|
|
|
Time’s up for old drug testing form
Make sure your drug testing providers are using the latest version of the Federal Drug Testing Custody and Control Form (CCF).
September 1, 2023, was the deadline for using the new form in place of the 2017 version. Among other changes, the newer CCF (issued in 2021) includes the option to test oral fluid in place of urine (see Step 2 on the form). (Note, however, that oral-fluid testing is not yet available because no labs have been approved to test oral fluids.)
Click here to read more about oral-fluid testing! |
You may need a memo
What happens if the old form is used by mistake? Using the 2017 version of the CCF won’t mean the test needs to be canceled, but it will require special documentation.
Whoever first becomes aware that an old CCF was used (whether it’s the collector, lab, medical review officer, or motor carrier) must create and sign a “memorandum for the record” that:
- States that the incorrect form contains all the information needed for a valid DOT drug test;
- States that the incorrect form was used inadvertently or as the only means of conducting a test, in circumstances beyond your control; and
- Lists the steps you’ve taken to prevent future use of an expired CCF.
The memo must be faxed or couriered to each party that has a copy of the CCF, on the same business day on which the problem came to light. The memo must be kept with the CCF, and the CCF must be marked on its face to make it obvious that the flaw was corrected.
Refer to 49 CFR 40.205 for details.
Key to remember: As of September 1, 2023, the 2021 version of the federal drug testing form must be used for all DOT drug tests. Failing to use the latest form will require creation of a special memo.

Time’s up for old drug testing form
Make sure your drug testing providers are using the latest version of the Federal Drug Testing Custody and Control Form (CCF).
September 1, 2023, was the deadline for using the new form in place of the 2017 version. Among other changes, the newer CCF (issued in 2021) includes the option to test oral fluid in place of urine (see Step 2 on the form). (Note, however, that oral-fluid testing is not yet available because no labs have been approved to test oral fluids.)
Click here to read more about oral-fluid testing! |
You may need a memo
What happens if the old form is used by mistake? Using the 2017 version of the CCF won’t mean the test needs to be canceled, but it will require special documentation.
Whoever first becomes aware that an old CCF was used (whether it’s the collector, lab, medical review officer, or motor carrier) must create and sign a “memorandum for the record” that:
- States that the incorrect form contains all the information needed for a valid DOT drug test;
- States that the incorrect form was used inadvertently or as the only means of conducting a test, in circumstances beyond your control; and
- Lists the steps you’ve taken to prevent future use of an expired CCF.
The memo must be faxed or couriered to each party that has a copy of the CCF, on the same business day on which the problem came to light. The memo must be kept with the CCF, and the CCF must be marked on its face to make it obvious that the flaw was corrected.
Refer to 49 CFR 40.205 for details.
Key to remember: As of September 1, 2023, the 2021 version of the federal drug testing form must be used for all DOT drug tests. Failing to use the latest form will require creation of a special memo.
RELATED NEWS
D & A background checks: Setting the record straight
How well do you know the Clearinghouse?
SAP list: What are the motor carrier’s obligations?
Clearinghouse alerts: Responding to an updated driver record
RELATED TOPICS
Introduction

Specialized Industries
Go beyond the regulations! Visit the Institute for in-depth guidance on a wide range of compliance subjects in safety and health, transportation, environment, and human resources.
J. J. Keller® COMPLIANCE NETWORK is a premier online safety and compliance community, offering members exclusive access to timely regulatory content in workplace safety (OSHA), transportation (DOT), environment (EPA), and human resources (DOL).

Interact With Our Compliance Experts
Puzzled by a regulatory question or issue? Let our renowned experts provide the answers and get your business on track to full compliance!

Upcoming Events
Reference the Compliance Network Safety Calendar to keep track of upcoming safety and compliance events. Browse by industry or search by keyword to see relevant dates and observances, including national safety months, compliance deadlines, and more.
THE J. J. KELLER INSTITUTE
Most Recent Highlights In Environmental
EPA: Removal of Affirmative Defense Provisions From the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for the Oil and Natural Gas Production Facility and Natural Gas Transmission and Storage Facility Source Categories
SUMMARY: The EPA is proposing amendments to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for the oil and gas industry issued under the Clean Air Act. Specifically, the EPA is proposing to remove the affirmative defense provisions of the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for both the Oil and Natural Gas Production source category and the Natural Gas Transmission and Storage source category.
