Road test requirements: 3 common questions

Pesticide registration tracking app

On April 18, EPA made enhancements to its MyPest app, which sources say was initially launched in mid-January. EPA is proud to say that MyPest already boasts over 1,200 registrants. The new app allows registrants of pesticide products to:

• Monitor the status of their registration submissions in real-time,
• Drill down to a detailed view of each application, and
• Communicate directly with EPA staff about registration packages in review.

Updates to MyPest include an enhanced dashboard page. The page offers information about the registrant’s cases and products. More updates are planned later this year.

Policy changes impacting two forms

On April 4, EPA announced in the Federal Register the issuance of Pesticide Registration (PR) Notice 2025-1. The notice itself is dated effective March 27, 2025. Its subject line reads, “Revised Procedures for Citing Data to Support Pesticide Registrations (EPA Forms No. 8570-34 and 8570-35).”

The latest PR notice supersedes PR Notice 98-5, dated June 12, 1998. While the revisions were proposed last June, the agency only finalized them now. According to PR Notice 2025-1:

• EPA Form 8570-34 — This is the Certification with Respect to Citation of Data. Pesticide registrants use this form to indicate how they will meet their data submission/citation obligations under the law. When a registrant refers to another company’s data, the registrant must certify that:
  • It offered compensation to the original data submitter, or
  • It has the original data submitter’s permission to cite the data.
• EPA Form 8570-35 — This is the Data Matrix. Pesticide registrants use this form to indicate to whom they made offers of compensation.

The two forms — EPA Forms 8570-34 and 8570-35 — have not been modified. Only policies regarding the submission of the two forms have changed. The agency:

• Eliminated the instruction to use “paper” submissions;
• Says registrants should complete and submit the two forms electronically through the Pesticide Submission Portal;
• Eliminated the instruction that registrants submit two versions of the Data Matrix, i.e., the ‘‘Internal Agency Use Copy’’ and the ‘‘Public File Copy’’; and
• Requires that registrants submit a single Data Matrix without redactions.

EPA contends that none of the information on Form 8570-35 is confidential. Put another way, none of the information on the Data Matrix is protected from public release. Therefore, the agency claims there is no reason to submit two versions of the form.

According to EPA, entities potentially affected by the policy changes include, but are not limited to:

• Crop production,
• Animal production,
• Food manufacturing, and
• Pesticide manufacturing.

Efficiencies and transparencies gained

Using electronic reporting for EPA Forms 8570-34 and 8570-35 brings efficient data transmittal, argues EPA. A bonus is that electronic reporting will also reduce errors. That’s because of automated validation tools in the portal. Submitters should experience lower costs and faster review and transmission of data, the agency adds.

In 2024, EPA received a total of 3,309 Data Matrices. Moving from two versions to just one for the Data Matrix form should save registrants and EPA time. Specifically, completing, submitting, and processing the Data Matrix should be quicker. EPA will also experience time savings when providing the public access to the information. Extra steps under the Freedom of Information Act would not be needed.

The MyPest app update is a step forward in efficiency and transparency, concludes EPA. The app enhancements are part of the agency’s overall move toward digital and streamlined processes. EPA projects that the app will improve the timeliness of pesticide registration decisions.

Key to remember

Recent actions streamline the pesticide registration process and make it more transparent. These actions relate to the MyPest app and EPA Forms 8570-34 and 8570-35.

What does “systematic” mean?

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) provides carriers with a lot of flexibility to design their maintenance program. Because vehicle use varies from fleet to fleet or even individual vehicles in a fleet, maintenance intervals can vary. For this reason, FMCSA does not establish a universal maintenance interval. Instead, they provide carriers with guidance stating “systematic” generally means a regular or scheduled program designed to keep vehicles in a safe operating condition.

Vehicles used in long haul, interstate transit will need a different schedule than a local delivery truck making frequent stops and starts. The important thing is that the carrier establishes a regular schedule and follows it.

How does FMCSA verify compliance?

One of the primary ways compliance is demonstrated is through a carrier's maintenance records. Any vehicle controlled by a motor carrier for 30 consecutive days must have maintenance records identifying the vehicle, make, serial number, and year.

The records must show the nature and due date of inspections and maintenance operations to be performed. They must also document the actual date and type of inspection, repair, or maintenance that was actually performed.

In short, a carrier should be able to demonstrate:

• What maintenance is required,
• When it is due, and
• When it was completed.

Producing a folder with invoices and receipts may show that a vehicle was repaired, but a well-documented program demonstrates that maintenance is being proactively managed.

