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

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

2025-01-07T06:00:00Z

This final rule amends Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) No. 225; Child restraint systems, and FMVSS No. 213b; Child restraint systems, to improve ease-of-use of the lower and tether anchorages, improve correct use of child restraint systems in vehicles, and maintain or improve the correct use and effectiveness of child restraint systems (CRSs) in motor vehicles. This final rule fulfills a mandate of the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) requiring that NHTSA improve the ease-of-use for lower anchorages and tethers in all rear seat positions.

DATES:

Effective date: March 20, 2025.

IBR date: The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register beginning March 10, 2025.

Compliance date: This final rule adopts a 3-year phase-in period to comply with the updated requirements in FMVSS No. 225. The phase-in begins on September 1, 2028, and requires that 20 percent of a manufacturer's applicable vehicles produced from September 1, 2028, to August 31, 2029, comply with the updated FMVSS No. 225, followed by 50 percent from September 1, 2029, to August 31, 2030, and 100 percent on and after September 1, 2030. Early compliance is permitted.

Reconsideration date: If you wish to petition for reconsideration of this rule, your petition must be received by February 21, 2025.

Published in the Federal Register January 7, 2025, page 1288.

View final rule.

§571.5 Matter incorporated by reference.
(k)(10)-(11)	Added	View text
§571.213b Child restraint systems; Mandatory applicability beginning December 5, 2026.
S5.5.2(j)	Revised	View text
S5.6.1.13 and S5.6.1.14	Added	View text
S5.9(a) through (c)	Revised	View text
Figures 15 and 16	Added	View text
§571.225 Child restraint anchorage systems.
S4.2	Revised	View text
S4.3-S4.6	Redesignated, revised	View text
S5 and S6	Revised	View text
S8 introductory text and S8.1 introductory text	Revised	View text
S8.2	Removed and reserved	View text
S9 introductory text, S9.1.1(d) and S9.2	Revised	View text
S9.2.4 and S9.2.5	Added	View text
S9.5	Revised	View text
S11, S12, and S13	Revised	View text
S14, S15, and S16	Removed	View text
Figures 8, 9, 10, and 19	Revised	View text
Figure 11	Removed and reserved	View text
Figures 23 through 28	Added	View text

New Text

§571.213b Child restraint systems; Mandatory applicability beginning December 5, 2026.

* * * *

S5.5.2(j) In the case of each child restraint system equipped with a tether strap the statement: Secure the tether strap provided with this child restraint.

* * * *

S5.9 Attachment to child restraint anchorage system. (a) Each add-on child restraint system other than a car bed, harness, or belt-positioning seat shall have components permanently attached to the system that enable the restraint to be securely fastened to the lower anchorages of the child restraint anchorage system specified in Standard No. 225 (§571.225) and depicted in NHTSA Standard Seat Assembly; FMVSS No. 213, No. NHTSA-213-2021, (March 2023) (incorporated by reference, see §571.5). The components must be attached to the add-on child restraint by use of a tool, such as a screwdriver. In the case of rear-facing child restraints with detachable bases, only the base is required to have the components. All components provided to attach the add-on child restraint or the detachable base (in the case of a rear-facing child restraint with a detachable base) to the lower anchorages of the child restraint anchorage system shall be permanently marked with the pictogram in figure 15 to this section.

(b) In the case of each child restraint system that has components for attaching the system to a tether anchorage, those components shall include a tether hook that conforms to the configuration and geometry specified in figure 11 to this section. The tether hook or the tether strap shall be permanently marked with either pictogram shown in figure 16 to this section. If the mark is on the tether strap or on a tag attached to the tether strap, the mark must be located within 25 mm of the tether hardware assembly (which consists of a tether hook and a webbing tightening mechanism designed to tighten or loosen the tether strap).

(c) In the case of each child restraint system that has components, including belt webbing, for attaching the system to an anchorage of a child restraint anchorage system (lower anchorage or tether anchorage), the belt webbing shall be adjustable so that the child restraint can be tightly attached to the vehicle. The length of the tether hardware assembly, which consists of a tether hook and a mechanism designed to tighten and loosen the tether strap, shall not exceed 165 mm.

§571.225 Child restraint anchorage systems.

* * * *

S4.2 Vehicles shall be equipped as specified in paragraphs S4.2(a) through (c), except as provided in S5 of this standard.

(a) Each vehicle with three or more forward-facing rear designated seating positions shall be equipped as specified in S4.2(a)(1) and (2).

(1) Each vehicle shall be equipped with a child restraint anchorage system conforming to the requirements of S6 and S9 of this standard at not fewer than two forward-facing rear designated seating positions. At least one of the child restraint anchorage systems shall be installed at a forward-facing seating position in the second row in each vehicle that has three or more rows, if such a forward-facing seating position is available in that row.

(2) Each vehicle shall be equipped with a tether anchorage conforming to the requirements of S6 of this standard at a third forward-facing rear designated seating position. The tether anchorage of a child restraint anchorage system may count towards the third required tether anchorage. In each vehicle with a forward-facing rear designated seating position other than an outboard designated seating position, at least one tether anchorage (with or without the lower anchorages of a child restraint anchorage system) shall be at such a designated seating position.

(b) Each vehicle with not more than two forward-facing rear designated seating positions shall be equipped with a child restraint anchorage system conforming to the requirements of S6 and S9 of this standard at each forward-facing rear designated seating position.

(c) Each vehicle without any forward-facing rear designated seating position shall be equipped with a tether anchorage conforming to the requirements of S6 of this standard at each forward-facing front passenger designated seating position.

* * * *

S4.3 Movable seats. (a) A vehicle that is equipped with a forward-facing rear designated seating position that can be moved such that it is capable of being used at either an outboard or non-outboard forward-facing designated seating position shall be considered as having a forward-facing non-outboard designated seating position. Such a movable seat must be equipped with a tether anchorage that meets the requirements of S6 of this standard or a child restraint anchorage system that meets the requirements of S6 and S9 of this standard, if the vehicle does not have another forward-facing non-outboard designated seating position that is so equipped.

(b) Tether and lower anchorages shall be available for use at all times, except when the seating position for which it is installed is not available for use because the vehicle seat has been removed or converted to an alternate use such as allowing for the carrying of cargo.

* * * *

S5 General exceptions. Vehicles manufactured before September 1, 2031, must meet the requirements of S5.1. Vehicles manufactured on or after September 1, 2031, must meet the requirements of S5.2.

S5.1 Vehicles manufactured before September 1, 2031. (a) Convertibles and school buses are excluded from the requirements to be equipped with tether anchorages.

(b) A vehicle may be equipped with a built-in child restraint system conforming to the requirements of Standard No. 213 (§571.213) or Standard No. 213b (§571.213b) as applicable, instead of one of the required tether anchorages or child restraint anchorage systems.

(1) Each vehicle that does not have a rear designated seating position and does not have an air bag installed at front passenger designated seating positions pursuant to a temporary exemption granted by NHTSA under 49 CFR part 555, must have a child restraint anchorage system installed at a front passenger designated seating position. In the case of convertibles, the front designated passenger seating position need have only the two lower anchorages meeting the requirements of S9 of this standard.

(2) Each vehicle that has a rear designated seating position and meets the conditions in S4.5.4.1(b) of Standard No. 208 (§571.208), and does not have an air bag installed at front passenger designated seating positions pursuant to a temporary exemption granted by NHTSA under 49 CFR part 555, must have a child restraint anchorage system installed at a front passenger designated seating position in place of one of the child restraint anchorage systems that is required for the rear seat. In the case of convertibles, the front designated passenger seating position need have only the two lower anchorages meeting the requirements of S9 of this standard.

(d) A vehicle that does not have an air bag on-off switch meeting the requirements of S4.5.4 of Standard No. 208 (§571.208) shall not have any child restraint anchorage system installed at a front designated seating position.

(e) A vehicle with a rear designated seating position for which interference with transmission and/or suspension components prevents the location of the lower bars of a child restraint anchorage system anywhere within the zone described by S9.2 of this standard is excluded from the requirement to provide a child restraint anchorage system at that position. However, except as provided elsewhere in this S5, such a vehicle must have a tether anchorage at a front passenger designated seating position.

S5.2 Vehicles manufactured on or after September 1, 2031. (a) School buses are excluded from the requirements to be equipped with tether anchorages.

(b) A vehicle may be equipped with a built-in child restraint system conforming to the requirements of Standard No. 213b (§571.213b) instead of one of the required tether anchorages or child restraint anchorage systems.

(d) A vehicle that does not have an air bag on-off switch meeting the requirements of S4.5.4 of Standard No. 208 (§571.208), shall not have any child restraint anchorage system installed at a front designated seating position.

S6. Requirements for tether anchorages. Vehicles subject to Standard No. 225 (this section) shall meet the tether anchorage requirements specified in S6.1, S6.2, and S6.4 according to the phase-in schedule specified in S13 of this standard.

S6.1 Configuration of the tether anchorage.

S6.1.1 Each tether anchorage shall:

(a) Permit the attachment of a tether hook of a child restraint system meeting the configuration and geometry specified in figure 11 of Standard No. 213 (figure 11 to §571.213);

(b) Be accessible without the need for any tools other than a screwdriver or coin;

(d) Be sealed to prevent the entry of exhaust fumes into the passenger compartment.

S6.1.2 Each tether anchorage shall:

(a) Consist of a rigid bar of any cross-section shape that permits the attachment of a tether hook (of a child restraint system) meeting the configuration and geometry specified in figure 11 of Standard No. 213 (figure 11 to §571.213), except in buses with a GVWR less than or equal to 10,000 pounds and vehicles that use a routing device per S6.2.1.2;

(b) Be accessible without the need for any tools and without folding the seat back (other than the head restraint) or removing carpet or other vehicle components (other than cargo covers) to access the anchorages. Individual tether anchorages may be covered with a cap, flap, or cover, provided that any cap, flap, or, cover is specifically designed to be opened, moved aside, or to otherwise give unobstructed access to the anchorage and is labeled with the symbol shown in figure 25 to this section;

(d) Be sealed to prevent the entry of exhaust fumes into the passenger compartment.

S6.2 Location of the tether anchorage.

S6.2.1 Subject to S6.2.1.2, the part of each tether anchorage that attaches to a tether hook must be located within the shaded zone shown in figures 3 through 7 to this section of the designated seating position for which it is installed. The zone is defined with reference to the seating reference point (see §571.3). (For purposes of the figures, “H Point” is defined to mean seating reference point.) A tether anchorage may be recessed in the seat back, provided that it is not in the strap wrap-around area at the top of the vehicle seat back. For the area under the vehicle seat, the forwardmost edge of the shaded zone is defined by the torso line reference plane.

S6.2.1.1 [Reserved]

S6.2.1.2 In the case of a vehicle that—

(a) Has a user-ready tether anchorage for which no part of the shaded zone shown in Figures 3 to 7 of this standard of the designated seating position for which the anchorage is installed is accessible without removing a seating component of the vehicle; and

(b) Has a tether strap routing device that is—

(1) Not less than 65 mm behind the torso line for that seating position, in the case of a flexible routing device or a deployable routing device, measured horizontally and in a vertical longitudinal plane; or

(2) Not less than 100 mm behind the torso line for that seating position, in the case of a fixed rigid routing device, measured horizontally and in a vertical longitudinal plane, the part of that anchorage that attaches to a tether hook may, at the manufacturer's option (with said option selected prior to, or at the time of, certification of the vehicle) be located outside that zone.

(c) The measurement of the location of the flexible or deployable routing device described in S6.2.1.2(b)(1) is made with SFAD 2 properly attached to the lower anchorages. A 40 mm wide nylon tether strap is routed through the routing device and attached to the tether anchorage in accordance with the written instructions required by S12 of this standard. The forwardmost contact point between the strap and the routing device must be within the stated limit when the tether strap is flat against the top surface of the SFAD and tensioned to 55 to 65 N. In seating positions without lower anchorages of a child restraint anchorage system, the SFAD 2 is held with its central lateral plane in the central vertical longitudinal plane of the seating position. The adjustable anchor attaching bars of the SFAD 2 are replaced by spacers that end flush with the back surface of the SFAD.

S6.2.2 Subject to S6.2.2.2, the part of each tether anchorage to which a tether hook attaches must be located within the shaded zone shown in figures 3 through 7 to this section of the designated seating position for which it is installed. The zone is defined with reference to the seating reference point (see §571.3). (For purposes of the figures, “H Point” means seating reference point.) A tether anchorage may be recessed in the seat back, provided that it is not in the strap wrap-around area at the top of the vehicle seat back. For the area under the vehicle seat, the forwardmost edge of the shaded zone is defined by a vertical plane 120 mm rearward of the “H Point,” as shown in figure 3 to this section.

S6.2.2.1 Subject to S6.2.2.2, for vehicles with adjustable or removable head restraints or no head restraints, the tether anchorage to which a tether hook attaches must be located outside the zone created by a 325 mm radius sphere with its center on the R-point and truncated horizontally at 230 mm below the sphere's center as shown in figures 8 and 9 to this section.

S6.2.2.2 In the case of a vehicle that—

(a) Has a user-ready tether anchorage for which no part of the shaded zone shown in figures 4 through 7 and 10 to this section of the designated seating position for which the anchorage is installed is accessible without the need for folding the seatback (other than the head restraint) or removing a seating component of the vehicle; and

(b) Has a tether strap routing device that is—

(c) The measurement of the location of the flexible or deployable routing device described in S6.2.2.2(b)(1) is made with SFAD 2 properly attached to the lower anchorages. A 40 mm wide nylon tether strap is routed through the routing device and attached to the tether anchorage in accordance with the written instructions required by S12 of this standard. The forwardmost contact point between the strap and the routing device must be within the stated limit when the tether strap is flat against the top surface of the SFAD and tensioned to 55 to 65 N. In seating positions without lower anchorages of a child restraint anchorage system, the SFAD 2 is held with its central lateral plane in the central vertical longitudinal plane of the seating position. The adjustable anchorage attaching bars of the SFAD 2 are replaced by spacers that end flush with the back surface of the SFAD 2.

S6.3 Strength requirements for tether anchorages. (a) When tested in accordance with S8, the tether anchorage must not separate completely from the vehicle seat or seat anchorage or the structure of the vehicle.

(b) Provisions for simultaneous and sequential testing:

(1) In the case of vehicle seat assemblies equipped with more than one tether anchorage, the force referred to in this S6.3 may, at the agency's option, be applied simultaneously to each of those tether anchorages. However, that force may not be applied simultaneously to tether anchorages for any two adjacent seating positions whose midpoints are less than 400 mm apart, as measured in accordance with S6.3(b)(i) and (ii) and figure 20 to this section.

(i) The midpoint of the seating position lies in the vertical longitudinal plane that is equidistant from vertical longitudinal planes through the geometric center of each of the two lower anchorages at the seating position. For those seating positions that do not provide lower anchorages, the midpoint of the seating position lies in the vertical longitudinal plane that passes through the SgRP of the seating position.

(ii) Measure the distance between the vertical longitudinal planes passing through the midpoints of the adjacent seating positions, as measured along a line perpendicular to the planes.

(2) A tether anchorage of a particular child restraint anchorage system will not be tested with the lower anchorages of that anchorage system if one or both of those lower anchorages have been previously tested under this standard.