DATES: This proposed rule is published in the Federal Register December 1, 2023, page 83889.
View proposed rule .
Are you as focused on combustible dusts as OSHA?
If you think you may have combustible dusts lurking in your facilities, you’ll want to know about recent updates to OSHA’s Combustible Dust National Emphasis Program ( NEP ). Have you been added to the list of higher-likelihood industries?
What are combustible dusts?
Employers are required to inspect their facilities for processes that generate or use combustible dusts and address associated fire, deflagration, and explosion hazards. So, what constitutes combustible dust? Combustible dusts are fine particles that present an explosion hazard when suspended in air under certain conditions.
The following combustible dusts can cause catastrophic loss of life, severe injuries, and building destruction:
- Metal dust such as aluminum, magnesium, and some forms of iron dusts;
- Wood dust;
- Coal and other carbon dusts, including carbon black;
- Plastic dust, phenolic resins, and additives;
- Rubber dust;
- Biosolids;
- Some textile materials;
- Organic dust such as sugar, flour, paper, and soap; and
- Dried blood.
Protecting workers from combustible dusts
Many combustible dust incidents occur without the employer or workers realizing they are in danger. They were either unaware of the potential for dust explosions or failed to recognize the serious nature of dust explosion hazards.
Hazard assessments must be performed to identify all physical and health hazards associated with combustible dusts and ensure Safety Data Sheets (SDSs) list potential exposures and controls. Employers must anticipate types of operations, material use, or downstream material processing that can generate or potentially generate combustible dusts. Operations and uses include:
- Abrasive blasting;
- Cutting, grinding, polishing, or crushing of materials;
- Conveying, mixing, sifting, or screening dry materials; and
- Building up dried residue from processing wet materials.
How easily particles ignite, or cause explosions, is dependent upon the particle size, shape, moisture content or humidity, and available oxygen. These physical characteristics can change during manufacturing, use, or while the material is being processed. The regulation at 1910.272 (j)(2)(ii) requires the removal of any fugitive grain dust accumulations whenever they exceed ⅛ inch (0.32 cm) at priority housekeeping areas or to demonstrate and assure, through the development and implementation of the housekeeping program, that equivalent protection is provided. The thickness of dust must be no more than the thickness of a dime. Essentially, if a footprint can be made in the dust, there’s too much.
What changed with the NEP?
OSHA replaced its March 2008 directive with a revised NEP on January 30, 2023. The NEP added several industries with a higher likelihood of having combustible dust hazards or that have experienced combustible dust-related fatalities/catastrophes. Industries added include:
- 311812 – Commercial Bakeries
- 325910 – Printing Ink Manufacturing
- 321912 – Cut Stock, Resawing Lumber, and Planning
- 316110 – Leather and Hide Tanning and Finishing
- 321214 – Truss Manufacturing
- 424510 – Grain and Field Bean Merchant Wholesalers
Keys to Remember
Too often, employers and workers were unaware of the potential for dust explosions or failed to recognize the serious nature of dust explosion hazards. OSHA has added some industries with a higher likelihood of having combustible dust hazards to the Combustible Dust NEP.
A particulate matter: Stricter emissions limits placed on lead recyclers
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a final rule for New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for secondary lead smelters, which include facilities that recycle lead-bearing scrap material, typically lead acid batteries. The final rule imposes stricter regulations on particulate matter (PM) emissions and adds testing, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements.
Who’s impacted?
Secondary lead smelters subject to the NSPS that were constructed, reconstructed, or modified after June 11, 1973, and on or before December 1, 2022, are regulated by 40 CFR 60 Subpart L. While PM emissions and opacity standards remain the same, the final rule adds these requirements:
- Initial performance tests of PM emissions and opacity,
- Periodic performance tests of PM emissions (every 12 months or every 24 months if conditions are met),
- Electronic submission of performance tests through EPA’s Central Data Exchange,
- Monitoring, and
- Recordkeeping and reporting.
Regulated secondary lead smelters that are constructed, reconstructed, or modified after December 1, 2022, are regulated by the newly added Subpart La, which requires the same additions to Subpart L as well as:
- Stricter PM emissions and opacity standards that apply at all times (including periods of startup, shutdown, and malfunction),
- PM standards for all process fugitive emission sources, and
- Periodic performance tests of opacity.