Recordkeeping requirements

These maintenance records generally must be retained where a vehicle is housed or maintained for a period of one year and then for six months after the vehicle leaves the carrier's control.

Systematic maintenance isn't about creating more paperwork. It’s about developing a repeatable process that keeps vehicles safe, identifies problems before they become more serious, and documents the work performed.

This information can also help carriers evaluate whether their current preventive maintenance intervals are appropriate for the equipment and how it is being used.

Systematic maintenance can save money

A good preventive maintenance program isn't just about satisfying a regulation. Identifying worn brakes, tire problems, fluid leaks, or other problems before they result in a failure is critical to reducing roadside breakdowns, emergency repairs, towing expenses, service disruption, and even unplanned downtime.

Preventive maintenance also gives carriers control over when repairs occur. A defect discovered during scheduled shop time can be addressed more efficiently, and at a lower cost than the same problem discovered on the side of the road.

This information can help carriers evaluate whether their current maintenance intervals are appropriate for the equipment and how the equipment is being used.

Key to remember: FMCSA requires you to keep records. Good records can help you run a better, less expensive maintenance program.

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.

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.

‘State and local laws’

A violation of 392.2 is a violation of a local or state law, regulation, or ordinance. These must be obeyed due to 392.2, which reads, “Every commercial motor vehicle must be operated in accordance with the laws, ordinances, and regulations of the jurisdiction in which it is being operated.”

The confusion is that there are no paragraphs in 392.2, so there technically should be no letters following that section. However, to inform the driver, carrier, and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) what particular state or local law or regulation was involved, FMCSA has developed a system of suffix codes. The letters following “392.2” – the “suffix” — show which state or local law or regulation was involved.

When one of these codes is used, the officer should include a description of the specific violation in the “violation details” area on the actual inspection report. FYI: Summary roadside inspection reports (such as the ones visible in CSA’s SMS) do not show these details.

Not all 392.2 violations are used in CSA

Not all of these state and local law or regulation violations are used by the FMCSA for scoring purposes. The Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) Safety Measurement System (SMS) does not use the 392.2 violations that cannot be tied to crash causation. Here are a couple of examples: 392.2UCR Failure to pay UCR fee and 392.2W Size and weight are not used.

Most common 392.2 violations

Below are the top 10 392.2 violations written during 2021. All of these violations are safety-related, and therefore used in the CSA SMS for scoring. The BASIC within the SMS the violation is scored in is shown following the violation description.

1. 392.2SLLS2 Speeding 6-10 miles per hour over the speed limit (Unsafe Driving)
2. 392.2C Failure to obey traffic control device (Unsafe Driving)
3. 392.2LV Lane Restriction violation (Unsafe Driving)
4. 392.2SLLS3 Speeding 11-14 miles per hour over the speed limit (Unsafe Driving)
5. 392.2WC Wheel (Mud) flaps missing or defective (Vehicle Maintenance)
6. 392.2SLLS4 Speeding 15 or more miles per hour over the speed limit (Unsafe Driving)
7. 392.2ML Failure to maintain lane (Unsafe Driving)
8. 392.2SLLSWZ Speeding work/construction zone (Unsafe Driving)
9. 392.2PK Unlawfully parking and/or leaving vehicle in the roadway (Unsafe Driving)
10. 392.2FC Following too close (Unsafe Driving)

Key to remember

In general, FMCSA does not write traffic codes. They rely on local and state agencies to do that. When state or local traffic codes are violated, it appears on a roadside inspection report as a violation of 392.2, with a suffix indicating which traffic code was involved.

Importance of a good onboarding process

Done well, onboarding can increase employee retention and overall job satisfaction. Done poorly, the onboarding process can be disjointed and overwhelming, causing a new employee to question whether they made the right decision to join a company. In fact, 20 percent of those surveyed said their less-than-ideal onboarding experience made them second-guess their decision to take the job.

Even if new hires sign documents acknowledging that they’ve received certain forms, it doesn’t mean they understand the materials. Almost half of those surveyed (41 percent) admitted to signing onboarding documents without reading them first. This gap in knowledge indicates that HR needs to do more to convey information during the onboarding process to make it more effective.

Onsite, remote, or hybrid

Onboarding challenges vary depending on whether employees work onsite, hybrid, or remote. According to the study, 59 percent of both remote and onsite employees said they retained more than half of their onboarding information, while only 47 percent of hybrid workers did. Remote employees were the most likely to call out contradictions in onboarding documentation or information that was outdated; however, they were also the ones most likely to be unable to find onboarding materials and resources to refer back to after the first week.