S6.4 Marking and conspicuity requirements for tether anchorages. Vehicles subject to Standard No. 225 (this section) shall meet S6.4 according to the phase-in schedule specified in S13 of this standard.

(a) For each tether anchorage installed pursuant to S4 of this standard, there shall be a permanent marking that:

(1) Consists of one of the pictograms shown in figure 25 to this section that is not less than 20 mm in height;

(2) Except for vehicles that use a routing device per S6.2.2.2, the center of the pictogram in the longitudinal direction must be in the vertical longitudinal plane that passes through the center of the tether anchorage bar (± half of the tether anchorage length), as shown in figure 26 (Left) to this section; or the center of the pictogram in the lateral direction must be in the horizontal lateral plane that passes through the center of the tether anchorage bar (± half of the pictogram height), as shown in figure 26 (right) to this section.

(3) The nearest edge of the marking shall be located not more than 100 mm away from the tether anchorage bar as shown in figure 27 to this section. No other attachment feature to secure occupant items (i.e., cargo hooks or similar) shall be nearer to the marking than the distance from the marking to the tether anchorage. Vehicles with routing devices per S6.2.2.2 may use tags attached to the routing device.

(b) The tether anchorage bar may be covered by a cap or cover that is removable without the use of any tool, provided that the cap or cover is permanently labeled with a marking meeting the requirements of S6.4(a)(1). If the cap or cover is permanently attached to the vehicle, the tether anchorage is not required to be separately marked. If the cap or cover is not permanently attached to the vehicle, the tether anchorage must also be marked with the symbol meeting S6.4(a)(1) through (3).

(c) For vehicles that have a cargo cover that needs to be moved or removed to access the tether anchorages, the cargo cover must be permanently marked with the symbol meeting S6.4.1(a)(1) of this standard for each tether anchorage that is accessible under the cargo cover. Tether anchorages under the cargo cover must also be marked per S6.4(a).

* * * *

S8 Test procedures. Each vehicle shall meet the requirements of S6.3 when tested according to the following procedures. * * *

S8.1 Apply the force specified in S6.3 as follows—

* * * * *

S9. Requirements for the lower anchorages of the child restraint anchorage system. Vehicles subject to Standard No. 225 (this section) shall meet the lower anchorage requirements specified in S9.2 and S9.5 according to the phase-in schedule specified in S13 of this standard.

S9.1 Configuration of the lower anchorages

S9.1.1 * * *

(d) The bars must not be capable of being stowable or foldable.

* * * *

S9.2 Location of the lower anchorages.

* * * *

S9.5 Marking and conspicuity requirements.

S9.5.1 Requirements for lower anchors. Lower anchorages must meet the requirements in S9.5.1(a) or (b).

(a) For each bar installed pursuant to S4, the vehicle shall be permanently marked with a circle:

(1) That is not less than 13 mm in diameter;

(2) That is either solid or open, with or without words, symbols, or pictograms, provided that if words, symbols or pictograms are used, their meaning is explained to the consumer in writing, such as in the vehicle's owner's manual; and

(3) That is located such that its center is on each seat back between 50 and 100 mm above or on the seat cushion 100 ±25 mm forward of the intersection of the vertical transverse and horizontal longitudinal planes intersecting at the horizontal centerline of each lower anchorage, as illustrated in figure 22 to this section. The center of the circle must be in the vertical longitudinal plane that passes through the center of the bar (±25 mm).

(4) The circle may be on a tag.

(b) The vehicle shall be configured such that the following is visible: Each of the bars installed pursuant to S4, or a permanently attached guide device for each bar. The bar or guide device must be visible without the compression of the seat cushion or seat back, when the bar or device is viewed, in a vertical longitudinal plane passing through the center of the bar or guide device, along a line making an upward 30-degree angle with a horizontal plane. Seat backs are in the nominal design riding position. The bars may be covered by a removable cap or cover, provided that the cap or cover is permanently marked with words, symbols or pictograms whose meaning is explained to the consumer in written form as part of the owner's manual.

S9.5.2 Requirements for lower anchors. Lower anchorages must meet the requirements in S9.5.2(a) and (b), as applicable.

(a) For each bar installed pursuant to S4, the vehicle shall be permanently marked with a symbol that:

(1) Is not less than 13 mm in diameter;

(2) Contains the pictogram shown in figure 24 to this section; and

(3) Is located such that its center is on each seat back between 50 and 100 mm above or on the seat cushion between 100 to −50 mm forward of the intersection of the vertical transverse and horizontal longitudinal planes intersecting at the horizontal centerline of each lower anchorage, as illustrated in figure 19 to this section. The center of the symbol must be in the vertical longitudinal plane that passes through the center of the bar (±25 mm).

(4) The symbol may be on a tag.

(b) The bars may be covered by a removable cap or cover, provided that the cap or cover is permanently marked with the pictogram shown in figure 24 to this section. If the cap or cover is permanently attached to the vehicle, the lower anchorage bars are not required to be separately marked with the pictogram. If the cap or cover is not permanently attached to the vehicle, the lower anchorage bars must also be marked with the symbol meeting S9.5.2(a)(1) through (4).

* * * *

S11. Test procedures. Each vehicle shall meet the requirements of this standard when tested according to the following procedures. Where a range of values is specified, the vehicle shall be able to meet the requirements at all points within the range.

(a) Strength requirements —(1) Forward force direction. Place SFAD 2 in the vehicle seating position and attach it to the two lower anchorages of the child restraint anchorage system. Do not attach the tether anchorage. A rearward horizontal force of 135 ±15 N is applied to the center of the lower front crossbar of SFAD 2 to press the device against the seat back as the fore-aft position of the rearward extensions of the SFAD is adjusted to remove any slack or tension. Apply a preload force of 500 N horizontally and in the vertical centerline of the SFAD 2 at point X. Increase the pull force as linearly as practicable to a full force application of 11,000 N in not less than 24 seconds and not more than 30 seconds and maintain at an 11,000 N level for 1 second.

(2) Lateral force direction. Place SFAD 2 in the vehicle seating position and attach it to the two lower anchorages of the child restraint anchorage system. Do not attach the tether anchorage. A rearward force of 135 ±15 N is applied to the center of the lower front crossbar of SFAD 2 to press the device against the seat back as the fore-aft position of the rearward extensions of the SFAD is adjusted to remove any slack or tension. Apply a preload force of 500 N horizontal and perpendicular to the longitudinal centerline of the SFAD 2 at point X of the test device. Increase the pull force as linearly as practicable to a full force application of 5,000 N in not less than 24 seconds and not more than 30 seconds and maintain at a 5,000 N level for 1 second.

(b) Clearance angle. The seat back angle, if adjustable, is set at the manufacturer's nominal design seat back angle. If the position is not specified, set the seat back at the first detent rearward of 25° from the vertical. Remove or open any lower anchorage cover, if present, to expose the lower anchorage. To measure clearance angle, attach the clearance angle tool to the lower anchorage and apply a vertical force of 67 N (15 lbf) to the tool. Measure the angle (with respect to the horizontal) of the tool while the force is being applied.

(c) Anchorage depth. The seat back angle, if adjustable, is set at the manufacturer's nominal design seat back angle. If the position is not specified, set the seat back at the first detent rearward of 25° from the vertical. To measure the anchorage depth, subtract 30 degrees from the measured seat pan angle to calculate the view angle. With the anchorage depth tool ( see figure 28 to this section) on a flat surface, adjust the view bar to read the view angle. Slide the zeroing strip along the view bar so that it is barely touching the top of the depth tool hook. Move the view bar forward, so the end of the zeroing strip is aligned with the zero-scribe line. For hidden anchorages, slide the anchorage depth tool so that it reads 0 mm at the rear edge of the slider. For visible anchorages, align the depth gauge to 25 mm so that negative values can be read. Attach the depth tool centered to the lower anchorage. Adjust the depth tool base to be within ±2 degrees of the view angle (30 degrees minus seat pan angle) to set the tool-parallel to the seat pan angle. Move the entire slider bar forward until the zeroing strip contacts the vehicle seat back or any other vehicle part.

S12. Written instructions. Vehicles subject to Standard No. 225 (this section) shall meet the written instruction requirements specified in either S12.1 or S12.2 according to the phase-in schedule specified in S13.

S12.1 Written instructions shall:

(a) Indicate which seating positions in the vehicle are equipped with tether anchorages and child restraint anchorage systems;

(b) In the case of vehicles required to be marked as specified in paragraphs S4.1 and S9.5 of this standard, explain the meaning of markings provided to locate the lower anchorages of child restraint anchorage systems; and

(c) Include instructions that provide a step-by-step procedure, including diagrams, for properly attaching a child restraint system's tether strap to the tether anchorages.

S12.2 Written instructions shall:

(a) Indicate which seating positions in the vehicle are equipped with tether anchorages and child restraint anchorage systems;

(c) Include instructions that provide a step-by-step procedure, including diagrams, for properly attaching a child restraint system's tether strap to the tether anchorages;

(d) Include instructions on how to locate and access the tether anchorage and the lower anchorages; and

(e) Use the following terms when referring to the different components of the child restraint anchorage system that are used to connect the child restraint system to the vehicle: “lower anchor” means the lower anchorage of the child restraint anchorage system in the vehicle, “tether anchor” means the top tether anchorage of the child restraint anchorage system in the vehicle, “lower anchor attachment” means the child restraint system or the detachable base's (in the case of a rear-facing child restraint with a detachable base) lower anchorage connector and the lower anchorage strap (for flexible lower anchorage attachments), “rigid lower anchor attachment” means the child restraint system or the detachable base's (in the case of a rear-facing child restraint with a detachable base) lower anchorage connector that is rigidly attached to the CRS or detachable base, respectively, and does not have a lower anchorage strap, and “tether” means the child restraints system's tether hook and tether strap.

S13 Phase-in schedule. The S13 phase in schedule details when listed requirements become inactive and are replaced by newer requirements. Requirements in Standard No. 225 (this section) not listed in S13 shall be in effect before, during, and after the S13 phase-in.

S13.1 Vehicle certification information. At any time during the production years ending August 31, 2029, and August 31, 2030, each manufacturer shall, upon request from the Office of Vehicle Safety Compliance, provide information identifying the vehicles (by make, model and vehicle identification number) that have been certified as complying with the child restraint anchorage usability requirements of this standard. Manufacturers shall specify the number of vehicles meeting each phase-in percentage. The manufacturer's designation of a vehicle as a certified vehicle is irrevocable.

S13.1.1 Pre phase-in. Vehicles manufactured before September 1, 2028, are subject to S6.1.1, S6.2.1, S9.2.1, S9.2.2, S9.2.3, S9.5.1, and S12.1 of this standard.

S13.1.2 Phase-in year 1. Vehicles manufactured on or after September 1, 2028, and before September 1, 2029. The total number of individual vehicles complying with S6.1.2, S6.2.2, S6.4, S9.2 (except for S9.2.2(a)), S9.5.2, and S12.2 of this standard shall be not less than 20 percent of a vehicle manufacturer's total production for this time period. The remaining 80 percent of a vehicle manufacturer's total production are subject to S6.1.1, S6.2.1, S9.2.1, S9.2.2, S9.2.3, S9.5.1, and S12.1 of this standard.

S13.1.3 Phase-in year 2. Vehicles manufactured on or after September 1, 2029, and before September 1, 2030. The total number of individual vehicles complying with S6.1.2, S6.2.2, S6.4, S9.2 (except for S9.2.2(a)), S9.5.2, and S12.2 of this standard shall be not less than 50 percent of a vehicle manufacturer's total production for this time period. The remaining 50 percent of a vehicle manufacturer's total production are subject to S6.1.1, S6.2.1, S9.2.1, S9.2.2, S9.2.3, S9.5.1, and S12.1 of this standard.

S13.1.4 Phase-in year 3 and beyond. Vehicles manufactured on or after September 1, 2030. The total number of vehicles complying with S6.1.2, S6.2.2, S6.4, S9.2 (except for S9.2.2(a)), S9.5.2, and S12.2 shall be not less than 100 percent of a vehicle manufacturer's total production.

S13.2 Vehicles produced by more than one manufacturer.

S13.2.1 For the purpose of calculating average annual production of vehicles for each manufacturer and the number of vehicles manufactured by each manufacturer under S13.1.1 through S13.1.4, a vehicle produced by more than one manufacturer shall be attributed to a single manufacturer as follows:

(a) A vehicle which is imported shall be attributed to the importer.

(b) A vehicle manufactured in the United States by more than one manufacturer, one of which also markets the vehicle, shall be attributed to the manufacturer which markets the vehicle.

S13.2.2 A vehicle produced by more than one manufacturer shall be attributed to any one of the vehicle's manufacturers specified by an express written contract, reported to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration under 49 CFR part 585, between the manufacturers so specified and the manufacturer to which the vehicle would otherwise be attributed under S13.2.1.

Figures to §571.225

* * * * *

Figure 8 to §571.225. Side View of 325 mm Radius Sphere Zone From R-Point, Truncated at 230 mm Below the Center

Figure 9 to §571.225. Three-Dimensional 325 mm Radius Sphere Zone From R-Point, Truncated Along the Lower Edge at 230 mm Below Its Center

Figure 10 to §571.225—Side View. User Ready Tether Anchorage Location

* * * *

Figure 19 to §571.225. Placement of Symbol on the Seat Back and Seat Cushion of Vehicle

DATES:

Effective date: March 20, 2025.

IBR date: The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in the rule is approved by the Director of the Federal Register beginning March 10, 2025.

Reconsideration date: If you wish to petition for reconsideration of this rule, your petition must be received by February 21, 2025.

Published in the Federal Register January 7, 2025, page 1288.

View final rule.

§571.5 Matter incorporated by reference.
(k)(10)-(11)	Added	View text
§571.213b Child restraint systems; Mandatory applicability beginning December 5, 2026.
S5.5.2(j)	Revised	View text
S5.6.1.13 and S5.6.1.14	Added	View text
S5.9(a) through (c)	Revised	View text
Figures 15 and 16	Added	View text
§571.225 Child restraint anchorage systems.
S4.2	Revised	View text
S4.3-S4.6	Redesignated, revised	View text
S5 and S6	Revised	View text
S8 introductory text and S8.1 introductory text	Revised	View text
S8.2	Removed and reserved	View text
S9 introductory text, S9.1.1(d) and S9.2	Revised	View text
S9.2.4 and S9.2.5	Added	View text
S9.5	Revised	View text
S11, S12, and S13	Revised	View text
S14, S15, and S16	Removed	View text
Figures 8, 9, 10, and 19	Revised	View text
Figure 11	Removed and reserved	View text
Figures 23 through 28	Added	View text

New Text

§571.213b Child restraint systems; Mandatory applicability beginning December 5, 2026.

* * * *

S5.5.2(j) In the case of each child restraint system equipped with a tether strap the statement: Secure the tether strap provided with this child restraint.

* * * *

§571.225 Child restraint anchorage systems.

* * * *

S4.2 Vehicles shall be equipped as specified in paragraphs S4.2(a) through (c), except as provided in S5 of this standard.

(a) Each vehicle with three or more forward-facing rear designated seating positions shall be equipped as specified in S4.2(a)(1) and (2).

