company, there are ways to manage supplies. For example, employers could use vending machines that allow employees to scan their badges and get basic supplies or personal protective equipment free of charge. This can help employers manage their supply chain and evaluate by whom and for what supplies are being used.

If opting to lock your first aid supplies, remember to make supplies readily accessible (within three to five minutes). This may require that additional keys for locks be made available to multiple personnel at all times when workers are present.

What supplies are required for my first aid kits?

Although their recommendations are non-mandatory, OSHA suggests using the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) for reference to determine what supplies you need to have. The contents for Class A kits listed in the ANSI standard should be adequate for small worksites. Class B kits are designed with a broader range and quantity of supplies to deal with injuries in more complex or high-risk environments (for example, larger operations or multiple operations conducted at the same location).

It’s important to note that although OSHA is still citing ANSI’s 1998 standard, an updated version of the standard, ANSI/International Safety Equipment Association (ISEA) Z308.1-2021, was approved on April 15, 2022, and went into effect on October 15, 2022. Major changes to the standard included:

• Changing tourniquet type to ensure it meets first aid needs. The equipment intended to prevent blood loss should be at least 1.5 inches wide and be effective for limb sizes 7–33 inches around.
• Making foil blankets mandatory. This measure was enacted after assessing similar international standards and recognizing “the multiple purposes that the item can serve to respond to first aid emergencies.”
• Providing further guidance on bleeding control kits. According to ISEA, these “contain more advanced first aid supplies to immediately treat life-threatening external bleeding.”

Determining what first aid supplies should be accessible depends on the workplace hazards and potential injuries. A great place to begin is by assessing your Form 300 injury logs to see the types of injuries already reported. Most employers perform risk assessments, beginning with a review of the Form 300 logs, to drive their decisions. OSHA also provides guidance to employers in 1910.151 Appendix A.

Keys to Remember

Employers must understand the accessibility risks associated with locking first aid cabinets even though OSHA and ANSI do not prohibit this practice. First aid supplies must be readily accessible (within three to five minutes) in the event of an emergency.

The basics of logging exemptions

To be able to use this logging exemption in 395.1(e)(1), the driver must:

• Stay within 150 air-miles of the work reporting location for the day (draw a 150 air-mile radius circle around the work reporting location for the day — the driver must stay within this circle),
• Be back to — and released from — the work reporting location for his/her 8- or 10-hour break within 14 hours, and
• Include the starting and ending times for the day and the total hours on duty on the time record for the day.

The company must retain the time record and have it available for inspection for six months.

What if the driver goes too far or works too many hours?

If the driver cannot meet the terms of the exemption (he or she goes too far or works too many hours), the driver must complete a regular driver’s log for the day as soon as the exemption no longer applies.

If the driver has had to complete a log 8 or fewer days out of the last 30 days, the driver can use a paper log for the day. If the driver had to complete a log more than 8 days out of the last 30 days, the driver needs to use an electronic log for the day (unless one of the ELD exemptions applies, such as operating a vehicle older than model year 2000).

30-minute break exemption

When a property-carrying driver is operating under the 150 air-mile exemption, the driver is also exempt from having to take the required 30-minute break (see 395.3(a)(3)(ii)).

If the driver began the day as a 150 air-mile driver and has driven more than 8 consecutive hours without a break, and something unexpected happens and the driver can no longer use the 150 air-mile exemption, the driver must stop and immediately take the 30-minute break as well as start logging. If the driver went outside of the 150 air-mile area before the driver had 8 hours of driving without a break from driving, the driver would be expected to take the break at the appropriate time.