Biggest opportunities for improvement

Many companies are using artificial intelligence (AI) to streamline processes. However, one of the biggest complaints of survey participants was that they (38 percent) didn’t receive any guidance on company AI policies. This was the largest information gap in the study.

Aside from AI, other areas survey respondents said companies could improve upon included having a single hub for onboarding information that was searchable. They also said they’d prefer fewer materials that are more consolidated in those first few days of employment. Using checklists would be ideal, along with having information dispensed gradually rather than all at once.

The bottom line is that better, more consistent communication in the first week or two of employment could make the onboarding process better all around.

Key to remember: A recent study shed light on the pitfalls of onboarding new hires.

Potential future increases

The bill, The Restoring Overtime Pay Act of 2026 (HR 8868), would increase the federal minimum salary level as follows:

• 2026 — $45,000
• 2027 — $55,000
• 2028 — $65,000
• 2029 — $75,000
• 2030 — 55th percentile of full-time salaried workers nationally*, updated annually

*The current 55th percentile of full-time salaried workers nationally is $89,440 and could increase to $98,000 by 2030.

The measure would allow the Secretary of Labor to establish a higher salary threshold through notice and comment rulemaking, as long as it can be updated annually.

The bill would also require the following:

• The Secretary of Labor would need to provide annual, automatic updates to the overtime threshold of at least the 55th percentile of weekly earnings of full-time salaried workers.
• If the Secretary doesn’t establish an increased salary threshold, the 55th percentile of weekly earnings of full-time salaried workers nationally would take effect, based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) from the second quarter of the preceding calendar year.
• The Secretary would need to publish a notice announcing the revised salary threshold no later than 60 days before the revised threshold takes effect.
• The BLS would need to publicly publish data on its website for each week of each quarter and data on weekly earnings by census region.

The bill is in the first stage of the legislative process. It was referred to the House Committee on Education and Workforce. While it has a small chance of being enacted at this time, it does show that some members of Congress are interested in this topic.

Key to remember: Congress members introduced a bill increasing the federal salary threshold level. But for now, employers can use the 2019 federal salary threshold to determine whether they may classify an employee as exempt.

How we got to this point

OSHA published its updated HazCom final rule on May 20, 2024 (89 FR 44144), aligning the standard with Revision 7 of the UN's Globally Harmonized System plus selected Revision 8 elements. In January 2026, with the first deadline days away and its own guidance documents unfinished, OSHA pushed every compliance date back four months (91 FR 1695). The schedule under 1910.1200(j) now reads:

• May 19, 2026: Manufacturers, importers and distributors: substances (passed)
• November 20, 2026: Employers: substances
• November 19, 2027: Manufacturers, importers and distributors: mixtures
• May 19, 2028: Employers: mixtures

The upcoming November date requires employers to update alternative workplace labeling, revise their written hazard communication programs, and train workers on newly identified hazards for substances whose classifications changed.

The manufacturer deadline for substances passed in May, which means reclassified safety data sheets have been arriving. Some products picked up new hazard classes, such as the new Category 3 for non-flammable aerosols or the subdivided flammable gas categories. Others shifted or changed hazard statements or precautionary language.

Each of those revised SDSs will need to be studied by employers because they could contain triggers. Under 1910.1200(h)(1), employers must train workers whenever a new chemical hazard is introduced into the work area. That includes a reclassified product. If your workplace labels, inventory and training still reflect the old SDS, you are out of step with the first document an inspector will ask for.

The cost of falling behind

Federal OSHA's maximum penalty is $16,550 per serious violation and $165,514 per willful or repeat violation. Those figures didn't rise this year and OSHA skipped the 2026 inflation adjustment because the fall 2025 government shutdown delayed the CPI data it relies on. Expect an adjustment in 2027.

Individual HazCom citations rarely make headlines. The real exposure is cumulative. HazCom violations often pop up alongside respiratory protection and PPE citations, and a HazCom citation today becomes the possibility for a repeat classification tomorrow, at ten times the price.

A 30-day action plan

With about a month left to prepare, focus on what an inspector will actually ask for.