EPA also added Method 22 as an alternative for showing compliance with opacity standards in efforts to reduce testing burdens.
EPA: Decabromodiphenyl Ether and Phenol, Isopropylated Phosphate (3:1); Revision to the Regulation of Persistent, Bioaccumulative, and Toxic Chemicals Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing revisions to the regulations for decabromodiphenyl ether (decaBDE) and phenol, isopropylated phosphate (3:1) (PIP (3:1)), two of the five persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic (PBT) chemicals addressed in final rules issued under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) in January 2021. After receiving additional comments following the issuance of the 2021 PBT final rules, the Agency has determined that revisions to the decaBDE and PIP (3:1) regulations are necessary to address implementation issues and to reduce further exposures. As required under TSCA, these proposed requirements would, if finalized, reduce the potential for exposures to humans and the environment to decaBDE and PIP (3:1) to the extent practicable. The Agency is not proposing to revise the existing regulations for the other three PBT chemicals (2,4,6-TTBP, HCBD, and PCTP) at this time.
DATES: This proposed rule is published in the Federal Register November 24, 2023, page 82287.
View proposed rule .
EPA: New Source Performance Standards Review for Secondary Lead Smelters
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing amendments to the new source performance standards (NSPS) for secondary lead smelters pursuant to the periodic review required by the Clean Air Act (CAA). Specifically, the EPA is finalizing revisions to the NSPS that applies to affected secondary lead smelters constructed, reconstructed, or modified after December 1, 2022 (NSPS subpart La). The EPA is also finalizing amendments to the NSPS for secondary lead smelters constructed, reconstructed, or modified after June 11, 1973, and on or before December 1, 2022, (NSPS subpart L). In addition, we are finalizing the use of EPA Method 22 (Visual Determination of Fugitive Emissions from Material Sources and Smoke Emissions from Flares) as an alternative for demonstrating compliance with the opacity limit.
DATES: This final rule is effective on November 20, 2023, published in the Federal Register November 20, 2023, page 80594.
View final rule .
§60.17 Incorporations by reference. | ||
(h)(206) | Revised | View text |
(j)(2) | Revised | View text |
Subpart L - Standards of Performance for Secondary Lead Smelters for Which Construction, Reconstruction, or Modification Commenced After June 11, 1973, and On or Before December 1, 2022 | ||
Subpart heading | Revised | View text |
§60.120 Applicability and designation of affected facility. | ||
(b) | Revised | View text |
§60.122 Standard for particulate matter. | ||
(a)(1) | Revised | View text |
§60.123 Test methods and procedures. | ||
Entire section | Revised | View text |
§60.124 Monitoring requirements. | ||
Entire section | Added | View text |
§60.125 Notification, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements. | ||
Entire section | Added | View text |
Subpart La—Standards of Performance for Secondary Lead Smelters for Which Construction, Reconstruction, or Modification Commenced After December 1, 2022 | ||
Entire subpart | Added | View text |
View Text
§60.17 Incorporations by reference.
* * * * *
(h) * * *
(206) ASTM D7520–16, Standard Test Method for Determining the Opacity of a Plume in the Outdoor Ambient Atmosphere, approved April 1, 2016; IBR approved for §§60.271(k); and (b); 60.273(c) and (d); 60.274(h); 60.275(e); 60.276(c); 60.271a; 60.272a(a) and (b); 60.273a(c) and (d); 60.274a(h); 60.275a(e); 60.276a(f); 60.271b; 60.272b(a) and (b); 60.273b(c) and (d); 60.274b(h); 60.275b(e); 60.276b(f); 60.374a(d).
* * * * *
(j) * * *
(2) EPA–454/R–98–015, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards (OAQPS), Fabric Filter Bag Leak Detection Guidance, September 1997, https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=2000D5T6.PDF; IBR approved for §§60.273(e); 60.273a(e); 60.273b(e); 60.373a(b); 60.2145(r); 60.2710(r); 60.4905(b); 60.5225(b).
* * * * *
Subpart L - Standards of Performance for Secondary Lead Smelters
§60.120 Applicability and designation of affected facility.
* * * * *
(b) Any facility under paragraph (a) of this section that commences construction or modification after June 11, 1973, is subject to the requirements of this subpart.
§60.122 Standard for particulate matter.
(a) * * *
(1) Contain particulate matter in excess of 50 mg/dscm (0.022 gr/dscf).