Common myths

Here are some of the common myths and misunderstandings about the 150 air-mile exemption:

• The driver must have the time records in the vehicle. Myth. The driver simply needs to explain to an officer during a roadside inspection that he/she does not have logs due to operating under the 150 air-mile exemption and that the required time records are back at the carrier’s office (just telling the officer, “I don’t have any logs” will lead to a violation, so the driver needs to know to provide the full explanation).
• The driver must log the previous seven days if he/she had been using this exemption and suddenly can’t. Myth. If the driver cannot use the exemption on one particular day, that is the only day the driver must use a regular log (either paper or electronic).
• Passenger-carrying drivers and drivers hauling hazardous materials cannot use this exemption. Myth. There are no restrictions on the use of this exemption, so any commercial driver can use it.
• A driver that crosses state lines cannot use this exemption. Myth. As this exemption appears in the Federal Motor Carrier Administration (FMCSA) regulations, it can be used by interstate drivers.
• Only drivers that operate out of a “company terminal” can use the 150 air-mile exemption. Myth. As long as the driver makes it back to the work reporting location for the day within the appropriate number of hours, the driver can use the exemption.
• Drivers that move from one jobsite to another every few weeks cannot use this exemption. Myth. If a driver that normally uses this exemption switches work reporting locations, the day the driver switches work reporting locations is the only day the driver cannot use the exemption.
• Drivers covered by this exemption are also exempt from the driver qualification (licensing and medical cards), driving, and vehicle inspection requirements. Myth. The only rules the driver is exempt from are the logging requirement in 395.8 and the 30-minute break requirement in 395.3.
• The driver cannot drive more than 150 miles for the day. Myth. The driver can drive as many miles as he/she wants to or needs to, as long as the driver stays within the 150 air-mile radius circle and gets back to the work reporting location within the appropriate number of hours.
• If a 150 air-mile driver gets into a vehicle with an ELD, the driver must use it. Myth. The carrier can have the driver log in and have the driver entered into the system as an “exempt driver,” or the carrier can request that the driver not log into the device and then attach a comment to the unassigned driving time generated by the driver’s movements. The comment would need to explain that the driver using the vehicle was a 150 air-mile driver who submitted a time record. It is up to the carrier to decide which option to use. If stopped for a roadside inspection, the driver will need to be able to explain to the inspector that he/she is an exempt driver using the 150 air-mile exemption, so using the electronic log is not required.

What’s different with the ‘150 air-mile non-CDL property-carrying drivers’

The 150 air-mile exemption at 395.1(e)(2) only applies to drivers that: Operate property-carrying vehicles that do not require a CDL to operate, and Stay within the 150 air-miles of their work reporting location.

If the driver stays within the 150 air-mile radius of the work reporting location, and returns to the work reporting location within 14 hours on 5 of the last 7 days, and 16 hours on 2 of the last seven days, the driver is allowed to use a time record in place of a log.

If the driver does not meet the terms of the exception, the driver will need to complete a log for the day. If the driver had to log more than 8 days out of the last 30 days, the driver will need to use an electronic log for the day. All of the other issues discussed above would apply to these drivers as well.

Managing the use

If you have drivers that use these exemptions, you will need to check time records to make sure they are complying with the appropriate time limits. You will also need to check movement records to verify that the drivers using these exemptions are staying within the mandated area (within 150 air-miles of the work reporting location for the day).

If a driver is over the hours limit, or has gone too far, you need to verify that the submitted a log for the day, either paper or electronic, depending on how many days the driver had to log out of the previous 30 days.

Verifying compliance is important

During an audit, if it is discovered that your drivers are using these exemptions incorrectly, you will be cited for not having drivers’ logs when required. Each day this occurred will be another violation, so the fine could be rather large if you are not managing the use of these exemptions!

No fishing

As proposed, the rule directs the FMCSA and other DOT agencies to avoid “fishing expeditions” without enough evidence in hand to support an enforcement claim. It also spells out what an enforcement notice should include — what rule you allegedly violated, the key facts, and what rights you have to challenge it and “avoid unfair surprise.”

Transparency is another key component. The rule will require agencies to share potentially exculpatory evidence — basically, information in the government’s hands that could help you defend yourself or reduce the penalty. The proposed version of the rule states that “making affirmative disclosures of exculpatory evidence in all enforcement actions will contribute to the [DOT’s] goal of open and fair investigations and administrative enforcement proceedings.”

The rule is also expected to reinforce the fact that guidance documents — including interpretations issued by the FMCSA and often published along with FMCSA regulations — are not legally binding. In addition, agencies will need to take additional steps in the guidance development process, such as doing cost-benefit analyses and legal review, and getting public input.