* * * *

S5 General exceptions. Vehicles manufactured before September 1, 2031, must meet the requirements of S5.1. Vehicles manufactured on or after September 1, 2031, must meet the requirements of S5.2.

S5.1 Vehicles manufactured before September 1, 2031. (a) Convertibles and school buses are excluded from the requirements to be equipped with tether anchorages.

S5.2 Vehicles manufactured on or after September 1, 2031. (a) School buses are excluded from the requirements to be equipped with tether anchorages.

S6.1 Configuration of the tether anchorage.

S6.1.1 Each tether anchorage shall:

(a) Permit the attachment of a tether hook of a child restraint system meeting the configuration and geometry specified in figure 11 of Standard No. 213 (figure 11 to §571.213);

(b) Be accessible without the need for any tools other than a screwdriver or coin;

(d) Be sealed to prevent the entry of exhaust fumes into the passenger compartment.

S6.1.2 Each tether anchorage shall:

(d) Be sealed to prevent the entry of exhaust fumes into the passenger compartment.

S6.2 Location of the tether anchorage.

S6.2.1.1 [Reserved]

S6.2.1.2 In the case of a vehicle that—

(b) Has a tether strap routing device that is—

S6.2.2.2 In the case of a vehicle that—

(b) Has a tether strap routing device that is—

(b) Provisions for simultaneous and sequential testing:

(ii) Measure the distance between the vertical longitudinal planes passing through the midpoints of the adjacent seating positions, as measured along a line perpendicular to the planes.

(a) For each tether anchorage installed pursuant to S4 of this standard, there shall be a permanent marking that:

(1) Consists of one of the pictograms shown in figure 25 to this section that is not less than 20 mm in height;

* * * *

S8 Test procedures. Each vehicle shall meet the requirements of S6.3 when tested according to the following procedures. * * *

S8.1 Apply the force specified in S6.3 as follows—

* * * * *

S9.1 Configuration of the lower anchorages

S9.1.1 * * *

(d) The bars must not be capable of being stowable or foldable.

* * * *

S9.2 Location of the lower anchorages.

* * * *

S9.5 Marking and conspicuity requirements.

S9.5.1 Requirements for lower anchors. Lower anchorages must meet the requirements in S9.5.1(a) or (b).

(a) For each bar installed pursuant to S4, the vehicle shall be permanently marked with a circle:

(1) That is not less than 13 mm in diameter;

(4) The circle may be on a tag.

S9.5.2 Requirements for lower anchors. Lower anchorages must meet the requirements in S9.5.2(a) and (b), as applicable.

(a) For each bar installed pursuant to S4, the vehicle shall be permanently marked with a symbol that:

(1) Is not less than 13 mm in diameter;

(2) Contains the pictogram shown in figure 24 to this section; and

(4) The symbol may be on a tag.

* * * *

S12.1 Written instructions shall:

(a) Indicate which seating positions in the vehicle are equipped with tether anchorages and child restraint anchorage systems;

(c) Include instructions that provide a step-by-step procedure, including diagrams, for properly attaching a child restraint system's tether strap to the tether anchorages.

S12.2 Written instructions shall:

(a) Indicate which seating positions in the vehicle are equipped with tether anchorages and child restraint anchorage systems;

(c) Include instructions that provide a step-by-step procedure, including diagrams, for properly attaching a child restraint system's tether strap to the tether anchorages;

(d) Include instructions on how to locate and access the tether anchorage and the lower anchorages; and

S13.1.1 Pre phase-in. Vehicles manufactured before September 1, 2028, are subject to S6.1.1, S6.2.1, S9.2.1, S9.2.2, S9.2.3, S9.5.1, and S12.1 of this standard.

S13.2 Vehicles produced by more than one manufacturer.

(a) A vehicle which is imported shall be attributed to the importer.

(b) A vehicle manufactured in the United States by more than one manufacturer, one of which also markets the vehicle, shall be attributed to the manufacturer which markets the vehicle.

Figures to §571.225

* * * * *

Figure 8 to §571.225. Side View of 325 mm Radius Sphere Zone From R-Point, Truncated at 230 mm Below the Center

Figure 9 to §571.225. Three-Dimensional 325 mm Radius Sphere Zone From R-Point, Truncated Along the Lower Edge at 230 mm Below Its Center

Figure 10 to §571.225—Side View. User Ready Tether Anchorage Location

* * * *

Figure 19 to §571.225. Placement of Symbol on the Seat Back and Seat Cushion of Vehicle

RELATED NEWS

        SAFETY & COMPLIANCE NEWS
    
Keep up with the latest regulatory developments from OSHA, DOT, EPA, DOL, and more.
GET FREE ARTICLES

        REGSENSE® REGULATORY REFERENCE
    
Explore a comprehensive database of word-for-word regulations on a wide range of compliance topics, with simplified explanations and best practices advice from our experts.
BROWSE BY TOPIC

        THE J. J. KELLER INSTITUTE
    
The Institute is your destination for in-depth content on 120+ compliance subjects. Discover articles, videos, and interactive exercises that will strengthen your understanding of regulatory concepts relevant to your business.  
BECOME AN EXPERT

        ADD HAZMAT, ENVIRONMENTAL, & HR RESOURCES
    
Unlock exclusive content offering expert insights into hazmat, environmental, and human resources compliance with a COMPLIANCE NETWORK EDGE membership.
ACCESS PREMIUM CONTENT

        DIRECT ACCESS TO COMPLIANCE EXPERTS
    
Struggling with a compliance challenge? Get the solution from our in-house team of experts! You can submit a question to our experts by email, set up a phone or video call, or request a detailed research report.
CONTACT AN EXPERT

        EVENTS
    
Register to attend live online events hosted by our experts. These webcasts and virtual conferences feature engaging discussions on important compliance topics in a casual, knowledge-sharing environment.
SEE UPCOMING EVENTS

Most Recent Highlights In Environmental

EHS Monthly Round Up - January 2023

In this monthly roundup video, we’ll review the most impactful environmental, safety, and health news.

Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental, safety, and health news. First, let’s take a look at what’s happening in safety and health.

If you haven’t already done so, now is the time to post your OSHA 300A Summary. Employers are required to post the Summary in a conspicuous place from February 1st through April 30th.

As required by law, OSHA increased its penalties for inflation in mid-January. Penalties went up 7.7 percent, effective January 17th.

Also in January, OSHA released its long-awaited Fall 2022 regulatory agenda. Along with numerous proposed rules in the works, three major final rules are slated for 2023 – COVID-19 in healthcare, Injury and Illness tracking, and an update to the hazard communication standard.

OSHA recently released two new letters of interpretation, which address exit signs and lockout/tagout. Specifically, OSHA states that the International Standards Organization emergency exit symbol can be located beside the mandatory EXIT text on an existing sign.

The second letter addresses the applicability of lockout/tagout and the maintenance and operations of cathodic protection rectifiers when working on pipelines.

New York’s Warehouse Worker Protection Act was signed into law in December and takes effect in late February. It protects warehouse distribution workers from undisclosed or unlawful work speed quotas and includes protections for workers who fail to meet these quotas.

In 2021, a worker died every 101 minutes from a work-related injury, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. A total of 5,190 fatal work injuries was recorded in the U.S. in 2021, an 8.9 percent increase over 2020.

Turning to environmental news, EPA automatically added nine per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, to the Toxics Release Inventory, or TRI, list. Four PFAS were added since they are no longer claimed as confidential business information.

EPA released its Fall 2022 regulatory agenda in early January. Included are major regulations impacting the National Ambient Air Quality Standards, waters of the United States, and modifications to the Risk Management Program under the Clean Air Act.

There are also a number of rules related to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants in various rule stages.

And finally, beginning with model year 2027, heavy-duty trucks will be required to meet clean air standards that are 80 percent more stringent than current requirements.

EPA says this final rule is aimed at reducing smog- and soot-forming emissions, increasing the life of governed vehicles by up to 250 percent, and increasing emissions warranty periods up to 450 percent.

Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup!

2026-10-20T05:00:00Z

Hawaii overhauls solid waste landfill regulations

Effective date: September 25, 2026

This applies to: Facilities that manage solid waste

Description of change: The State of Hawaii Department of Health made the first major update to the solid waste management control regulations in decades. The amended regulations:

Increase flexibility for small municipal solid waste landfills (MSWLFs),
Revise siting restrictions for MSWLFs,
Add requirements for construction and demolition landfills and special waste landfills,
Add leachate control and closure requirements for all solid waste management facilities,
Require auto processing and salvaging on an impervious surface, and
Update the solid waste permitting program.

Examples of significant changes include:

Adding requirements for facilities that manage solid waste (except landfills), such as leachate control for all facilities and use of impervious working surfaces for solid waste salvage facilities;
Updating MSWLF requirements (such as requiring compliance with the federal maximum contaminant level or state level (whichever is lower) for groundwater contaminants); and
Adding new requirements for construction and demolition landfills.

2026-10-20T05:00:00Z

North Dakota adopts permanent septic system rules

Effective date: October 1, 2026

This applies to: The licensing, permitting, and installation of on-site wastewater treatment systems (septic systems)

Description of change: The North Dakota Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) finalized permanent rules for on-site wastewater treatment systems (septic systems). The final rule establishes statewide licensing requirements, a common technical code, and a process for variances from the code.

Senate Bill 2267 shifted responsibility for regulating septic systems to the DEQ. The department issued an emergency rule in 2025 to continue existing licenses. This rulemaking finalizes:

Licensing requirements for septic system installers,
Training requirements for licensed septic system installers,
Permit requirements (permits will continue to be issued by the local permitting authority), and
Technical requirements (which closely align with the existing voluntary common code previously developed).

2026-10-20T05:00:00Z

Ohio establishes CCR regulations

Effective date: October 1, 2026

This applies to: Owners and operators of coal combustion residuals (CCR) landfills and surface impoundments

Description of change: The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) adopted regulations for CCR generated by electric utilities and disposed of in dedicated landfills and surface impoundments. The new rules partially implement the federal CCR regulations (40 CFR Part 257 Subpart D). They also contain state-specific provisions (OAC Chapter 3745-525) for requirements related to CCR permits to install and financial assurance for landfills previously regulated by OAC Chapter 3745-30.

The Ohio EPA plans to apply for partial approval to implement the CCR program in place of EPA.

2026-10-20T05:00:00Z

Texas adopts financial assurance rules for recycling facilities

Effective date: October 1, 2026

This applies to: Recycling facilities that accept, process, and repurpose renewable energy components

Description of change: The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)’s final rule adds 30 TAC Chapter 376 (and amends Chapter 328 accordingly) to establish new requirements for recycling facilities that accept, process, and repurpose renewable energy components for recovering valuable materials from:

Wind turbine generators,
Solar energy devices, and
Battery energy storage systems.

The new rule adds reporting, financial assurance, and penalty requirements. For example, the regulation requires recycling facilities to submit annual reports by January 15 that include:

An inventory of unrecycled renewable energy components,
An estimated timeline to recycle them,
A cost estimate for recycling or disposing of the materials prepared by a third-party Texas-licensed professional engineer, and
Evidence of financial assurance for the cost estimate.

Most Recent Highlights In Transportation

2026-10-20T05:00:00Z

California amends vehicle regulations

Effective date: September 10, 2026

This applies to: Public agency utilities, high-priority fleets, and drayer trucks subject to the Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF) regulation and hydrogen refueling stations subject to the Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) regulation

Description of change: The California Air Resources Board (CARB) amended the ACF’s state and local government requirements. CARB’s final rule:

Extends the 50 percent zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) purchase requirement to January 1, 2030;
Modifies the Daily Usage Exemption and the ZEV Purchase Exemption to allow all vehicles of all model years to be eligible for consideration;
Adds an exemption under the ZEV Milestones Option for captive waste and wastewater fleets that produce biomethane on-site;
Expands the ZEV Purchase Exemption availability criteria to ensure minimum ZEV warranty requirements and manufacturer experience or reliability and streamlines the exemption process;
Modifies the Fleet Resiliency Exemption by lowering the ZEV penetration threshold from 25 to 5 percent of the fleet where it stays and expands eligibility to all vehicle types; and
Repeals sections of the ACF regulation for high-priority fleets and drayer trucks (these regulations were never implemented because CARB didn’t have a federal preemption waiver to enforce them).

CARB also amended the LCFS regulation, modifying the derating factors for light- and medium-duty hydrogen refueling infrastructure (LMD-HRI) crediting. CARB reduced the derating factor so that LMD-HRI stations may receive HRI credits for the full nameplate capacity for public stations and 50 percent of the nameplate capacity for private stations.

2026-10-20T05:00:00Z

EPA proposes reallocating excess 2025 SREs to 2026, 2027

On October 16, 2026, EPA published a rule proposing to revise the Small Refinery Exemption (SRE) reallocation volumes for compliance years 2026 and 2027 under the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) program.

Who’s impacted?

The RFS program applies to obligated parties, including:

Refiners of gasoline or diesel fuel (i.e., transportation fuel); and
Importers of transportation fuel.

EPA sets annual renewable fuel volume and percentage standards for each compliance year. Obligated parties must calculate their individual renewable volume obligations (RVOs), measured in Renewable Identification Numbers (RINs), and obtain and retire enough RINs to meet their RVOs for each compliance year.

What’s the issue?

In April 2026, EPA established the annual volume and percentage standards for the 2026 and 2027 compliance years (Set 2 Rule), including reallocating part of the SREs granted and expected to be granted for the 2023–2025 compliance years.

However, EPA granted a higher volume of SREs for the 2025 compliance year than expected, exempting 770 million more RINs than the Set 2 Rule projected for the 2026 and 2027 compliance years. The agency plans to revise the Set 2 Rule to account for the additional SRE reallocation volume.

What’s the proposed solution?

EPA proposes reallocating 100 percent of the additional 770 million RINs by reallocating the additional 2025 exempted RVO either:

Equally between the 2026 and 2027 compliance years, or
Fully to the 2027 compliance year.

The proposed rule would adjust the renewable volume and percentage standards for biomass-based diesel, advanced biofuel, and total renewable fuel. The Set 2 Rule didn’t establish SRE reallocation volumes for cellulosic biofuel.

Additionally, the proposed rule may extend the current 2026 compliance reporting deadline of March 31, 2027.

EPA will host a virtual public hearing for the proposed rule on November 4, 2026. Public comments on the rule are due by December 4, 2026 (Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2024-0505).

Key to remember: EPA proposes to reallocate the excess 2025 small refinery exemption volumes to the 2026 and 2027 compliance years.

2026-10-16T05:00:00Z

When one activity triggers multiple environmental obligations

Environmental compliance programs are often managed separately. Air permitting, hazardous waste, stormwater, emergency planning, and chemical reporting frequently involve different personnel, regulations, and procedures.

The challenge is that facilities do not operate that way. They operate processes, and those processes rarely fit neatly within a single regulatory category.

A company rarely decides to implement an "air program change" or a "hazardous waste change." Instead, it purchases a new solvent, installs a fuel tank, modifies a manufacturing process, or adds new equipment. A single operational decision can affect multiple environmental compliance programs at the same time. When organizations evaluate changes through only one regulatory lens, they risk overlooking obligations that arise elsewhere.