* * * * *
§60.123 Test methods and procedures.
(a) In conducting the performance tests required in §60.8, the owner or operator shall use as reference methods and procedures the test methods in appendix A of this part or other methods and procedures as specified in this section, except as provided in §60.8(b).
(b) The owner or operator shall determine compliance with the particulate matter standards in §60.122 as follows:
(1) Method 5 shall be used to determine the particulate matter concentration during representative periods of furnace operation, including charging and tapping. The sampling time and sample volume for each run shall be at least 60 minutes and 0.90 dscm (31.8 dscf).
(2) Method 9 and the procedures in §60.11 shall be used to determine opacity.
Most Recent Highlights In Transportation
EPA: National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Rubber Tire Manufacturing
SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing amendments to the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Rubber Tire Manufacturing, as required by the Clean Air Act (CAA). To ensure that all emissions of hazardous air pollutants (HAP) from sources in the source category are regulated, the EPA is proposing emissions standards for the rubber processing subcategory of the rubber tire manufacturing industry, which is the only unregulated subcategory within the Rubber Tire Manufacturing source category.
DATES: Comments must be receive on or before January 2, 2024. Published in the Federal Register November 16, 2023, page 78692.
View proposed rule .
Are workers using the right respirator and cartridge?
OSHA requires employers to provide each worker with respiratory protection when such equipment is necessary to protect the worker’s health. Employers are required by 29 CFR 1910.134 to provide respirators that are applicable and suitable for the purpose intended. The employer must also establish and maintain a respiratory protection program that identifies respiratory hazards, controls, and proper personal protective equipment selection and use.
Respirators protect workers against insufficient oxygen, harmful dusts, smoke, gases, and vapors. These hazards may cause cancer, lung diseases, or even death. Without the correct respirator and corresponding cartridge, workers are at risk of exposure.
Does the type of respirator and cartridge really matter?
Respirators protect workers in two ways — by removing contaminants from the air or by supplying clean air to the user. Particulate respirators filter out airborne particles, while air-purifying respirators (APRs) with cartridges filter out chemicals and gases. Atmosphere-supplying respirators (ASRs provide air and include airline respirators, which use compressed air from a remote source, and self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) , which contain their own air supply.
Each type of respirator has an assigned protection factor (APF) that indicates the level of protection expected from the respirator. APRs use filters, cartridges, or canisters to remove contaminants such as dusts, gases, vapors, and aerosols from the air. The cartridges or canisters have a filter, sorbent, catalyst, or combination of these items that removes specific contaminants from air that passes through the container. Per 1910.134(d)(3)(i)(A), employers are required to assign protection factors based on Table 1 in the standard.
Both the proper type and the service life of the cartridge are paramount. Respirators and cartridges must meet or exceed the required level of worker protection. Employers must ensure APFs are appropriate to the operation or task for which respirators are used.
Types of respirator cartridges
Employers and workers should always refer to container labels and safety data sheets (SDSs to determine the proper respiratory protection for each task. NIOSH-approved respirator cartridges are designated by color coding:
- Black — used for organic vapors (OV)
- Black/magenta (black/purple) — used for OV and high efficiency (HE) filter, P100 filters
- Olive-brown — used for OV, acid gases, and ammonia
- Olive-brown/magenta (olive-brown/purple) — used for OV, ammonia, acid gases, and HE filter, P100 filters
- Magenta (purple) — used for HE filter, P100 filters
- Yellow — used for OVs and acid gases
- Yellow/magenta (yellow/purple) — used for OV, acid gases, and HE filter, P100 filters
- White — used for acid gases
- Bright green — used for ammonia
End of service life
Each respirator cartridge will have an end-of-service-life indicator (ESLI) warning the respirator user that the end of adequate respiratory protection is near. For example, the sorbent is approaching saturation or is no longer effective. Workers who use cartridges or canisters beyond the ESLI are placing themselves in harm’s way.
Keys to Remember
OSHA’s Respiratory Protection standard requires employers to protect workers from insufficient oxygen, harmful dusts, smoke, gases, and vapors. Respirators and corresponding cartridges must be of proper type and condition to ensure protection appropriate to the operation or task for which they’re used.