Many of the changes in the proposed rule were in place prior to 2021 but were rescinded by the previous administration.

A new era for enforcement

One of the most intriguing changes in the rule will allow motor carriers to petition the DOT to argue that their staff violated procedural requirements. If the carrier wins, the proposed remedies go beyond a scolding for the investigators. They could include:

• Removing the enforcement team,
• Excluding certain issues or evidence,
• Ordering certain factual findings, or
• Restarting the enforcement action from the beginning or from an earlier point in the proceedings.

FMCSA enforcement cases dropped dramatically last year even without the new rule; the future may hold even fewer once the proposed changes go into effect.

Key to remember: A new “rule on rules” from the DOT is expected soon, and it could change the FMCSA’s enforcement playbook.

Why is using a checklist so critical?

Carriers may wonder “Why do more than the regulations require?” or “How important is consistent execution of company policies?” These are two questions answered by the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI)’s 2022 study, Understanding the Impact of Nuclear Verdicts on the Trucking Industry.

In the study, defense and plaintiffs’ attorneys agreed on two things regarding protecting carriers from nuclear verdicts:

1. “Crash avoidance is everything,” and
2. “Strictly adhering to safety and operational policies is essential to staying out of court and/ or reducing award sizes.”

Another key point from the study was that almost any failure to follow the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration Regulations (FMCSRs), which are minimums, will be a focus of litigation. Conversely, carriers need to show that their procedures exceed the regulations and they uphold their duty to select the safest possible drivers. A well-constructed checklist accomplishes both.

An example of a checklist is at the following link:

DQ checklist

Three consequences of poor hiring practices

1. Increased risk of litigation

Failure to comply with the FMCSRs, along with missing clues about unsafe driving history, becomes the basis for a negligent hiring claim and excessive verdict.

Some industry best practices when evaluating prospective drivers include:

• Questioning employment gaps greater than 30 days. This could indicate a license suspension or incarceration.
• Using an expert who knows licensing authority coding and formats to scrutinize motor vehicle records (MVRs) for unsafe driving violations, suspensions, and crashes.
• Requiring a new medical certification at hire by a company-approved Certified Medical Examiner to avoid the risk of drivers’ doctor-shopping.

2. Audit fines

Failing to maintain proper DQ files can result in non-compliance with the FMCSRs. This can lead to significant fines and penalties. For example, record-keeping penalties have to $1,544 per day, with a maximum penalty of $15,445.

Common driver hiring audit violations include:

• Application missing, incomplete, or not compliant with 391.21.
• Safety performance history from all regulated employers in the prior three years not documented.
• The MVR shows the driver was not properly licensed for the vehicle assigned (wrong class, missing endorsement, restricted/suspended/revoked, etc.). The carrier’s reviewer needs to know what to look for because MVRs differ from state to state.
• No documented road test or use of the exception in 391.33 which allows a current CDL or road test certificate to be used instead.

3. Damage to reputation

Headline crashes can severely damage a company’s reputation and ability to secure future business. Details of what contributed to a crash are often part of the news. Press disclosing a carrier’s poor hiring practices can result in customers losing trust and wanting to avoid vicarious liability (being sued because of a carrier’s crash while hauling their goods).

Key to remember: To reduce the risk of fines, litigation, and lost business, develop and always follow policies and procedures that exceed the FMCSRs.

FMLA certification basics

Employers aren’t required to use certifications, but if they do, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has five different certification forms to use for various FMLA leave situations.

The forms are as follows:

1. Certification of Health Care Provider for Employee's Serious Health Condition,
2. Certification of Health Care Provider for Family Member's Serious Health Condition,
3. Certification of Qualifying Exigency for Military Family Leave,
4. Certification for Serious Injury or Illness of a Current Servicemember for Military Family Leave, and
5. Certification for Serious Injury or Illness of a Veteran for Military Family Leave.

Let’s focus on the first two, as these are the most common ones HR administrators use.