The following examples illustrate how one product, process, or activity can trigger requirements across several environmental programs.

Switching to a new paint or solvent

A facility may decide to replace an existing paint, coating, or solvent to improve product quality, address supply chain challenges, or reduce costs. Before making the switch, environmental professionals should consider how the change could affect multiple compliance obligations.

A new paint or solvent may contain a different concentration of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), affecting air emission calculations, permit applicability, or recordkeeping requirements. Spent materials, contaminated wipes, absorbents, and cleanup residues may require a new hazardous waste determination. Depending on the chemical composition and quantities involved, the material could also affect Tier II inventory reporting or Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) reporting obligations.

What appears to be a straightforward purchasing decision can ultimately affect air compliance, waste management, and chemical reporting programs.

Installing a diesel fuel storage tank

Organizations often add fuel storage to support emergency generators, fleet operations, or business continuity initiatives. While the project may be viewed primarily as an operational improvement, it can create environmental obligations in several areas.

The tank may count toward Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) applicability thresholds. Fuel storage can also increase stormwater pollution risks, requiring updates to inspection procedures, pollution prevention controls, or employee training. Secondary containment requirements, spill response procedures, and release reporting obligations may also need review.

A project initially viewed as a facilities improvement may affect spill prevention, stormwater management, and emergency preparedness responsibilities.

Managing aerosol cans

Aerosol cans are commonly used throughout facilities for maintenance, cleaning, lubrication, painting, and other routine activities. Their widespread use can cause organizations to overlook their broader compliance implications.

Depending on how they are managed, discarded aerosol cans may qualify for the federal universal waste regulations. If cans are punctured and processed for recycling, facilities must also consider hazardous waste management requirements, employee training, and potential air emission concerns associated with puncturing operations. Likewise, storage practices, container management, and recordkeeping procedures should be evaluated.

Because aerosol cans intersect with waste management, recycling, and air concerns, they demonstrate how a routine maintenance activity can involve multiple regulatory programs.

Adding a refrigeration process

Expanding refrigerated storage capacity or installing a new industrial refrigeration process may seem like a project driven by production needs. However, depending on the refrigerant used and the quantity stored onsite, the environmental and safety implications can extend well beyond equipment installation.

Certain refrigerants may be subject to leak management and repair, servicing, recovery, and recordkeeping requirements. Depending on the substance and quantity stored onsite, facilities may also trigger Tier II or Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) reporting obligations.

For facilities using substances such as anhydrous ammonia, increasing refrigerant inventories may have even broader consequences. Exceeding regulatory thresholds could trigger EPA Risk Management Program (RMP) requirements and OSHA Process Safety Management (PSM) obligations, adding responsibilities related to process hazard analyses, operating procedures, employee training, emergency planning, mechanical integrity, and management of change.

The project may also require updates to emergency response procedures, hazard communication programs, and chemical inventory management processes. As a result, a decision driven by production or storage needs may affect environmental reporting, accident prevention, emergency preparedness, and process safety requirements across the facility.

Looking beyond program boundaries

Environmental regulations are often organized by media, program, or statute. Facilities, however, operate through products, equipment, and processes. Because of this difference in perspective, a single operational change can have consequences that reach far beyond its original purpose.

Organizations that routinely evaluate projects through multiple compliance lenses are often better positioned to identify environmental obligations before they become compliance issues. Asking how a new product, process, equipment installation, or operational change might affect air, waste, water, chemical reporting, spill prevention, emergency planning, or process safety requirements can help reduce surprises and support more effective compliance management.

Key to remember: Environmental compliance obligations rarely exist in isolation. Before implementing a new product, process, or operational change, consider how it may affect multiple environmental programs, not just the one most directly associated with the project.

2026-10-16T05:00:00Z

Court vacates EPA’s methylene chloride rule: How should facilities respond?

When a court overturns an environmental regulation, it can be tempting to adopt an “all bets are off” approach and stop efforts to comply with the rule. However, facilities that continue to operate as if the rule still applies are better prepared to meet any future rulemaking that’s likely to occur. On September 15, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated EPA’s methylene chloride risk management rule established under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and remanded it back to the federal agency for further proceedings. EPA must restart the rulemaking process for methylene chloride.

Here’s what you need to know about the ruling and how your facility can respond to “hedge its bets” against future environmental regulations of methylene chloride.

What regulations and facilities are impacted?

The court’s decision in East Fork Enterprises, Inc. v. EPA (Case No. 24-60227) impacts EPA’s methylene chloride risk management rule finalized in May 2024 (2024 final rule). The rule applied to entities that manufacture (including import), process, distribute in commerce, use, or dispose of methylene chloride or methylene chloride-containing products.

Reasons for overturning the methylene chloride rule

The court listed a range of reasons for vacating the 2024 final rule, including the following significant findings.

Whole-chemical approach

EPA used a “whole chemical” approach in its revised 2022 risk determination for methylene chloride (on which the 2024 final rule is based) instead of making individual risk determinations for each condition of use (COU). As a result, EPA recharacterized six COUs (previously found not to present unreasonable risk) as posing unreasonable risk.

Court’s conclusion: TSCA doesn’t permit EPA to issue a whole-chemical risk determination; it requires EPA to evaluate and issue risk determinations for each COU.

Personal protective equipment (PPE) assumption

In its 2022 risk determination, EPA didn’t assume that exposed employees use PPE. However, TSCA requires the agency to account for PPE use if evidence suggests that it’s commonly used.

Court’s conclusion: There was sufficient evidence for EPA to assume PPE use, especially given that OSHA’s methylene chloride standard generally requires the use of PPE when employee exposure warrants it.

Risk analysis methods

EPA’s approach to “unreasonable risk” went beyond the statutory limits, appearing to attempt to eliminate nearly all risks. Further, EPA’s risk analysis didn’t comply with TSCA’s “best available science” standard (producing exposure limits unsupported by substantial evidence), and the agency overlooked relevant evidence.

Court’s conclusion: TSCA requires EPA to identify only unreasonable risk, which allows for some risk; the act isn’t designed to eliminate all risk. Also, TSCA mandates the agency to base its risk evaluations on all acceptable scientific information, including data contrary to its presuppositions.

Regulating to the extent necessary

EPA exceeded its authority by imposing regulations beyond “the extent necessary.” The court ruled that EPA’s basis for requiring a near-complete ban on methylene chloride use was unauthorized because it was based on the agency’s uncertainty as to whether a risk deemed reasonable will stay reasonable.

Court’s conclusion: TSCA permits EPA to eliminate actual, identified unreasonable risk. The agency can’t ban chemicals based on a reasonable risk that may become unreasonable in the future.

What’s next?

The court vacated with remand EPA’s methylene chloride rule and associated risk determination. As a result, EPA’s risk determination for methylene chloride is invalid, and the methylene chloride risk management rule is no longer in effect. Additionally, EPA must develop a new risk management rule that resolves the issues identified in the court’s opinion.

How should regulated entities respond?

EPA’s methylene chloride risk management rule is legally unenforceable, including its bans on uses and the regulatory requirements (such as the Workplace Chemical Protection Program). However, due to the uncertainty of EPA’s response and future rulemaking, companies should respond thoughtfully. Consider these tips:

Watch closely for EPA’s response to this litigation.
Consider maintaining protective measures and compliance programs that were implemented in response to the 2024 final rule, where possible. Continuing these efforts may ease compliance burdens if EPA issues a revised rule in the future. For example:
- Continue conducting exposure monitoring and recording the results,
- Keep searching for possible substitutes, and
- Maintain workplace protections that are already implemented.
Ensure compliance with existing methylene chloride regulations, including:
- EPA’s March 2019 final rule banning methylene chloride for consumer paint and coating removal, and
- OSHA’s occupational exposure control requirements for methylene chloride (29 CFR 1910.1052).

Key to remember: A U.S. court vacated EPA’s 2024 methylene chloride risk management rule, but facilities that maintain protections and compliance programs developed under the rule may be better prepared for any future regulations of the chemical.

2026-10-14T05:00:00Z

EPA proposes additional TCE compliance delays

On October 14, 2026, EPA published a proposed rule to extend additional compliance dates for the trichloroethylene (TCE) risk management rule finalized in 2024 (2024 TCE final rule) under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). If finalized, the rule would delay compliance deadlines for certain chemical processors and refrigerant manufacturers.

Who’s impacted?

The 2024 TCE final rule applies to entities that manufacture (including import), process, distribute in commerce, use, or dispose of TCE or TCE-containing products.

The proposed rule specifically affects:

Chemical processors;
Manufacturers, processors, and distributors subject to downstream notification requirements; and
Refrigerant manufacturers that process TCE to make HFC-134a.

What are the proposed changes?

For chemical processors, EPA proposes to move the prohibition compliance dates from December 18, 2026, to December 31, 2027, for:

Processing TCE as a reactant/intermediate;
Processing TCE for the industrial and commercial use of TCE as a processing aid in as well as the industrial and commercial use of TCE as a processing aid in:
- Process solvent used in battery manufacturing;
- Process solvent used in polymer fiber spinning, fluoroelastomer manufacturing, and Alcantara manufacturing;
- Extraction solvent used in caprolactam manufacturing; and
- Precipitant used in beta-cyclodextrin manufacturing.
Disposing of TCE through wastewater from such processing and uses to industrial pretreatment, industrial treatment, or publicly owned treatment works.

For manufacturers, processors, and distributors in commerce, the proposed rule amends the compliance date for downstream notifications and the text required to be in the Safety Data Sheets (SDSs) to reflect the new prohibition compliance dates. EPA would require affected manufacturers, processors, and distributors to update the SDSs with the new text 30 days after the publication date of a final rule.

For refrigerant manufacturers, EPA proposes extending the first phaseout reduction of processing TCE as an intermediate to manufacture HFC-134a. The 2024 TCE final rule requires manufacturers to reduce the annual amount of TCE feedstock they use to no greater than 75 percent of their baseline by June 7, 2027. This proposed rule would push the compliance date to December 31, 2027.

Key to remember: EPA proposes extending the TCE prohibition compliance deadline for certain chemical processors and the TCE feedstock phasedown date for specific refrigerant manufacturers.

Most Recent Highlights In Safety & Health

2026-10-14T05:00:00Z

EPA further delays 2025 GHGRP submissions

EPA published an interim final rule on October 14, 2026, further extending the submission deadline for the reporting year (RY) 2025 annual greenhouse gas (GHG) report from October 30, 2026, to March 10, 2027.

Who’s impacted?

The final rule applies to facilities subject to the GHG Reporting Program (GHGRP) at 40 CFR Part 98. Generally, three types of entities must report:

Large industrial sources of GHG emissions that directly emit 25,000 or more metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO₂e) per year;
Fuel and industrial gas suppliers whose products would result in 25,000 or more metric tons of CO₂e of GHG emissions per year if combusted, released, or oxidized; and
CO₂ injection facilities that inject any amount of CO₂ into the subsurface.

What’s the new deadline?

The interim final rule pushes the submission deadline for the RY 2025 GHG report from October 30, 2026, to March 10, 2027. The delay only applies to the RY 2025 GHG report.

Rule refresher

The GHGRP requirements are based on source categories in the subparts of Part 98. Facilities must report GHG emissions from the previous calendar year for all applicable source categories.

Reporters must use specific methods to calculate GHG emissions, which are detailed in the regulations. Facilities submit the annual GHG report to EPA using the electronic Greenhouse Gas Reporting Tool (e-GGRT).

Key to remember: EPA's interim final rule extends the submission deadline for the 2025 annual GHG report to March 10, 2027.

2026-10-13T05:00:00Z

EPA delays CWA hazardous substances FRPs by 3 years

EPA issued a final rule on October 13, 2026, extending the compliance date to submit Facility Response Plans (FRPs) for worst-case discharges of Clean Water Act (CWA) hazardous substances by 3 years.

Effective December 14, 2026, the final rule also removes provisions related to climate change and environmental justice.

Who’s impacted?

The extension affects facilities subject to the FRP requirements of 40 CFR Part 118. These include onshore non-transportation-related facilities that:

Could be reasonably expected to cause substantial harm to the environment by discharging a CWA hazardous substance (117.3) into or on the navigable waters, adjoining shorelines, or exclusive economic zone; and
Meet the applicability criteria listed at 118.3.

What are the changes?

The agency moved the deadline from June 1, 2027, to June 1, 2030, providing regulated facilities additional time to prepare and submit their CWA hazardous substances FRPs to EPA. Covered entities must also submit a Substantial Harm Certification Form (Appendix A to Part 118) with the FRP.

Type of facility	FRP submission deadline
Existing facility (in operation by November 30, 2029)	June 1, 2030
Newly regulated facility (meets applicability criteria after November 30, 2029)	Within 6 months of meeting applicability criteria
Newly constructed facility* (starts operations after June 1, 2030)	Before starting operations
Facility with planned event/change* (occurs after June 1, 2030)	Before changed part of facility starts operations
Facility with unplanned event/change (occurs after June 1, 2030)	Within 6 months of event/change

* If changes occur during startup, facilities must submit adjustments to the FRP after a 60-day operational trial period.

EPA also removed the following factors considered during the substantial harm determination:

Enhancing resilience to climate change as a passive mitigation measure or system,
Possible vulnerability to adverse weather conditions caused by climate change, and
Potential adverse impacts to communities with environmental justice concerns.

Further, the agency removed requirements to include the impacts of climate change and the impacts on communities with environmental justice concerns in the hazard evaluation.

Key to remember: EPA extended the compliance deadline to June 1, 2030, for entities to submit Facility Response Plans for worst-case discharges of CWA hazardous substances.

EHS Monthly Round Up - September 2026

In this September 2026 roundup video, we'll review the most impactful environmental, health, and safety news.

Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news. Let’s take a look at what happened over the past month.

For the 16th consecutive year, fall protection for construction topped OSHA’s list of most frequently cited standards. Preliminary inspection data for fiscal year 2026 show that OSHA recorded just over 4,000 fall protection construction violations, down from nearly 6,000 in FY 2025. The standards rounding out the Top 10 list remain unchanged from previous years, though some rankings have shifted.

The next HazCom compliance deadline is coming up on November 20. Employers who purchase substances that are aerosols, desensitized explosives, and flammable gases will receive – or may already have received – revised safety data sheets and see updated labels with their shipments. In addition, all employers must, as necessary, update any alternative workplace labeling, update their HazCom training program, and provide additional employee training for any newly identified hazards. Employers also must retain any new SDSs they receive.

California's Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board released a revised discussion draft of its proposed workplace violence prevention rule for general industry. The draft better defines employer responsibilities under the state’s workplace violence prevention law.

Turning to environmental news, EPA repealed the majority of the greenhouse gas emission standards established by the 2024 Carbon Pollution Standards for fossil fuel-fired power plants. The agency also proposes to remove the remaining GHG emission requirements for these plants.

And finally, EPA extended the Renewable Fuel Standard compliance deadline from September 1 to October 1. The extension gave parties more time to assess the impact of EPA’s small refinery exemption decisions and adjust their strategies before completing their 2025 reporting obligations.

Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!

EHS Monthly Round Up - October 2024

In this October 2024 roundup video, we'll review the most impactful environmental, health, and safety news.

Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental, health, and safety news. Please view the content links in the transcript for more information about the topics I’ll be covering today. Let’s get started!

A Government Accountability Office report says OSHA can do more to protect warehouse and delivery workers from ergonomic injuries. The report recommends several steps for OSHA to consider, including ensuring compliance officers can easily obtain data on when musculoskeletal disorders occurred.

OSHA updated its inspection guidance for animal slaughtering and processing industries. Inspections will focus on several hazards, including sanitation, ergonomics, and machine guarding. Among other changes, compliance officers will conduct inspections during off-shift times and identify workplace activities that impact employees most at risk such as temporary employees.

OSHA urges workers involved in hurricane cleanup and recovery efforts to be mindful of hazards, especially those associated with restoring electricity, removing debris, and trimming trees. Proper training, experience, and familiarity with related equipment helps ensure worker safety.

And finally, turning to environmental news, EPA extended the 2024 Chemical Data Reporting deadline to November 22 due to technical difficulties with its electronic reporting tool. The 2024 report covers activities that occurred between calendar years 2020 and 2023.

Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!

EHS Monthly Round Up - May 2023

In this monthly roundup video, we'll review the most impactful environmental, safety, and health news.

Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental, health, and safety news. Please view the content links in the transcript to take a deeper dive into the topics I’ll be covering today. With that said, let’s get started!

First, let’s take a look at what’s happening in safety and health. The week of May 1 marked the 10th annual Stand-Down to Prevent Falls in Construction. Employers were encouraged to have safety talks or demonstrations on the use of fall protection.

A new National Emphasis Program on fall prevention covers all industries, with a focus on construction and specific general industry activities. It took effect May 1; however, programmed inspections will begin after a 90-day outreach period.

With the start of lawn-care season, a recent OSHA case highlights some of the risks involved. The Agency found a lawn service contractor operating in Kentucky ignored safety requirements to save time.

A forklift operator suffered fatal injuries after falling into a recycling baler while trying to remove a jam. Investigators found a lack of training and communication were contributing factors.

In response to larger, more frequent wildfires, the state of Washington has proposed permanent wildfire smoke rules. They include year-round requirements for employers that will be in effect whenever there’s a risk that workers will be exposed to wildfire smoke.

And finally, turning to environmental news, EPA finalized changes to the new source performance standards for Automobile and Light Duty Truck Surface Coating Operations. The rule adds more emissions requirements for such operations.

Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!

Most Recent Highlights In Human Resources

EHS Monthly Round Up - January 2024

In this monthly video, we'll review the most impactful environmental, health, and safety news.

Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll go over the most impactful environmental, health, and safety news. Please view the content links in the transcript for more information about the topics I’ll be covering today. Let’s get started!

Effective January 15, OSHA penalties increased 3.2 percent for inflation. Most penalties increased to $16,131. Willful and serious violations, however, increased to $161,323.

Construction workers aged 45 and older suffer more severe injuries and higher associated costs than other age groups. Most injuries are due to slips, trips, and falls.

Washington State updated its process safety management rules to better protect workers in petroleum refineries from the hazards of volatile chemicals. The rules take effect December 27, 2024.

Bloodborne pathogens topped the list of OSHA violations for the healthcare industry in 2023. Hazard Communication was the second most cited standard, followed by respiratory protection.

OSHA Region 2 launched a regional emphasis program that targets tree trimming, tree removal, and land clearing operations. Region 2 includes New York, New Jersey, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

EPA continues to strengthen its regulation of per- and polyfluoroalkyl — or PFAS — substances. A new rule prevents facilities from using any of the 300+ inactive PFAS before EPA conducts a risk determination and, if necessary, regulates the activity.

Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!

EHS Monthly Round Up - May 2025

In this May 2025 roundup video, we'll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news.

Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news. Let's take a look at what happened over the last month!

OSHA will host an informal public hearing on its proposed Heat Injury and Illness Prevention rule on June 16. Information about the proposed rule and instructions on how to watch the hearing can be found on OSHA’s website.

OSHA’s National Safety Stand-Down to Prevent Falls in Construction event, held the week of May 5, raised awareness of fall hazards in an effort to help prevent injuries and fatalities. Slips, trips, and falls were the leading cause of death in the construction industry in 2023, accounting for 421 fatalities.

After concluding its investigation of a California chemical facility fire, the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board is calling for improved heater safeguards to prevent similar incidents. The fire was caused by an overheated refinery furnace. The Board also made several safety recommendations for chemical facilities.

Following a number of recent fall incidents, the Mine Safety and Health Administration issued a safety alert advising miners to use fall protection. The most recent incident occurred when a miner fell from the deck of a bulldozer.

Turning to environmental news, EPA further delayed the PFAS manufacturing report submission period. The date was moved from July 11, 2025, to April 13, 2026. This is a one-time reporting requirement for manufacturers of per- and polyfluoroalkyl, or PFAS, substances.

Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!

EHS Monthly Round Up - December 2024

In this December 2024 roundup video, we’ll review the most impactful environmental, health, and safety news.

OSHA’s personal protective equipment in construction final rule takes effect January 13. Employers must ensure PPE is of safe design and construction for the work to be performed and properly fits employees.

OSHA extended the comment deadline to January 14 for its proposed heat illness prevention rule. This gives stakeholders two more weeks to review the proposal and comment on it. An informal public hearing on the rule is scheduled for June 16.

OSHA released its Fall 2024 regulatory agenda on December 13. Many final and proposed rulemakings have been pushed into the first half of 2025, and a few have been bumped into the third quarter of the year.

OSHA updated its arc flash guidance for employees working on energized electrical equipment. Arc flash incidents can ignite clothing, cause structural fires, and cause severe or fatal burns. The guidance covers protecting employees from arc flash hazards, common electrical work myths, establishing boundaries around arc flash hazards, and being aware of arc flash hazards.

Warehouse, delivery, and retail workers are at increased risk for injuries and illnesses during the holidays due to higher volumes of work to meet consumer demand. OSHA reminds employers to protect workers by ensuring they’re trained to recognize and prevent hazards.

And finally, turning to environmental news, EPA released its Fall 2024 regulatory agenda on December 13. It includes projected publication dates for several final and proposed rules that may impact industry compliance with air, land, and water regulations.

Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!

EHS Monthly Round Up - April 2025

In this April 2025 roundup video, we'll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news.

Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news. Let’s take a look at what’s happened over the last month!

On April 17, OSHA released 2024 injury and illness data. This includes information from more than 370,000 establishments that submitted Form 300A, as well as partial data from more than 732,000 Form 300 and Form 301 records. OSHA provides public access to the data in an effort to identify unsafe conditions and workplace hazards that may lead to occupational injuries and illnesses.

This year’s National Stand-Down to Prevent Struck-by Incidents took place the week of April 21. Struck-by incidents are the second leading cause of death among construction workers and the leading cause of nonfatal injuries in the construction industry. The stand-down emphasized the importance of training and prevention on worksites.

A safety alert from the Mine Safety and Health Administration urges the mining community to implement effective safety and health programs, with a focus on identifying and eliminating health and safety hazards. The alert was issued due to a high number of mining fatalities in the first quarter of 2025.

The Mine Safety and Health Administration temporarily paused its silica enforcement for coal mine operators until August 18, four months from its original compliance date of April 14. Under the agency’s silica rule, mine operators must update their respiratory protection programs. This may require them to obtain additional respirators and sampling devices. The agency says this four-month pause provides time for operators to come into compliance.

And finally, turning to environmental news, EPA updated the process for making data corrections to hazardous waste manifests. Waste handlers must correct errors on the manifest within 30 days of a request from EPA or a state agency. They also must submit corrections electronically.

And finally, EPA streamlined its pesticide registration process. The agency updated its MyPest app and made policy changes regarding how to submit two of its registration forms.

Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!

EHS Monthly Round Up - August 2023

In this monthly roundup video, we'll review the most impactful environmental, health, and safety news.

Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we'll review the most impactful environmental, health, and safety news. Please view the content links in the transcript to take a deeper dive into the topics I'll be covering today. With that said, let's get started!

In response to soaring temperatures across the country, OSHA issued a heat hazard alert reminding employers of their obligation to protect workers against heat illness. OSHA also ramped up enforcement activities in high-risk industries like construction and agriculture.

OSHA's annual Safe and Sound Week was held the week of August 7. It highlighted the importance of workplace safety and health programs. This year's focus was on mental health and well-being.

OSHA wants to know how you use your safety and health program to ensure a positive workplace safety culture. The agency has drawn up questions related to work safety values, safety messaging, and more, and will use your feedback to develop educational materials. November 30 is the deadline for comments.

Though the current hurricane season has been relatively quiet, it's important to be prepared as the height of the season approaches. Both OSHA and NIOSH have provided resources to help emergency responders, recovery workers, and employers prepare in advance for anticipated weather disasters.

Workplace deaths due to unintentional overdoses of fentanyl and methamphetamine continue to rise. In 2021, there were 464 such fatalities, a 19.6 percent increase over 2020.

And finally, turning to environmental news, receiving facilities will see increased user fees for the e-Manifest system in fiscal years 2024 and 2025. EPA sets these user fees based on how the manifest is submitted and processing costs for each manifest type. Using fully electronic waste manifests will cost significantly less.

Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We'll see you next month!

New Network Poll

What stumps you most about OSHA's Occupational Noise Exposure standard?

No active poll

Please come back soon!

View Previous Polls & Results

Most Popular Highlights In Environmental

2026-04-13T05:00:00Z

EPA delays TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS reporting timeline again

On April 13, 2026, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a final rule that further delays the submission period for the one-time report required of manufacturers on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) by the PFAS Reporting and Recordkeeping Rule (PFAS Reporting Rule).

This final rule pushes the starting submission period to either 60 days after the effective date of a future final rule updating the PFAS Reporting Rule or January 31, 2027, whichever is earlier.

Who’s impacted?

Established under Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Section 8(a)(7), the PFAS Reporting Rule (40 CFR Part 705) requires any business that manufactured (including imported) any PFAS or PFAS-containing article between 2011 and 2022 to report. Covered manufacturers and importers must submit information on:

Chemical identity, uses, and volumes made and processed;
Byproducts;
Environmental and health effects;
Worker exposure; and
Disposal.

What’s the new timeline?

The opening submission period was moved from April 13, 2026, to either 60 days after the effective date of a future final PFAS Reporting Rule or January 31, 2027, whichever is earlier.

Most manufacturers have 6 months to submit the report. Small manufacturers reporting only as importers of PFAS-containing articles have 1 year.

TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS Reporting Rule submission period
	Start date	End date
Most manufacturers	60 days from effective date of final PFAS Reporting Rule or January 31, 2027 (whichever is earlier)	6 months from start date or July 31, 2027 (whichever is earlier)
Small manufacturers reporting solely as PFAS article importers	60 days from effective date of final PFAS Reporting Rule or January 31, 2027 (whichever is earlier)	1 year from start date or January 31, 2028 (whichever is earlier)

Why the delay?

In November 2025, the agency proposed updates to the PFAS Reporting Rule. EPA has delayed the reporting period to give the agency time to issue a final rule (expected later this year).

Key to remember: EPA has delayed the starting submission deadline for the TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS Reporting Rule from April 2026 to no later than January 2027.

EHS Monthly Round Up - January 2023

In this monthly roundup video, we’ll review the most impactful environmental, safety, and health news.

If you haven’t already done so, now is the time to post your OSHA 300A Summary. Employers are required to post the Summary in a conspicuous place from February 1st through April 30th.

As required by law, OSHA increased its penalties for inflation in mid-January. Penalties went up 7.7 percent, effective January 17th.

The second letter addresses the applicability of lockout/tagout and the maintenance and operations of cathodic protection rectifiers when working on pipelines.

There are also a number of rules related to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants in various rule stages.

And finally, beginning with model year 2027, heavy-duty trucks will be required to meet clean air standards that are 80 percent more stringent than current requirements.

Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup!

2026-06-24T05:00:00Z

North Carolina approved revisions to wastewater discharge rules

Effective date: May 1, 2026

This applies to: Facilities with domestic wastewater discharges up to 2 million gallons per day

Description of change: The North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) adopted a rule that adds a permitting option to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program for facilities with domestic wastewater discharges of up to 2 million gallons per day.

DEQ removed the ban on new or expanded discharges of oxygen-consuming waste when the 7Q10 and 30Q2 flows are both 0 for these facilities. In other words, it allows systems to discharge domestic wastewater to zero-flow receiving streams, provided the system:

Meets qualifying criteria,
Complies with specific effluent limits, and
Uses low-energy methods before discharging wastewater to the receiving stream.

It’ll likely benefit areas where the cost of piping to a higher-flowing stream farther away is prohibitive.

2026-02-24T06:00:00Z

EPA repeals stricter Mercury and Air Toxics Standards for coal-, oil-fired power plants

On February 24, 2026, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a final rule repealing the 2024 amendments made to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Coal- and Oil-Fired Electric Utility Steam Generating Units (EGUs). It’s also referred to as the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) for power plants.

Effective April 27, 2026, this rule (2026 Final Rule) repeals stricter compliance requirements made to the MATS rule in May 2024 (2024 Final Rule) and reverts them to the less stringent standards established by the 2012 MATS Rule.

Who’s affected?

The rule applies to power plants with coal- and oil-fired EGUs subject to the NESHAP (40 CFR 63 Subpart UUUUU).

What are the changes?

The final rule repeals these 2024 amendments:

The revised filterable particulate matter (fPM) emission standard and corresponding total and individual non-metal hazardous air pollutant (HAP) metal standards for existing coal-fired EGUs (reverting to the 2012 MATS Rule requirements);
The revised compliance demonstration requirements for all EGUs to install continuous emission monitoring systems (CEMS) for fPM emissions and the adjusted quality assurance criteria (reverting to the previous standard, allowing EGUs to choose from three compliance demonstration methods); and
The revised mercury (Hg) emission standard for lignite-fired EGUs (reverting to the 2012 MATS Rule limit).

The 2026 Final Rule also reinstates the low-emitting EGU (LEE) program for fPM and non-Hg HAP metals. The LEE program requires less frequent stack testing for sources with emissions below 50 percent of the corresponding limit for 3 consecutive years.

Further, EPA’s final rule updates the fPM sampling requirements for EGUs that demonstrate compliance with a PM CEMS. These units must collect either a minimum catch of 6.0 milligrams or a minimum sample volume of 4 dry standard cubic meters (dscm) per test run. EGUs demonstrating compliance using other methods must collect a lower minimum sample volume of 1 dscm per PM test run.

Compliance requirement	2024 Final Rule	2026 Final Rule
fPM emission limit for existing coal-fired EGUs	0.010 pounds per million British thermal units of heat input (lb/MMBtu)	0.030 lb/MMBTu
fPM emission compliance demonstration for all coal-and oil-fired EGUs	EGUs must use PM CEMS	EGUs may use: Quarterly stack testing PM continuous parametric monitoring systems PM CEMS
Hg emission limit for existing lignite-fired EGUs	1.2 pounds per trillion British thermal units of heat input (lb/TBtu)	4.0 lb/TBtu

Key to remember: EPA’s final rule repeals the stricter emission limits set by the 2024 amendments to the Mercury and Air Toxics Standard for coal- and oil-fired power plants.