EPA: Locomotives and Locomotive Engines; Preemption of State and Local Regulations
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is finalizing revisions to its regulations addressing preemption of State and local regulation of locomotives and engines used in locomotives. This rule implements a policy change to no longer categorically preempt certain State regulations of non-new locomotives and engines, aligning with the plain text of the Clean Air Act (CAA), and better achieving the legislative intent of providing for exclusive Federal regulation of new locomotives and new locomotive engines while preserving the ability of California and other States to adopt and enforce certain State standards regulating non-new locomotives and engines.
DATES: This final rule is effective on December 8, 2023, published in the Federal Register November 8, 2023, page 77004.
§1074.10 Scope of preemption. | ||
(b) | Revised | View text |
(c) | Added | View text |
§1074.12 Scope of preemption-specific provisions for locomotives and locomotive engines | ||
Entire section | Removed | View text |
§1074.101 Procedures for California nonroad authorization requests. | ||
(a) | Revised | View text |
Previous Text
§1074.10 Scope of preemption.
* * * *
(b) For nonroad engines or vehicles other than those described in paragraph (a) of this section and §1074.12, States and localities are preempted from enforcing any standards or other requirements relating to control of emissions from nonroad engines or vehicles except as provided in subpart B of this part.
* * * *
§1074.101 Procedures for California nonroad authorization requests.
(a) California must request authorization from the Administrator to enforce its adopted standards and other requirements relating to control of emissions from nonroad engines or vehicles that are not preempted by §1074.10(a) or §1074.12. The request must include the record on which the state rulemaking was based.
* * * *
EPA: Trichloroethylene (TCE); Regulation under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to address the unreasonable risk of injury to human health presented by trichloroethylene (TCE) under its conditions of use as documented in EPA's November 2020 Risk Evaluation for TCE and January 2023 revised risk determination for TCE pursuant to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). TCE is widely used as a solvent in a variety of industrial, commercial and consumer applications including for hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) production, vapor and aerosol degreasing, and in lubricants, greases, adhesives, and sealants. TSCA requires that when EPA determines a chemical substance presents unreasonable risk that EPA address by rule the unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment and apply requirements to the extent necessary so the chemical no longer presents unreasonable risk. EPA determined that TCE presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health due to the significant adverse health effects associated with exposure to TCE, including non-cancer effects (liver toxicity, kidney toxicity, neurotoxicity, immunotoxicity, reproductive toxicity, and developmental toxicity) as well as cancer (liver, kidney, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma) from chronic inhalation and dermal exposures to TCE. TCE is a neurotoxicant and is carcinogenic to humans by all routes of exposure. The most sensitive adverse effects of TCE exposure are non-cancer effects (developmental toxicity and immunosuppression) for acute exposures and developmental toxicity and autoimmunity for chronic exposures. To address the identified unreasonable risk, EPA is proposing to: prohibit all manufacture (including import), processing, and distribution in commerce of TCE and industrial and commercial use of TCE for all uses, with longer compliance timeframes and workplace controls for certain processing and industrial and commercial uses (including proposed phaseouts and time-limited exemptions); prohibit the disposal of TCE to industrial pre-treatment, industrial treatment, or publicly owned treatment works, with a time-limited exemption for cleanup projects; and establish recordkeeping and downstream notification requirements.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 15, 2023, published in the Federal Register October 31, 2023, page 74712.
View proposed rule .
EPA: Changes to Reporting Requirements for Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances and to Supplier Notifications for Chemicals of Special Concern; Community Right-to-Know Toxic Chemical Release Reporting
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is adding per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) subject to reporting under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) and the Pollution Prevention Act (PPA) pursuant to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020 (NDAA) to the list of Lower Thresholds for Chemicals of Special Concern (chemicals of special concern). These PFAS already have a lower reporting activity threshold of 100 pounds. The addition of these PFAS to the list of chemicals of special concern means such PFAS are subject to the same reporting requirements as other chemicals of special concern ( i.e., it eliminates the use of the de minimis exemption and the option to use Form A and would limit the use of range reporting for PFAS). Removing the availability of these burden-reduction reporting options will result in a more complete picture of the releases and waste management quantities for these PFAS. EPA is removing the availability of the de minimis exemption for purposes of the Supplier Notification Requirements for all chemicals on the list of chemicals of special concern. This will help ensure that purchasers of mixtures and trade name products containing such chemicals are informed of their presence in mixtures and products they purchase to better inform any TRI reporting obligations.