Who can fill out an FMLA certification?

The FMLA regulations describe the person who has the authority to fill out a certification as a “health care provider.” The good news is, the regulations include a lengthy list of medical professionals who fit this role.

Under the FMLA, a health care provider includes:

• A doctor of medicine or osteopathy,
• A podiatrist,
• A dentist,
• A clinical psychologist,
• An optometrist,
• A chiropractor (limited to manual manipulation of the spine as demonstrated by X-ray),
• A nurse practitioner,
• A nurse midwife,
• A clinical social worker,
• A physician assistant,
• A Christian Science practitioner, and
• Any health care provider from whom the employer or the employer's group health plan's benefits manager will accept a medical certification to substantiate a claim for benefits.

To be qualified to fill out FMLA forms, medical professionals must be authorized to practice in the state and perform within the scope of their practice. This means that the provider must be authorized to diagnose and treat physical or mental health conditions.

What about doctors in a foreign country?

If an employee or an employee's family member is visiting another country, or a family member resides in another country, and a serious health condition develops, the employer must accept a medical certification from a health care provider who practices in that country. This includes second and third opinions.

If a medical certification from a foreign health care provider is not in English, the employee may be required to provide a written translation of the certification.

Key to remember: The FMLA regulations spell out which medical professionals can fill out certification forms.

Serious health condition

Substance abuse can be an FMLA-qualifying serious health condition as long as it meets the definition. If an employee (or family member) is kept overnight in a health care facility or if continuing treatment is involved, a serious health condition exists.

An FMLA serious health condition involving continuing treatment includes, for example:

• A period of incapacity of more than three, consecutive, full calendar days, and any subsequent treatment.
• Any period of incapacity (or treatment for) a chronic serious health condition requiring treatments at least twice per year.
• A period of incapacity for a permanent or long-term condition in which treatment might not be effective.
• Any period of absence to receive multiple treatments for a condition that would likely result in a period of incapacity of more than three consecutive, full calendar days in the absence of treatment.

Employees in substance abuse treatment programs could be experiencing any of these. As with most FMLA leave requests, you may require that an employee provide a certification to support the need for such leave. A certification should give you enough information to determine if the condition meets the criteria.

Treatment

One of the key words here is “treatment.” An employee who is not receiving treatment for substance abuse might not be entitled to FMLA leave for substance abuse. Employees are not, however, entitled to FMLA leave, for example, due to being under the influence of drugs or alcohol even if they indicate that they are going to obtain treatment in the future. FMLA leave is only for someone actually receiving treatment.

Let’s say, for example, that Jo Employee is selected for a random drug test and tests positive for illegal narcotics. If Jo never requested FMLA leave for the condition, under your company’s drug policy, Jo could be subject to termination. If you don’t have such a policy, your actions, however, may be more limited.

The federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) does not protect employees who illegally use drugs, and neither the FMLA nor the ADA protects employees who are impaired on the job. The ADA could, however, protect employees who receive medication-assisted treatment (MAT) to help reduce or quit the use of opiates, even if the medication is methadone (a narcotic) and shows up in a drug test.

Health care settings

Health workers worldwide face a high risk of violence, with 8–38 percent experiencing physical attacks, while others are subjected to threats or verbal abuse, according to the World Health Organization (WHO). Most incidents involve patients or visitors. Those at greatest risk include nurses, patient-facing staff, emergency room personnel, and paramedics.

Violence against health workers harms staff well-being, morale, and retention, ultimately compromising quality of care and causing significant financial loss.

An OSHA proposed rule — ‘Workplace Violence in Health Care and Social Assistance’ — was moved to Long-Term Action status, according to the Spring 2025 regulatory agenda that was released on September 4, 2025. Long-Term Actions are items under development, but the agency doesn’t expect to have a regulatory action within the 12 months after the latest edition of the agenda.

This turn of events was surprising since OSHA had been working on a standard for preventing workplace violence in health care and social assistance settings. OSHA had planned to publish the proposed rule in the Federal Register in June 2025.

Even without a federal standard addressing workplace violence in health care, several states have their own health care violence prevention laws in place.