2026-10-14T05:00:00Z

EPA proposes additional TCE compliance delays

Who’s impacted?

The 2024 TCE final rule applies to entities that manufacture (including import), process, distribute in commerce, use, or dispose of TCE or TCE-containing products.

The proposed rule specifically affects:

Chemical processors;
Manufacturers, processors, and distributors subject to downstream notification requirements; and
Refrigerant manufacturers that process TCE to make HFC-134a.

What are the proposed changes?

For chemical processors, EPA proposes to move the prohibition compliance dates from December 18, 2026, to December 31, 2027, for:

Processing TCE as a reactant/intermediate;
Processing TCE for the industrial and commercial use of TCE as a processing aid in as well as the industrial and commercial use of TCE as a processing aid in:
- Process solvent used in battery manufacturing;
- Process solvent used in polymer fiber spinning, fluoroelastomer manufacturing, and Alcantara manufacturing;
- Extraction solvent used in caprolactam manufacturing; and
- Precipitant used in beta-cyclodextrin manufacturing.
Disposing of TCE through wastewater from such processing and uses to industrial pretreatment, industrial treatment, or publicly owned treatment works.

Key to remember: EPA proposes extending the TCE prohibition compliance deadline for certain chemical processors and the TCE feedstock phasedown date for specific refrigerant manufacturers.

2026-10-14T05:00:00Z

EPA further delays 2025 GHGRP submissions

Who’s impacted?

The final rule applies to facilities subject to the GHG Reporting Program (GHGRP) at 40 CFR Part 98. Generally, three types of entities must report:

Large industrial sources of GHG emissions that directly emit 25,000 or more metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO₂e) per year;
Fuel and industrial gas suppliers whose products would result in 25,000 or more metric tons of CO₂e of GHG emissions per year if combusted, released, or oxidized; and
CO₂ injection facilities that inject any amount of CO₂ into the subsurface.

What’s the new deadline?

The interim final rule pushes the submission deadline for the RY 2025 GHG report from October 30, 2026, to March 10, 2027. The delay only applies to the RY 2025 GHG report.

Rule refresher

The GHGRP requirements are based on source categories in the subparts of Part 98. Facilities must report GHG emissions from the previous calendar year for all applicable source categories.

Key to remember: EPA's interim final rule extends the submission deadline for the 2025 annual GHG report to March 10, 2027.

Most Popular Highlights In Transportation

2026-10-15T05:00:00Z

Winter safety starts before the first storm

Fall’s shorter days and cooler temperatures are a reminder that winter weather is right around the corner. Now is the time to prepare your drivers for what’s ahead when it comes to staying safe during the winter months.

Be prepared

A sudden snowstorm can quickly turn into an emergency situation during the winter months. Drivers should make sure their vehicles are stocked with a winter survival kit and basic emergency supplies. In addition to the items that should be in their vehicle at all times (warning devices, jumper cables, tool kit, first aid kit), they should also carry the following items:

A snow brush and scraper for clearing ice and snow;
A shovel and traction devices (tire chains, sand, kitty litter) to help free a vehicle that becomes stuck in snow or ice;
A brightly colored cloth to increase visibility if stranded;
Warm blankets or a sleeping bag for protection from the cold;
Extra food, water, and any necessary medications; and
Additional winter clothing, including a coat, gloves, hat, and boots.

What to do if stranded

Even the most prepared drivers can find themselves stranded during severe winter weather. Knowing what to do is key to driver safety.

The most important rule is to stay in the vehicle. Unless help is clearly visible and within a short distance, leaving the vehicle can be extremely dangerous due to limited visibility, blowing snow, and the risk of becoming disoriented. If able to safely do it, the driver should hang a brightly colored cloth outside the vehicle to signal for help.

To stay warm, the engine and heater should run for about 10 minutes each hour. The driver should crack a window and keep the exhaust pipe free of snow to prevent carbon monoxide poisoning.

Retaining body heat is important to avoid hypothermia, a condition brought on when the body’s temperature drops to a dangerously low level. Symptoms of hypothermia include uncontrollable shivering, slow speech, memory lapses, and drowsiness.

Drivers can conserve body heat by wearing layers, using blankets or sleeping bags, and keeping their hands and feet warm. Simple movements, such as clapping hands and moving arms and legs, can also help maintain circulation until help arrives.

Key to remember: Now is the time to review winter survival tips with your drivers. Taking proactive steps today can help prevent problems when winter storms hit.

2026-10-15T05:00:00Z

Safe driving habits are on cruise control: Tickets issued to over half of drivers tested

Of the 8,083 commercial motor vehicle and passenger vehicle drivers tested across North American roadways, 3,968 warnings and 2,604 tickets were issued for unsafe driving behaviors.

Speeding, distracted driving, and aggressive driving were among the leading causes of roadway crashes cited, according to the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance’s (CVSA’s) 2026 North America safety event findings. 

The top unsafe behaviors of 2026 include:

Reckless, careless, and dangerous driving, which was the focus of this year’s Operation Safe Driver Week: 83 warnings and 33 citations were issued. Broken down by driver type, 50 warnings and 22 citations were issued to commercial motor vehicle drivers, and 33 warnings and 11 citations were issued to passenger vehicle drivers.
Speeding, which was the most cited behavior: 1,003 warnings and 691 citations were issued. Broken down by driver type, 50 warnings and 22 citations were issued to commercial motor vehicle drivers, and 33 warnings and 11 citations were issued to passenger vehicle drivers.
Failure to wear a seat belt: 292 warnings and 311 citations were issued. Broken down by driver type, 267 warnings and 270 citations were issued to commercial motor vehicle drivers, and 25 warnings and 41 citations were issued to passenger vehicle drivers.
Possession, use or impairment of drugs or alcohol: 17 warnings and 26 citations were issued. Broken down by type, 12 warnings and 22 citations were issued to commercial motor vehicle drivers, and 5 warnings and 4 citations were issued to passenger vehicle drivers.

Other Top Warnings, Citations, and Tickets Issued to CMV Drivers
Offense	Total # Warnings	Total # Citations
Failure to obey traffic control device	652	319
Improper lane change	76	23
Following too closely	48	23
Improper passing	29	10
Improper turn	12	3

The goal of Operation Safe Driver Week strives to improve driver safety and lessen the number of accidents on North American roadways. The event was held from July 12–18. Law enforcement agencies from 36 U.S. states, 7 Canadian provinces, and Mexico participated in this year’s initiative.

2026-10-14T05:00:00Z

One Texas-to-Texas load could change your registration requirements

Many carriers believe that once they’ve obtained their interstate authority, they’re authorized to make any type of move in any state — but that’s not always the case. Texas is a great example of this, as having interstate operating authority doesn’t always give a motor carrier everything it needs to conduct transportation within the state of Texas.

This is why it’s essential that carriers look closely at any movements that both begin and end in Texas. Even a carrier that primarily operates in interstate commerce needs Texas intrastate authority if it performs a point-to-point Texas trip.

Interstate authority vs. Texas intrastate authority

Understanding the difference between interstate authority and Texas intrastate authority is integral to understanding what a carrier needs before operating in Texas. The USDOT number and the Texas Department of Motor Vehicles (TxDMV) number serve different purposes:

USDOT numbers are the carrier’s federal safety identifier and are used to track information such as inspections, crashes, and compliance history; and
TxDMV numbers and the related Texas registration certificate demonstrate that the carrier is registered with the state to make intrastate movements.

Because the two credentials aren’t interchangeable, a carrier with a USDOT number and federal operating authority may still need to register with the TxDMV. The key question is: Does the carrier perform any regulated movements that both originate and terminate within Texas?

When do you need to register with the TxDMV?

Texas generally requires the following intrastate vehicles and operations to have and display a USDOT number and to register with TxDMV for intrastate authority:

Private and for-hire vehicles, or combinations of vehicles, with a gross weight or gross weight rating exceeding 26,000 pounds when used to transport cargo in furtherance of a commercial enterprise;
For-hire vehicles used to transport household goods, regardless of gross weight rating;
Vehicles, including buses, designed or used to transport more than 15 passengers, including the driver;
Commercial school buses;
Vehicles used to transport hazardous materials in a quantity requiring placarding; Vehicles operated by a foreign carrier;
Foreign-domiciled buses; and/or
Vehicles owned or controlled by a person who isn’t a U.S. citizen or doesn’t reside in the United States.

Applying for Texas intrastate authority

Application for authority can be completed online. Call (800) 299-1700 to begin the registration process over the phone and obtain a Unique Identifier Number (UIN). Once a UIN has been assigned, use the online Motor Carrier Credentialing System (MCCS) at https://apps.txdmv.gov/apps/mccs/motorcarrier/.

Registration isn’t a one-time administrative task

Once a carrier receives its certificate of registration, it must maintain that status by doing the following:

Review its principal business address, mailing address, and email address in the department’s online system every 6 months;
Maintain required insurance filings;
Keep its vehicle listing current; and
Retain the insurance cab card at its principal place of business, and make sure the correct copy is carried in each covered vehicle.

Just like at the federal level, changes in vehicle size, passenger capacity, cargo, routes, ownership, or operating status could trigger a fresh review of the carrier’s registration obligations.

Key to remember: Federal authority alone may not be enough when a regulated trip both begins and ends in Texas, even if the carrier performs those trips infrequently. A careful review of a carrier’s operations — and confirmation of TxDMV registration requirements — can help prevent credentialing issues, roadside delays, and avoidable compliance fees.

2023-12-22T06:00:00Z

Navigating change: Key updates to 2024 IATA DGR take effect

Every year the International Air Transport Association (IATA) updates its Dangerous Goods Regulations (DGR) to ensure the safe and secure handling of dangerous goods that are shipped or transported by air. While changes to the 2024 IATA DGR (65th edition) are not as plentiful as they were in previous years, they are no less important.

Mandatory compliance with the 2024 IATA DGR begins on January 1, 2024, and will be valid until the 2025 IATA DGR comes into effect. Let’s look at the key updates, listed by Section, for the 65th edition of the IATA DGR:

Need additional information for IATA? Check out this ezExplanation.

Limitations

Dangerous Goods Carried by Passengers or Crew (2.3)— Provisions for battery-powered mobility aids have been revised to include reference to the guidance on the end-to-end processes associated with the carriage of mobility aids.

Packing

The following packing instructions have been updated:

5.2.0.9 - Added a water capacity limit for non-refillable cylinders containing a flammable gas, limited to a water capacity not exceeding 1.25 L.
PI 952 - Revised to include reference to "equipment."
PI 954 - Clarified the rules for marking overpacks containing dry ice. The total net quantity of dry ice in the overpack must be marked on the outside of the overpack.

Packaging specifications and performance tests

6.0.3 - Clarified the requirements and formatting for UN specification marks on packages.

Documentation

8.1.6.9.2, Step 6 – Added a note to "reinforce that there is no requirement for the type, number and net quantity in inner packagings within the outer packaging of a combination packaging to be shown" on the shipping papers (Shippers Declaration for Dangerous Goods).

Radioactive materials

10.8.3.9.1—Added an additional example of the description for the first sequence of information on the Shipper's Declaration to address where a radioactive material has a subsidiary hazard, and the proper shipping name must be supplemented by the technical or chemical name.
10.8.6—Added two examples to show how radioactive materials with a subsidiary hazard should be described and how packages in an overpack should be shown.

Appendices

IATA has added a new appendix to the list of appendices in the DGR. Appendix H includes a list of changes IATA will make to the 2025 IATA DGR. IATA added Appendix H so that shippers and carriers have time to prepare for the substantial updates that are coming for 2025. Some of the changes include:

Adding an exception for data loggers and cargo trackers with installed lithium batteries.
Modifying the exception for COVID-19 vaccines to now apply to all pharmaceutical products.
Adding a new classification for sodium ion batteries.
Updating the list of dangerous goods and special provisions.
Amending and adding several packing instructions.
Revising the "lithium battery mark", which will be known as the "battery mark" in the future.

Making sure you are keeping up with these regulatory changes and preparing for future updates is extremely important if you want to avoid costly delays, fines, and lost revenue. Keep your hazmat employees up to speed and inform them of any changes they need to be aware of.

Key to Remember: IATA updates their DGR every year and changes to the 2024 IATA DGR become effective on January 1, 2024.

2022-12-27T06:00:00Z

Placarding responsibility – Whose is it?

Many shippers are unaware of their responsibility to provide placards to drivers, but the responsibility shifts as soon as the driver hits the road.

Check the regulations

According to Section 172.506 of the Hazardous Materials Regulations (HMR), a shipper offering a hazardous material for transportation by highway must provide the motor carrier with the required placards for the material being offered. The shipper must offer the placards to the carrier prior to, or at the same time as, the material is offered for transportation — unless the vehicle is already placarded for the hazmat.

Section 172.506 also states that no motor carrier may transport a hazardous material in a motor vehicle unless the required placards for the hazmat are affixed to the vehicle. Before transport, the driver is responsible for displaying the required placards for all the hazmat that is on the vehicle.

Avoid issues with shippers

Many trailers are equipped with flip placards that represent most classes of hazardous materials but without adequate training, shippers may not understand their responsibility to provide the driver with the required placards. If a driver arrives and the shipper fails to provide placards, the driver should contact dispatch for additional instructions or drive to a truck stop to secure the necessary placards. The driver becomes responsible for placards as soon as the trailer enters a public highway, so train your drivers to temporarily refuse the shipment until the proper placards can be obtained. If necessary, the driver must bobtail or leave empty before driving to pick up placards.

Another common placarding question with shippers involves combination loads. If a driver arrives at a shipper’s location and is already transporting a hazardous material below the placarding threshold, is the shipper required to provide placards for the combination load on the trailer? In this scenario, the driver already has 600 pounds of a Class 8 corrosive material on the trailer, and the shipper is offering an additional 500 pounds of the same commodity. The regulations state that the shipper is only required to provide placards for the commodity that is being offered, not for the aggregate weight of both shipments. In this scenario, the driver is responsible for providing placards since it involves a combination load.

The Hazardous Materials Regulations are complex, especially for newer employees. Drivers that can speak “hazmat” to shippers often secure additional business, so be sure to train your drivers and give them the confidence to have impactful conversations with shippers.

Key to remember: Carry extra placards in case a shipper is unable to supply the required placards or a combination of hazmat on the vehicle requires different placards.

2023-08-16T05:00:00Z

Driver training time: On duty or off?

Training time is time spent wisely, but a big question remains: how should it be recorded?

Ongoing driver training is critical for ensuring that commercial motor vehicle drivers operate their vehicles safely and compliantly.

In fact, a recent report from the American Transportation Research Institute found that motor carriers who can access training materials and other resources from industry associations are safer than those who cannot. But is driver training time “on duty” or off?

It depends ...

Several variables will affect the answer:

If a driver is required to go to a terminal or any other location for mandatory training, then the time must be recorded as “on duty.” That’s true whether the driver is paid or not. This falls under the category of “performing any ... work in the capacity, employ, or service of a motor carrier” under the definition of “on-duty time” in 49 CFR 395.2.
If a driver has control over when and where the training is done, it’s done at the driver’s leisure, and it is not done during a period of time when the driver would otherwise have to be logging on duty (such as while waiting at a customer’s location), then it can be logged “off duty.”
If a driver is off duty (such as at home for the weekend) but is given the training as a mandatory assignment and must complete it at a specific date, time, or location, then the training must be considered on-duty time.