1. Audit your SDS library: Request current SDSs from every supplier and compare Section 2 against the versions on file. Flag every changed classification.
2. True up the chemical inventory: The list required by 1910.1200(e)(1)(i) must use product identifiers that match the current SDS.
3. Audit workplace labels: Secondary containers and alternative systems such as HMIS or NFPA must convey hazard information consistent with the updated SDS. Reclassified products need relabeling.
4. Revise the written program: Document how you receive, review and distribute updated SDSs, and reference the 2024 standard. Inspectors usually start here.
5. Retrain, and document it: Target training to the products that changed rather than running a generic refresher. Record dates, attendees and content.
6. Prepare for 2028: The mixtures deadline is a pretty big wave, because most workplace chemicals are mixtures. The SDS review process you build this month is the one you'll lean on through May 2028.

Keys to remember: November 20, 2026, is the employer HazCom deadline for substances. Employers must be ready to address updated hazard classifications flowing downstream from manufacturers and importers.

The five principles behind HOP

HOP is built around five core principles. The wording may vary, but the underlying ideas remain the same.

1. Error is normal

People make mistakes. That's part of being human. No amount of training, experience, or motivation will completely eliminate human error. Employees will occasionally forget a step, misread information, become distracted, or make a decision that doesn't work out as intended.

Instead of expecting perfect performance, HOP encourages employers to ask:

• What happens if someone makes a mistake?
• Will the error be detected?
• Is there a safeguard in place?
• Could the mistake lead directly to an injury or serious event?

Employers shouldn't rely on employees getting it right every single time. Processes and safeguards help catch mistakes before they lead to an injury or serious event.

2. Blame fixes nothing

Blame may identify who was involved, but it rarely explains why the event happened.

When an investigation stops at "employee error," valuable learning opportunities are often missed. Maybe the procedure wasn't practical or outdated. Maybe production demands influenced the decision. Maybe communication, training, staffing, equipment, or supervision played a role.

Accountability is important, but effective investigations dive deeper to examine the pressures, workplace factors, and system weaknesses that contributed to the event.

3. Context drives behavior

People generally do what makes sense to them at the time. That's why understanding the work environment matters. Factors that can influence decisions include:

• Production pressure,
• Staffing levels,
• Fatigue,
• Time constraints,
• Equipment design,
• Resource availability,
• Workload, and
• Conflicting priorities.

Looking back after an incident, it can be easy to wonder why someone made a particular decision. In the moment, however, the employee was responding to the circumstances in front of them from their perspective. Understanding those circumstances often helps explain why the decision seemed reasonable at the time and where improvements may be needed.

4. Leader response matters

How leaders respond after an incident can have a lasting impact. If employees expect blame and punishment, they're less likely to report concerns, admit mistakes, or speak up when something isn't right.

When leaders focus on understanding what happened and learning from it, employees are more likely to share information that can help prevent future incidents.

Employees are generally more willing to report concerns, share lessons learned, and discuss mistakes when they believe the goal is to improve the workplace rather than assign blame.

5. Learning is vital

Every near miss, hazard report, equipment problem, employee concern, and incident creates an opportunity to learn.

Organizations don't have to wait for someone to get hurt before making improvements. Most warning signs show up long before an injury occurs.

Paying attention to those warning signs can help employers address problems before they contribute to an injury or serious incident.

Why the system matters

One of the biggest lessons from HOP is that workplace outcomes are rarely driven by one person alone. Procedures, equipment, staffing, schedules, training, maintenance practices, production expectations, and leadership decisions all influence how work gets done.

Looking beyond the employees’ actions often reveals controllable risks that contributed to the event. By identifying and controlling what shapes the decision-making environment, organizations can move beyond blame and toward effective and lasting incident prevention.

Putting HOP into practice

Organizations don't need to create a new safety program to begin using HOP principles. In many cases, it starts by changing how incidents, near misses, and operational problems are discussed and investigated.

The next time an incident, near miss, equipment problem, or operational issue occurs, consider asking:

• What made this action seem reasonable at the time?
• What factors influenced the decision?
• What pressures or obstacles were present?
• What safeguards were missing, weak, or ineffective?
• What can we improve so the next person doesn't face the same situation?

Open conversations like this often identify issues that wouldn't have been found by simply concluding that the employee made a mistake.

Key to remember: Human error may explain what happened, but it rarely explains why it happened. Looking at the factors surrounding the work often provides a clearer picture of what contributed to the event and what can be done to help prevent it from happening again.

Why this matters

Electrical equipment labels provide vital information when a worker must inspect or service energized equipment. This information helps workers choose the proper personal protective equipment (PPE) the worker needs to wear when performing work on that piece of equipment.

Of course, the safest plan is to work on the system in a deenergized state. However, qualified workers may still need to wear appropriate PPE to verify that no electrical current is flowing in the system and to take voltage, amperage, or other electrical measurements during initial energization of circuits and equipment.