General Duty Clause

Although OSHA doesn’t have a workplace violence standard, employers must provide a workplace that’s free of known health and safety hazards. This is addressed in OSHA’s General Duty Clause (GDC), Section 5(a) of the Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) Act.

The following elements are necessary for OSHA to prove a violation of the GDC:

• The employer failed to keep the workplace free of a hazard to which employees of that employer were exposed;
• The hazard was recognized;
• The hazard was causing or was likely to cause death or serious physical harm; and
• There was a feasible and useful method to correct the hazard.

A general duty citation must involve both the presence of a serious hazard and exposure of the cited employer’s own employees.

During a violent incident investigation, OSHA inspectors would likely gather evidence about whether an employer knew that a potential workplace violence hazard existed and whether there were feasible means to prevent or minimize such hazards. Investigators might also look at evidence of any potential whistleblower retaliation in which workers complained about workplace violence risks or reported injuries from workplace violence incidents.

Health care facilities have been cited when staff were injured by violent patients or visitors. In one case, nurses were regularly assaulted, but the hospital had no prevention program, no staff training, and no reporting system. OSHA stepped in using the GDC. Prevention could have included de-escalation training, secure facility layouts, panic buttons, and post-incident support.

Tips for preventing violent acts

In most workplaces where risk factors can be identified, violent acts can be prevented or minimized.

Building respectful workplaces is one way to do this. The most common forms of uncivil behaviors are when employees:

• Address others in disrespectful ways,
• Interrupt those who are speaking, and
• Micromanage people to an excessive degree.

Providing employees with civility training — which differs from anti-harassment training — can help to create more respectful work environments with less conflict. While civility training isn’t only focused on preventing harassment, that could be a component.

Research has shown that incivility can be a precursor to harassment. In contrast to anti-harassment training, civility training tends to give employees positive examples of how to behave, versus actions to avoid.

The training typically includes a focus on:

• Interpersonal communication,
• Conflict resolution, and
• Effective supervisory techniques.

How civility training is presented will depend on the size of the workforce, demographics, location, industry, etc. There is no one-size-fits-all approach. The point is to get employees to be more aware of how their words and actions impact others, and how they should treat everyone with respect.

It’s also important to watch for signs that someone could turn violent. While there’s no guarantee that one or more questionable behaviors equate to a potential incident, some warning signs come from someone experiencing personal or work issues.

They could be struggling financially, going through a divorce, or having health issues. Work triggers could stem from negative employment actions, like a demotion or termination, or other types of conflict.

Key to remember: April is Workplace Violence Prevention Month. Now’s the time to focus on ways to keep all employees safe.

What information must the written program include?

Paragraph (e) of 1910.1200 outlines written program requirements. Although the program doesn’t need to be lengthy or complicated, it must include enough detail to explain how your organization is complying with the HazCom standard. There are specific elements OSHA will look for to ensure compliance:

• A list of the hazardous chemicals known to be present in the workplace that matches the identifier on the container label and the safety data sheet (SDS).
• The designation of person(s) responsible for ensuring labeling of in-house containers and the person(s) responsible for ensuring labeling of shipped containers (if any).
• A description of any in-house labeling system(s) and any labeling alternatives used in the facility (if applicable).
• A description of HazCom training provided to employees.
• Procedures to review and update label information when necessary.
• Methods used to inform employees of the hazards of non-routine tasks, such as cleaning reactor vessels, and the hazards of unlabeled pipes in their work areas.
• An explanation of how the employer will comply on multi-employer worksites. Employers on multi-employer worksites who do not use hazardous chemicals, but whose employees are exposed to the chemicals used by other employers on the worksite, are required to have a program and train their employees on the hazards of the chemicals in the work areas.

Key to remember: If you’re covered by the HazCom standard, you may need a written program. It must include specific elements listed in 1910.1200(e).

Walking-Working Surfaces

For many years, employers were required to post a plate on mezzanines, platforms, or similar work areas showing the weight capacity or load rating approved by a building official. OSHA removed that requirement in 2017, so these capacity plates are no longer required.