Get more insights about on-duty time in our ez Explanation!

Nothing official

While federal regulations don’t address the issue directly, and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) has not issued any official word on it, there is some FMCSA guidance that touches on the issue:

Question: May the time a driver spends attending safety meetings, ceremonies, celebrations, or other company-sponsored safety events be recorded as off-duty time?

Guidance: Yes, if attendance is voluntary.

This guidance indicates that a driver may be performing a company-related activity without needing to record the time as on duty, as long as the driver has a choice to be there or not.

In addition, the following guidance refers to medical exams but could equally apply to training sessions:

Question: If a driver drives in a non-commercial vehicle to take a physical examination, should the duty status be recorded as on-duty not driving, or as off-duty? Would the answer change if the motor carrier directs the driver to go for the examination?

Guidance: So long as the driver schedules and attends the physical examination at a time of his or her own choosing, the time may be recorded as off-duty. If, however, the motor carrier directs the driver to attend at a specific time, the time is to be recorded as on-duty not driving.

Finally, it’s worth noting that if a driver is able to log off duty for a training session as discussed above, paying the driver for that time does not mean it has to be logged on duty:

Question: How does compensation relate to on-duty time?

Guidance: The fact that a driver is paid for a period of time does not always establish that the driver was on duty for the purposes of part 395 during that period of time. A driver may be relieved of duty under certain conditions and still be paid.

Key to remember: Driver training is highly recommended, but motor carriers often question how drivers should log the time. If certain conditions are met, training sessions can be logged off duty.

Most Popular Highlights In Human Resources

2023-09-06T05:00:00Z

Appellate court sided with employee's (almost) 3-year-delayed FMLA claim

Back in October 2018, Laffon had a medical emergency and needed some time off under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA).

Her leave lasted until November 15. Ten days after she returned to work, on November 26, her employer terminated her.

She sued, arguing that the employer retaliated against her because of her FMLA leave.

The catch? She didn't bring the suit until almost three years later.

No link between leave and termination

In court, the employer argued that there was no causal link between Laffon taking FMLA leave and her termination. Although the court documents aren't robust, they do reveal that the employer indicated that Laffon's allegations didn't show that her taking FMLA leave was a factor in the decision to terminate her. The documents showed only that the termination chronologically followed her leave.

The court agreed with the employer. It also agreed that Laffon failed to allege a willful violation of the FMLA, which would allow her to benefit from the FMLA's three-year statute of limitations.

Laffon appealed the case to the Ninth Circuit.

Statute of limitations

Under the FMLA, employees have two years from the date of the last event constituting the alleged violation for which they can bring a claim.

Those two years are extended to three years if the employer's actions were "willful." This means that an employee must show that the employer either knew or showed reckless disregard for whether its conduct violated the FMLA.

Ruling overturned

Fast forward to August 2023, when the Ninth Circuit reversed the lower court's decision. It indicated that, based on Laffon's amended complaint and liberally construing the law, her allegations establish that her leave was causally connected to her termination and that the employer's action (her termination) was willful.

Glymph v. CT Corporation Systems, No. 22-35735, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, August 22, 2023.

Key to remember: Terminating an employee soon after returning from FMLA leave is risky, unless there is a clear, well-documented, non-leave-related reason. Case documents did not show such a clear reason, which can also increase the risk of a willful finding. Employees have time to file claims, even years.

2026-10-13T05:00:00Z

Is providing an accommodation instead of FMLA leave okay? The law says, “No.”

Eligible employees may take leave for qualifying reasons under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). But may an employer require an employee to accept a workplace accommodation instead of taking FMLA leave? What if the absence creates a hardship for the employer?

The answer is likely no.

Under FMLA regulations at 825.702(d), if an employee is entitled to FMLA leave, the employer may not require the employee to take a job with a reasonable accommodation in place of that leave.

In other words, an employer generally may not deny FMLA leave and require the employee to keep working in a modified job, even if the employer offers similar pay and benefits or adjusts the job so the employee can perform its essential functions.

Is there an exception?

There’s a limited exception for certain intermittent or reduced schedule leaves. If the need for leave is foreseeable because of planned medical treatment, or if the employer agrees to intermittent or reduced schedule leave for bonding with a healthy child, the employer may temporarily transfer the employee to an available alternative position. The employee must be qualified for the position, however, and the position must better accommodate the recurring leave than the employee’s regular job.

This exception doesn’t apply when the leave is unforeseeable, such as during episodic flare-ups related to a chronic condition.

When the employee requests a different arrangement

The FMLA doesn’t prohibit employers from agreeing to an employee’s request for a different shift, schedule, or position when the employee returns from leave. However, employers may not pressure or require the employee to accept a different position against the employee’s wishes.

Applies to any accommodation

This rule applies to any workplace accommodation. For example, in lieu of leave, an employer may not require an employee to:

Work from home,
Use modified equipment, or
Accept changes to a workstation.

No undue hardship defense under the FMLA

Unlike the federal Americans with Disabilities Act, the FMLA doesn’t include an undue hardship defense. This means that employers may not deny FMLA leave because the employee’s absence creates staffing challenges, affects productivity, or burdens a department.

Key to remember: If an employee is entitled to FMLA leave, the employer may not require the employee to accept an accommodation instead of taking that leave.

2024-05-07T05:00:00Z

May employees take FMLA leave to care for family members outside the U.S.?

Yes, employees may take leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to care for family members who are outside U.S. borders.

If the employee meets the eligibility criteria of the FMLA, the family member has an FMLA serious health condition, and the employee is needed to care for the family member, the employee’s time off would be protected. It doesn’t really matter where the family member is.

To figure out whether the family member’s condition meets the criteria under the FMLA, employers may require that the employee provide a certification supporting the leave.

Certifications in other languages

If an employee or a family member is visiting in another country, or a family member lives in another country, and a serious health condition develops, employers must accept a medical certification from a health care provider who practices in that country. This rule applies to an original certification, a recertification, and when requesting a second or third opinion from a provider.

If a certification by a health care provider from another country is in a language other than English, employers may require that the employee provide a written translation of the certification.

Traveling to care for family member

If family members are outside the U.S., employees will need to spend some time traveling. The employee’s travel time would likely be seen as part of the FMLA leave if:

The travel is so intertwined with the care, or
If it is needed to obtain the care.

Handling intermittent leave

Employees may also take intermittent FMLA leave to care for far-away family members. Employers would manage such leave the same way they do for intermittent leave inside the U.S. Employers should:

Give the employee an eligibility/rights & responsibilities notice within five days of being put on notice,
Ask for a certification if desired (including a translation),
Give the employee a designation notice within five days of getting enough information, and
Track the employee’s leave time.

Whenever employees are away from the physical worksite, tracking how much intermittent FMLA leave they are taking has its own challenges. Employers may use a simple honor system of self-reporting or technology to keep track of when the employee is taking FMLA leave and when the employee is working.

Key to remember: Eligible employees may take FMLA leave to care for family members who are outside the U.S.

2026-10-14T05:00:00Z

HR manager didn’t follow company policy for his own FMLA leave, and got terminated for it

In early 2023, Frank, an HR manager, suffered from severe right shoulder arthritis. Starting on February 21, he decided to take leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) to manage his health issues, eventually opting for surgery.

The employer’s policy indicated that requests for FMLA leave be made through the HR Department on the forms provided. The forms required employees to provide a medical certification to support the absence.

When Frank first asked for leave, he didn’t submit a medical certification. He argued that delayed submission of such paperwork was, nonetheless, consistent with the employer’s customary practice. During his tenure as HR manager, he would also retroactively approve FMLA leave for employees who began their leave before filling out the required paperwork.

On March 9, Debra, a company director, sent Frank a letter reminding him to submit the medical certification by March 17. When Frank failed to do so, Debra sent him a second, third, and fourth reminder, extending the deadline each time. In the last two letters, she warned Frank that failure to comply with the company leave policies could result in his termination.

Frank didn’t submit a certification until May 4. It excused his absence beginning May 2, but didn’t address his absences from February 21 to May 1. He never provided documentation covering the prior absences or a reason for them.

On July 7, before he could return to work, the employer informed Frank that his employment was terminated. The termination letter cited his “failure to provide the healthcare certifications required” by company policies, which resulted in his incurring “multiple unexcused absences in violation of the” company’s personnel code.

Frank sued, but the court sided with the employer, despite the suspicious timing of the termination. It first noted that when an employee takes leave without complying with the employer’s internal leave policies, they haven’t “engaged in any activity protected by the FMLA.” Also, since Frank failed to provide a certification supporting his leave from February 21 to May 1, the FMLA didn’t cover his time off, and he didn’t engage in FMLA-protected activity.

Bergman v. St. Clair County, Southern District of Illinois, No. 3:24-CV-02374, September 23, 2026.

Key to remember: If an employee fails to provide a requested FMLA certification without justification, employers may deny FMLA protections.

Court decisions are based on the specific facts presented and each court’s interpretation of the law. Because courts may reach different conclusions, similar situations can lead to different outcomes. Employers should avoid relying on a single case as definitive guidance and instead assess each situation carefully, considering applicable laws, and seeking advice when needed.

2020-04-29T05:00:00Z

May employees receive unemployment while on unpaid FMLA leave?

In many situations, when an employee is not working, he or she may collect unemployment benefits. Those benefits, however, are generally reserved for those who are unemployed. Employees on leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) are not generally considered to be unemployed. State unemployment laws, however, can define “unemployed” as they see fit, and employers can benefit from understanding how that term is defined and how it might be applied to employees on unpaid FMLA leave.

Case in point

Ophelia, an employee, began taking FMLA leave for a serious health condition on August 16. Her company-provided accrued paid leave ran out three days later, on August 19. From that point she was on unpaid FMLA leave.

On October 2, during the unpaid FMLA leave, Ophelia applied for unemployment benefits. Her employer contested the claim arguing that she was still employed. The state unemployment agency disagreed, indicating that, because Ophelia was not getting paid, she was considered unemployed. The issue was sent to the courts.

The employer argued that Ophelia was not separated from employment with the company and, therefore, was not eligible for unemployment benefits. She continued to be covered by the company group health care plan and her job was being held – none of which are hallmarks of an unemployed individual. On the other side of the coin, the FMLA entitles eligible employees to FMLA leave; therefore, unemployed persons are not entitled to FMLA leave.

The unemployment agency, however, argued that Ophelia was unemployed while on an unpaid leave of absence for a medically verifiable illness. She did not perform any work or received any pay. Therefore, if she met all other requirements, she would be entitled to unemployment benefits.

The case went to an appeals court, where it was indicated that it would be absurd for an individual to be entitled to unemployment benefits during FMLA leave. Not necessarily, said the state supreme court, where the case ultimately landed. The state unemployment law defines “unemployed” as when the individual does not perform services for wages in excess of a certain amount, among other things.

There are some exceptions to being disqualified to receive unemployment, and one of those is when the individual left work because of an illness, which is basically what Ophelia did. Because she was not performing services for wages, she met the definition of unemployed, and was not disqualified from receiving benefits solely because she was on FMLA leave. The situation did not require a formal severance of the employer-employee relationship.

Therefore, according to the final ruling, an individual on unpaid FMLA leave could fit within the unemployment law’s definition of the term “unemployed.” While this might not happen often, it could happen. The employee would need to then proceed to the eligibility phase of the unemployment benefits application process.

While this state’s definition of “unemployed” opened the door for an employee to receive unemployment benefits during unpaid FMLA leave, your state’s definition might not. With the current proliferation of unemployment claims, being aware of the definition can help avoid surprises.

Be aware that, under the current pandemic, federal law allows states to pay unemployment benefits where:

An employer temporarily ceases operations due to COVID-19, preventing employees from coming to work;
An individual is quarantined with the expectation of returning to work after the quarantine is over; and
An individual leaves employment due to a risk of exposure or infection or to care for a family member.

In addition, federal law does not require an employee to quit in order to receive unemployment benefits due to the impact of COVID-19.

An individual receiving paid sick leave or paid family leave, even under the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, is still receiving pay. Thus, generally speaking, the individual is not “unemployed,” so the individual is ineligible for unemployment insurance.

Texas Workforce Commission v. Wichita County, Texas Supreme Court, No. 17-0130, May 25, 2018.

2026-10-06T05:00:00Z

California expands sexual harassment prevention training requirements

Effective date: January 1, 2028

This applies to: California employers with 5 or more employees

Description of change: Assembly Bill (AB) 1803, signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom on September 27, 2026, requires covered California employers to add “anti-hate speech training” to their existing harassment prevention training.

The added training must provide guidance on recognizing, reporting, and confronting workplace speech that “vilifies, humiliates, or incites hatred” against individuals based on characteristics protected under the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. Those characteristics include race, religious creed, national origin, ancestry, disability, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, reproductive health decision-making, and veteran or military status.

AB 1803 doesn’t increase the existing training time requirements of 1 hour for employees and 2 hours for supervisors or require employers to conduct a separate training course. Employers may incorporate the hate-speech content into their existing harassment prevention programs.

View related state info: Sexual Harassment - California

Most Popular Highlights In Safety & Health

2026-10-09T05:00:00Z

How well do first responders know your facility?

Organizations spend a lot of time and resources preparing for emergencies. Local fire departments, EMS providers, and hazmat teams do too. But here’s a question that isn’t asked very often: How much preparation have they done together?

When a serious incident occurs, organizations often rely on outside responders to help protect employees, property, and the surrounding community. These responders bring valuable expertise and resources, but they may not know the facility, its hazards, or its operations as well as the people who work there every day.

That's why emergency preparedness should be viewed as a partnership, not a handoff. The strongest emergency responses occur when organizations and first responders build relationships, share information, and understand each other's expectations long before an incident occurs.

Build the relationship before it's needed

The best time for organizations to meet with local responders isn’t during an emergency. Facility tours, pre-incident planning meetings, and joint exercises allow both sides to learn from one another. Responders can become familiar with facility layouts, hazards, and access procedures. Facility personnel can better understand responder capabilities, equipment, and response expectations.

These conversations also help identify potential issues before they become problems. Questions about after-hours access, communication protocols, command structure, specialized hazards, or monitoring capabilities are much easier to answer during a planning meeting than during an active emergency.

Perhaps most importantly, these interactions build trust and familiarity, both of which can improve communication when pressure is high.

Why familiarity matters

When responders arrive, they often need information quickly to make critical decisions. The more they know beforehand, the more effectively they can respond. During an emergency, responders don't have time to learn the facility from scratch.

Consider some of the questions they may need answered:

Are there gates, badge-controlled doors, or other security measures?
Are there any areas with restricted access?
What hazardous materials are onsite, and where are they located?
Which utilities, fire department connections (FDCs), or processes may need to be shut down?
Who has authority to make decisions during the incident?
Which employees have specialized knowledge of equipment, chemicals, or operations?
How can responders access the facility after normal business hours?

Without those answers, valuable time can be spent gathering information instead of managing the emergency.

The relationship goes both ways

Organizations sometimes assume responders have every resource they might need. In reality, responder capabilities can vary by jurisdiction, equipment availability, and specialized training.