Information on the label comes from an Incident Energy Analysis Method which is typically performed by an electrical engineer using calculations found in NFPA 70E Annex D. The label provides information workers need to stay safe.

Required label information

NFPA 70E 130.5(H) requires arc flash labels to include information that helps workers understand the electrical hazards and choose the proper PPE for the task. This information includes:

• Nominal System Voltage (such as120/240 volts, 480/277 volts, or 600 volts);
• Arc flash boundary, which identifies the distance at which incident energy reaches 1.2 cal/cm² (5 J/cm²). This is when serious burn injuries can happen; and
• At least one of the following:
  • Available incident energy and the corresponding working distance,
  • Minimum arc rating of clothing to be worn as PPE, or
  • Site-specific level of PPE.

Other valuable information on a label

While NFPA 70E requires certain minimum information on an arc flash label, employers may choose to include additional details that help workers identify electrical hazards. Two examples are the Limited Approach Boundary and Restricted Approach Boundary.

These boundaries address shock hazards, which NFPA 70E defines as the risk of injury from electric current passing through the body. Depending on the amount of current, the path it takes through the body, and the duration of exposure, an electric shock can result in anything from a mild sensation to significant injury or even death.

• Limited Approach Boundary: Marks the distance where a shock hazard exists. Unqualified workers must remain outside this boundary unless escorted by a qualified person and properly advised of the hazards.
• Restricted Approach Boundary: Establishes the shock protection boundary for qualified workers. Crossing this boundary requires additional protective measures to prevent contact with exposed energized parts.

Always read the fine print on the label.

Key to remember: Arc flash labels provide critical information to workers before they perform tasks on electrical equipment. Understanding this information is an essential part of assessing risk, determining proper protective measures, and most importantly ensuring the safety of the workers.

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.

Top violations by frequency

Scanning the list of top citations, the Hazard Communication standard was the number one frequently cited OSHA standard in Part 1910 last fiscal year. The regulation at 1910.1200 requires covered employers to implement a written program to inform workers about the hazards of non-exempted chemicals they may be exposed to on the job. Workers have a “right to know and understand” the hazardous chemicals they work with or near.

The Lockout/Tagout standard took the number two spot on the preliminary OSHA list. Under 1910.147, workers servicing or maintaining machines or equipment may be seriously injured or killed if hazardous energy is not properly controlled. The standard requires covered employers to implement a program and procedures to disable machinery and equipment, thereby preventing the unexpected release of hazardous energy (like electricity), while workers perform these servicing and maintenance activities.

When effective engineering controls are not feasible, or while they are being instituted, appropriate respirators must be provided and used when necessary to protect the health of the worker. This requirement is per OSHA’s Respiratory Protection standard at 1910.134, which ranked number three on the list. Under this standard, covered employers must identify and evaluate the respiratory hazards in the workplace and develop and implement a written respiratory protection program with site-specific procedures and elements for respirator use. When respirators are not required but are worn voluntarily, 1910.134 generally imposes more limited obligations for the employer.

Top citations by penalty rate among the 20

The top 20 had an average overall penalty rate of $3,991. However, the highest penalty rate among these 20 most-cited standards went to the Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals standard. In FY 2026, the preliminary data show that the price tag on that regulation averaged $8,757 per citation. Catastrophic releases of toxic, reactive, flammable, or explosive chemicals have resulted in toxic, fire, or explosion hazards. OSHA 1910.119 provides requirements for the management of hazards associated with processes using threshold quantities of highly hazardous chemicals.

The Machine Guarding standard at 1910.212 came in second, at $7,383 on average per citation. Moving machine parts have the potential to cause severe workplace injuries, such as crushed fingers or hands, amputations, burns, or blindness. The standard applies to employers when workers are exposed to dangerous moving parts. Covered employers must provide one or more methods of machine guarding to protect the operator and other workers in the machine area from hazards such as those created by point of operation, ingoing nip points, rotating parts, flying chips, and sparks.

The Lockout/Tagout standard took third place when ranking the 20 standards by penalty rate. The preliminary dollar amount was $6,836 per citation on average for 1910.147. Injuries resulting from the failure to control hazardous energy during servicing or maintenance activities can be serious or fatal. The standard is intended to address these risks.

Key to remember

New enforcement data for Part 1910 are now available for FY 2026. While the top 20 citations tend to line up almost identically every year, ranking these top 20 by penalty rate offers a different way to view the data. Both tables above give general industry employers insight when they evaluate and prioritize compliance at their own site.

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.