The current regulation at 1910.22(b) simply requires employers to ensure that each walking-working surface can support the maximum intended load. OSHA reasoned that builders consider maximum loads during design and construction.

Employers can certainly leave existing capacity plates in place and may want to check local building codes, which may still require a weight capacity posting.

Storage areas and racks

OSHA doesn’t explicitly require posting storage areas or shelves with weight capacities. Still, the agency has cited employers for unposted storage systems, particularly if a collapse occurred.

The weight of stored materials must not exceed the safe weight limits of shelving. Most industrial shelving is already labeled, helping identify capacities for each shelf or shelving unit. For shelving not labeled or built in-house, OSHA recommends determining capacity limits using sound engineering calculations, then clearly marking storage equipment with safe load capacities. Again, this isn’t technically required, but it can go a long way toward reducing human error and avoiding a possible General Duty Clause citation.

Other storage hazards

OSHA also looks to ANSI/RMI MH16.1 – Specification for the Design, Testing and Utilization of Industrial Steel Storage Racks, which recommends securing storage racks of various types and heights. This increases their stability and decreases the potential for tipping over.

Damaged shelves or supports, improper installation, and unsafe modifications can all increase the risk of worker injury. Storage shelving must be installed appropriately, limited to a safe height, secured properly, and guarded to prevent damage.

Mitigating shelving hazards

Employers are responsible for identifying and mitigating shelving hazards in the workplace. Some effective ways of protecting workers include:

• Inspect shelving and racking regularly for damage or defects. Train workers to report any damage, loose bolts, or other concerns immediately.
• Remove any damaged shelving or immediately isolate the affected area until it can be repaired or replaced.
• Label shelving and storage racks with load capacities and do not exceed storage capacities.
• Install guards on shelving uprights to prevent damage from incidental vehicle or forklift contact.
• Ensure materials stored on shelving, racks, and other storage devices are stacked, blocked, interlocked, and limited in height so they remain stable and secure.
• Ensure that materials don’t protrude from storage areas, such as boards or other items extending into pedestrian or vehicle aisles.
• Train workers to store heavier loads on lower or middle shelves and lighter loads on higher shelves.

Every employer that maintains sales stock or manufacturing supplies needs a safe and secure way to store those items. Following these best practices helps ensure that the storage itself doesn’t create additional hazards to workers.

Key to remember: Although OSHA no longer requires posting load ratings on working surfaces, employers should have load ratings on storage areas to help prevent overloading.

Ladders feel safe, until they’re not

Ladders don’t usually trigger a sense of risk because they’re seen as a part of everyday work. When tasks feel quick and familiar, people don’t always stop reassessing the setup. That’s how unsafe ladder habits with big consequences can develop, including:

• standing on the top step “just for a second;”
• reaching too far instead of climbing down;
• using whatever ladder is closest, not the right one; and
• skipping ladder inspections because “it worked last time.”

Ladder safety isn’t going away, and that’s not a bad thing

If ladder safety feels like a repeat conversation, that’s because the same risks keep showing up. New employees are hired; facilities and equipment changes, and old habits stick around longer than they should. Even experienced workers fall into this trap. Familiar tasks start to invite rushing. Rushing leads to shortcuts, and shortcuts are where ladder injuries happen.

Emphasis must be placed on recognizing the risk before the climb starts. This means knowing when a ladder is the wrong choice, repositioning is safer than reaching, and when a quick task deserves the same setup as a longer one.

Most incidents don’t start with bad intentions. They start with “just this once” decisions, one more rung, one quick reach, one skipped check. Effective ladder safety training is about breaking routines and refocusing attention on the decisions that make ladder work safer.

Routine work, repeat injuries

Ladder injuries follow a familiar pattern. They don’t usually come from unusual jobs or unexpected hazards, and they happen during everyday tasks that feel common. Injury reports often look the same, such as short tasks, quick setups, and decisions made under time pressure. The ladder didn’t fail. The setup and the decisions around it did.