For example, a local department may have standard atmospheric monitoring equipment but may not carry instruments designed to detect every chemical present at a facility. Certain incidents may require additional resources, technical expertise, or support from a regional hazmat team.

Understanding those capabilities and limitations before an emergency occurs helps both organizations and responders establish realistic expectations, identify resource gaps, and avoid surprises when an incident occurs.

Don't rely on paperwork alone

Many organizations already share hazard information through regulatory programs. Facilities subject to EPCRA requirements may provide chemical inventory information that helps emergency planners understand potential community hazards, but that information doesn't replace direct conversations and site familiarity.

Responders also benefit from information such as facility maps, building access points, utility shutoff locations, hazardous material storage areas, emergency contacts, and site-specific response considerations.

Responders don't need every document an organization has ever produced. What helps most is having key information organized, accessible, and available before an emergency occurs.

Strengthen the partnership

To strengthen relationships with local emergency responders:

Arrange facility tours to familiarize responders with the site;
Review emergency plans, major hazards, and available resources together;
Confirm after-hours access procedures;
Identify primary and backup emergency contacts;
Provide updates when processes, layouts, or chemical inventories change; and
Conduct joint drills or exercises.

Key to remember: First responders shouldn't be learning about a facility during an emergency. The best emergency responses are built on relationships, communication, and shared understanding long before 911 is called.

2026-10-15T05:00:00Z

Expert Insights: Trench Safety by the Numbers

When I started working in construction safety, my colleague and I loved to challenge each other with safety questions to keep on top of our game amidst a dynamic construction world. Remembering safety rules is critical, but can be overwhelming, when it comes to excavation and trenches for example. Things such as when a protection system is required, when an egress method is necessary, or at what point a professional engineer needs to get involved come to mind. So, we came up with a little quiz called Excavation Safety by the Numbers to help refresh the what, where, and when of excavations. Here are some common numbers by the foot: 2, 4, 5, 6, 20, and 25.

2 Feet

There are two circumstances where the number 2 comes into play.

Spoil piles must be at least 2 feet from the edge of an excavation or trench provided the surface is able to support such a load.
If using a trench box or other engineered protection system, the bottom of the protection system cannot be more than 2 feet above the bottom of the trench or excavation.

4 Feet with 25 feet

Four feet is the trench or excavation depth that triggers the requirement to have a means of egress such as a ladder. Depending on the length of the trench/excavation, the maximum travel distance to or between egress points is 25 feet.

5 Feet

A protective system is required for trenches and excavations 5 feet deep or deeper unless a competent person determines the excavation is entirely in stable rock.

6 Feet

If employees are working near the edge of a trench/excavation with a depth of 6 feet or more, then fall protection/prevention is required.

20 Feet

If the depth of a trench/excavation is greater than 20 feet, then the protective system must be designed and approved by a professional engineer. While this number quiz does not encompass every aspect of trench/excavation safety, it may help reinforce key concepts before the first scoop of soil is moved. Remember to follow specific jobsite requirements for each trench and excavation.

2026-10-12T05:00:00Z

DOL report spotlights OSHA small employer, low-hazard industry inspections

A new report brings attention to OSHA inspections of small employers in low-hazard industries. In a September 24 alert memorandum to OSHA assistant secretary David Keeling, the Department of Labor (DOL) Office of Inspector General (OIG) states its “urgent concern” that OSHA may have conducted impermissible inspections of small employers in low-risk industries and therefore may not have complied with the agency’s authorized appropriations acts.

The memo explains that an OIG investigation identified 481 inspections that the Inspector General says warrant further review by OSHA.

Hotline complaint leads to investigation, report

The OIG’s investigation stemmed from a September 2025 hotline complaint alleging OSHA had performed a planned program inspection on the complainant earlier that year even though the complainant’s business was allegedly exempted by OSHA’s appropriations rider. A recurring congressional appropriations rider generally prohibits OSHA from using appropriated funds for enforcement activities involving employers that have 10 or fewer employees and operate in designated low-hazard industries. However, the agency can still inspect an otherwise-exempt employer in certain circumstances, including:

Health hazards;
Fatalities, or hospitalizations of two or more employees;
Imminent danger; and
Complaints from current employees.

In response to the complaint, the Inspector General reviewed OSHA Information System (OIS) inspection data from November 8, 2024, through January 21, 2026. (The review did not include supporting case files.) The analysis found OSHA initiated and closed 621 inspections that met the exemption criteria. Of those, the report says 140 clearly involved a permissible exception, while:

201 had insufficient OIS data demonstrating an exception applied, and
280 had no permissible exceptions supported by OIS data.

These issues, the OIG states, may have stemmed from control weaknesses in OSHA guidance and issues with data reliability: “Therefore, OSHA may have conducted 481 impermissible inspections that did not comply with its appropriations acts.”

Following a preliminary review of 27 case files, OSHA found four that did not meet any exceptions allowed under its appropriations acts. The agency also found coding errors with the other 23 inspections. OSHA officials indicated the overall issue was likely due to coding errors rather than impermissible inspections and stated it would need to perform an in-depth review of case files to confirm. The Inspector General noted that this raises concerns about overall data reliability and that both issues (i.e., coding errors, impermissible inspections) warrant immediate attention from agency management.

OSHA pushes back on findings

In response to a draft of the September 24 memo, OSHA officials disagreed with the findings, citing the Inspector General’s lack of familiarity with the OIS and its data fields and its limited review of the inspection information for each inspector or investigation as the reason for its “unsupported conclusions.” The agency also argued that the OIG did not adequately account for OSHA’s procedures, management reviews, or the fact that inspectors sometimes need to begin an investigation to determine whether the exemption or an exception applies.

OIG recommendations to OSHA and DOL

The Inspector General stated that, ultimately, OSHA’s response did not change the OIG’s conclusion, and four recommendations were made to OSHA:

Review all 481 identified inspections to determine whether they complied with the appropriations acts and take appropriate action based on the results.
Establish adequate controls to prevent impermissible inspections and to document permissible exceptions in both the OIS and case files.
Update guidance to specify which employee-related field to use when determining if enforcement exemptions and limitations apply under OSHA’s appropriations acts.
Improve OIS data accuracy through data-entry controls and validation against case-file documentation.

The Inspector General also recommended that the Secretary of Labor conduct an investigation to determine whether OSHA failed to comply with the Antideficiency Act. The OIG noted that if the DOL ultimately determines that a violation occurred, federal law requires reporting to the President and Congress, with a copy provided to the Comptroller General.

OSHA’s consideration of the recommendations is ongoing, and the OIG says it looks forward to continuing its work with OSHA “to ensure planned corrective actions meet the intent of our proposed recommendations.” It should be noted that the Inspector General did not audit supporting case file documentation and therefore drew no conclusions on whether OSHA complied with its appropriations acts.

Key to remember: A DOL OIG investigation found that OSHA may have conducted certain small employer inspections that did not comply with its appropriations acts. OSHA disputes the findings, and its review of the cases and the OIG’s recommendations is ongoing. For employers, the Inspector General’s report is a reminder that some small employers in low-hazard industries may be subject to special limits on OSHA enforcement.

2022-06-13T05:00:00Z

Cleaning with compressed air: Making sense of the OSHA regulation

It is a common sight in many workplaces to see employees using compressed air to clean parts, equipment, and even clothing. What many workers and some employers do not realize is that compressed air can be deadly. That is why OSHA has a regulation prohibiting the use of compressed air for cleaning unless the dead-end pressure is reduced to below 30 psi, and then only with effective chip guarding and PPE.

The regulation Federal OSHA’s requirement for cleaning with compressed air is in 1910.242(b):

“Compressed air used for cleaning. Compressed air shall not be used for cleaning purposes except where reduced to less than 30 psi and then only with effective chip guarding and personal protective equipment.” Because the regulation is short and somewhat vague, OSHA has clarified the issue in a compliance directive and letters of interpretation.

What is “chip guarding”?

“Effective chip guarding” means any method or equipment which will prevent a chip or particle (of whatever size) from being blown into the eyes or unbroken skin of the operator or other workers.

Effective chip guarding may be separate from the air nozzle as in the case where screens or barriers are used. The use of protective cone air nozzles are acceptable in general for protection of the operator, but barriers, baffles or screens may be required to protect other workers if they are exposed to flying chips or particles.

What about the psi requirement?

The regulation requires the psi at the nozzle to be less than 30 when using compressed air for cleaning.

However, OSHA has said in interpretive guidance that the use of compressed air for cleaning purposes at pressures at or greater than 30 psi is permissible if the outlet or source is fitted with a relief device or air ports that drop the pressure to less than 30 psi if the flow is dead-ended.

What about cleaning clothing/bodies?

While the regulation does not specifically address the issue, in a letter of interpretation OSHA said that employers should not allow employees to use compressed air for cleaning themselves or their clothing in general industry situations. The eyes and other body parts, such as the respiratory system, may be damaged as the result of inadequate personal protective equipment, lack of chip guards, and/or uncontrolled release of compressed air.

The dangers

There are numerous dangers of improperly using compressed air:

Embolism: If compressed air enters the bloodstream through a body opening or skin break, it can create an embolism (air bubble) that can be life threatening.
Eye damage: Particles that are being blown can “blow back” and strike the eyes. The air itself can also cause injury if it is pointed toward the eyes.
Hearing loss: Some compressed air equipment can be loud enough to damage hearing. Always wear proper PPE.
Combustible dust: If compressed air is used to blow certain dusts, it can create a suspension in the air that could ignite if there is an ignition source.
Respiratory: Particles or air can enter the respiratory system, posing deadly hazards.
Whips: If not properly secured, hoses can whip and cause severe injury.

Workers must be trained that even extremely low pressures, such as 5 or 10 psi, can still cause severe damage if pointed toward the body, particularly the mouth, eyes, ears, or open areas in the skin.

Employers should train employees on the dangers of compressed air, and ensure the equipment is equipped with the necessary safety features and is properly maintained.

Supervisors should watch for improper use, particularly horseplay, and initiate corrective action. In addition, for many applications, a broom or shop vacuum may be just as effective at cleaning, and much safer. Compressed air may seem harmless, but if strict safeguards and practices are not utilized it can be deadly.

2026-09-17T05:00:00Z

Heads up! HazCom employer compliance deadline approaching fast

OSHA’s revised Hazard Communication (HazCom) standard contains multiple compliance dates at 29 CFR 1910.1200 paragraph (j) for chemical manufacturers, importers, distributors, and employers. In fact, the next compliance date is for employers, and it’s just over two months away! The November 20, 2026, employer deadline is driven by changes to chemical hazard classifications for aerosols, desensitized explosives, and flammable gases.

Reclassification impacts downstream chemical users

According to 1910.1200(j), chemical manufacturers, importers, and distributors evaluating substances (see the definition in 1910.1200(c)) based on the new classifications had until May 19, 2026, to:

Reclassify the substances under revised criteria,
Update their safety data sheets (SDSs) and shipping labels for these substances, and
Otherwise be in compliance with all the modified provisions of the standard for those substances.

Hazard classification is the process of identifying a chemical’s hazards and determining how severe those hazards are. Chemical manufacturers and importers use 1910.1200(d), along with Appendix A (for health hazards) and Appendix B (for physical hazards) to make these determinations. When OSHA aligned HazCom with Revision 7 of the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals (GHS) in 2024, the agency revised its classification categories for aerosols, desensitized explosives, and flammable gases.

Once a classification is determined, it dictates the warnings, pictograms, hazard statements, and other safety and health information that must appear on SDSs and shipping labels. OSHA explains that the classification should provide downstream users with sufficient information to perform a hazard assessment specific to their own workplace and to understand how employees must use the chemical product there.

How the November 20 deadline impacts employers

Employers who purchase substances that are aerosols, desensitized explosives, and flammable gases will receive (or may already have received) revised SDSs and see updated container labels with their shipments.

In addition, according to 1910.1200(j), all employers must, as necessary:

Update any alternative workplace (in-house) labeling per 1910.1200(f)(6);
Update their HazCom training program required by 1910.1200(h)(1); and
Provide additional employee training in line with 1910.1200(h)(3) for newly identified physical, health, or other hazards covered by the standard.

Employers will also need to retain any new SDSs they receive. However, if they have not purchased new inventory, they’re not required to contact the manufacturer, importer, or distributor for a new SDS. Still, an employer may proactively request new ones from their suppliers anyway.

Further HazCom compliance dates in paragraph (j)

Chemical manufacturers, importers, and distributors evaluating mixtures (as defined in 1910.1200(c)) based on the new classifications have until November 19, 2027, to reclassify them based on the new criteria, update their SDSs and shipping labels, and otherwise be in compliance with all the modified provisions of the standard for those mixtures.

Also, for mixtures, employers have until May 19, 2028, to update any alternative workplace labeling, update their HazCom training program, and provide additional employee training for newly identified physical, health, or other hazards.

Key to remember: OSHA paragraph (j) to 1910.1200 has several compliance dates for chemical manufacturers, importers, distributors, and employers. One date has already passed, and the next one (November 20, 2026) applies to employers. Two more are slated for November 19, 2027, and May 19, 2028.

2023-12-28T06:00:00Z

Does my office need an exit sign?

One of the most common questions inspectors get when evaluating workplace emergency safeguards is, “Does my office need an exit sign?” Section 29 CFR 1910.37 requires employers to provide specific safeguards and operational features for exit routes. OSHA’s intent is to minimize danger to employees and requiring proper exit route marking is one way to do so.

In short, smaller rooms or offices with only one door don’t necessarily need an exit sign. OSHA standards for exit signage are based on NFPA 101, Life Safety Code, which OSHA incorporated by reference. OSHA 1910.37(b)(4) states, “If the direction of travel to the exit or exit discharge is not immediately apparent, signs must be posted along the exit access indicating the direction of travel to the nearest exit and exit discharge. Additionally, the line-of-sight to an exit sign must clearly be visible at all times.”

Other exit signage requirements to consider

The International Fire Code (IFC) was not adopted by OSHA; however, it’s likely to be referenced by local fire marshals. The IFC states, “Exit signs are not required in rooms or areas that require only one exit or exit access.” Generally, a room or area that holds fewer than 50 people is permitted to have only one exit. These rooms are typically smaller with an exit that is close and obvious, so an exit sign shouldn’t be needed inside the room. For example, individual offices, small conference rooms, storage rooms, and bathrooms usually don’t have exit signs because the way out is obvious.

Additional requirements for office exits require they:

Are free of obstructions. No materials or equipment may be placed, either permanently or temporarily, within the exit route.
Are arranged so that employees aren’t required to travel toward a high hazard area unless the path of travel is effectively shielded from the high hazard area by suitable partitions or other physical barriers.
Don’t pass through a room that can be locked, such as a bathroom, to reach an exit or exit discharge, or lead into a dead-end corridor.
Are adequately lighted so that an employee with normal vision can see along the exit route.
Have each exit route door be free of decorations or signs that obscure the visibility of the exit route door.

Key to remember

When considering exit signs for smaller offices, employers must determine the size of the room, path of travel to an exit, and how obvious the exit would be based on room size. Generally, a room intended to hold fewer than 50 people is permitted to have only one exit and would not require an exit sign.

About Notice at Collection Terms of Use Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information Accessibility Support