Injury data from OSHA and the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) consistently point to the same causes. That’s why the same types of ladder injuries keep occurring repeatedly, not because the hazards are unknown, but because routine work makes those hazards easier to overlook. These reasons include:

• people underestimate the risk because ladders feel familiar;
• jobs feel “too small” to stop and reset the ladder;
• time pressure encourages leaning, rushing, and overreaching; and
• experience leads to comfort, and comfort leads to shortcuts.

The rules are written in injuries

OSHA ladder requirements are built around real injury trends and are based on decades of injury data. Falls from ladders remain one of the leading causes of workplace injuries, which is why OSHA keeps ladders near the top of its enforcement priorities year after year:

OSHA 29 CFR 1910.23 defines how ladders are intended to be used, specifically prohibiting practices such as standing on the top step of a stepladder, using ladders for purposes they were not designed for, and climbing ladders that have not been inspected. These requirements exist because improper use, poor setup, and skipped inspections consistently show up in ladder fall investigations.

OSHA 29 CFR 1910.30 reinforces that preventing ladder injuries depends on training employees to recognize hazards before they climb, understand proper ladder selection and positioning, and know when a ladder is not the right tool for the task. Together, these standards emphasize that ladder injuries are not random events, they are predictable outcomes of routine decisions made during everyday work.

Small choices make a big difference

Ladder safety isn’t only about compliance. Incidents develop from a series of small, moment to moment decisions made during routine work. These choices made daily either reduce risk or quietly add to it. Ladder injuries can be avoided by taking the time to make simple improvements including:

• inspecting and securing the ladder,
• climbing down and repositioning,
• selecting the proper ladder for the task, and
• stopping when the ladder no longer feels stable or safe.

Key to remember: Take the time to choose safer setups, stay alert, and prevent routine decisions from turning into preventable injuries. When employees choose the correct ladder, reposition instead of reaching, and inspect before use, the risk of ladder injuries falls, not your employees.

Exemptions

The following Subparts are exempt from the Confined Spaces in Construction standard:

• Diving: 29 CFR 1926, Subpart Y
• Excavation: 29 CFR 1926, Subpart P
• Underground Construction, Caissons, Cofferdams and Compressed Air: 29 CFR 1926, Subpart S

Note, however, that employers engaged in these activities must comply with this standard if their workers are exposed to confined space hazards that are not addressed by the standards listed above. For example, the Excavation standard (Subpart P) protects workers in a trench (a type of confined space) against the hazards associated with the trench itself.

However, the Excavation standard would not protect workers inside a sewer line that is installed in an open trench from confined space hazards associated with the sewer line. The employer must comply with the Excavation standard to protect workers in the trench and with the Confined Spaces standard to protect workers in the sewer line.

It gets complicated

Where Subpart AA applies and there is a provision that addresses a confined space hazard in another applicable OSHA standard, the employer must comply with both that requirement and the applicable provisions of Subpart AA.

For example, employers engaged in the following activities in confined spaces must also comply with other applicable OSHA standards, such as:

• Process Safety Management: 29 CFR 1926.64

• Hazardous Waste Operations: 29 CFR 1926.65

• Welding and Cutting: 29 CFR 1926, Subpart J

Duties of employers

All employers

• Identify all confined spaces in which their workers may work and determine whether any are permit spaces. If its workers are supposed to enter permit spaces, the employer is an “entry employer.”
• Employers who are not “entry employers” must make sure their workers stay out of any permit spaces present on the site unless the workers are authorized for entry.

Entry employers

• Protect workers against permit space hazards by complying with the standard.
• Inform the controlling contractor of the program followed and hazards encountered in permit spaces.

Controlling contractors

• Share information they have about permit space hazards with entry employers and other employers whose activities may create hazards in the permit space.
• Coordinate entry operations when there is more than one entry employer.
• Coordinate operations when permit space entry occurs during other activities at the site that might create a hazard in the space.

Host employers

• Share information they have about permit space hazards with the controlling contractor.

Key to remember

Employers engaged in construction activities in a permit space have a duty under the standard to make sure their employees work safely. This includes protecting them from exposure to permit space hazards.