DATES: This final rule is effective November 30, 2023 and shall apply for the reporting year beginning January 1, 2024 (reports due July 1, 2025), published in the Federal Register October 31, 2023, page 74360.
View final rule
§372.22 Covered facilities for toxic chemical release reporting. | ||
(c) | Revised | View text |
§372.25 Thresholds for reporting. | ||
Introductory text | Revised | View text |
(f)-(h) | Revised | View text |
§372.28 Lower thresholds for chemicals of special concern. | ||
Table 1 to paragraph (a)(1); entry “Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances” | Added | View text |
§372.29 Thresholds for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. | ||
Entire section | Removed | View text |
§372.30 Reporting requirements and schedule for reporting. | ||
(a)-(b) | Revised | View text |
§372.38 Exemptions. | ||
(a)(2) | Revised | View text |
(b)-(d), (f)-(h) | Revised | View text |
§372.45 Notification about toxic chemicals. | ||
(d)(1) | Revised | View text |
Previous Text
§372.22 Covered facilities for toxic chemical release reporting.
* * * *
(c) The facility manufactured (including imported), processed, or otherwise used a toxic chemical in excess of an applicable threshold quantity of that chemical set forth in §372.25, §372.27, §372.28, or §372.29.
§372.25 Thresholds for reporting.
Except as provided in §372.27, 372.28, and 372.29, the threshold amounts for purposes of reporting under §372.30 for toxic chemicals are as follows:
* * * *
(f) A toxic chemical may be listed in §372.65 with the notation that only persons who manufacture the chemical, or manufacture it by a certain method, are required to report. In that case, only owners or operators of facilities that manufacture that chemical as described in §372.65 in excess of the threshold applicable to such manufacture in §372.27, §372.28, or§372.29 or are required to report. In completing the reporting form, the owner or operator is only required to account for the quantity of the chemical so manufactured and releases associated with such manufacturing, but not releases associated with subsequent processing or use of the chemical at that facility. Owners and operators of facilities that solely process or use such a chemical are not required to report for that chemical.
(g) A toxic chemical may be listed in §372.65 with the notation that it is in a specific form (e.g., fume or dust, solution, or friable) or of a specific color (e.g., yellow or white). In that case, only owners or operators of facilities that manufacture, process, or use that chemical in the form or of the color, specified in §372.65 in excess of the threshold applicable to such activity in §372.27, §372.28, or§372.29 are required to report. In completing the reporting form, the owner or operator is only required to account for the quantity of the chemical manufactured, processed, or used in the form or color specified in §372.65 and for releases associated with the chemical in that form or color. Owners or operators of facilities that solely manufacture, process, or use such a chemical in a form or color other than those specified by §372.65 are not required to report for that chemical.
(h) Metal compound categories are listed in §372.65(c) . For purposes of determining whether any of the thresholds specified in §372.27, §372.28, or§372.29 are met for metal compound category, the owner or operator of a facility must make the threshold determination based on the total amount of all members of the metal compound category manufactured, processed, or used at the facility. In completing the release portion of the reporting form for releases of the metal compounds, the owner or operator is only required to account for the weight of the parent metal released. Any contribution to the mass of the release attributable to other portions of each compound in the category is excluded.
§372.30 Reporting requirements and schedule for reporting.
(a) For each toxic chemical known by the owner or operator to be manufactured (including imported), processed, or otherwise used in excess of an applicable threshold quantity in §372.25, §372.27, §372.28, or §372.29 at its covered facility described in §372.22 for a calendar year, the owner or operator must submit to EPA and to the State in which the facility is located a completed EPA Form R (EPA Form 9350-1), EPA Form A (EPA Form 9350-2), and, for the dioxin and dioxin-like compounds category, EPA Form R Schedule 1 (EPA Form 9350-3) in accordance with the instructions referred to in subpart E of this part. If the covered facility is located in Indian country, the facility shall submit (to the extent applicable) a completed EPA Form R, Form A, and Form R Schedule 1 as described above to EPA and to the official designated by the Tribal Chairperson or equivalent elected official of the relevant Indian Tribe, instead of to the State.
(b)(1) The owner or operator of a covered facility is required to report as described in paragraph (a) of this section on a toxic chemical that the owner or operator knows is present as a component of a mixture or trade name product which the owner or operator receives from another person, if that chemical is imported, processed, or otherwise used by the owner or operator in excess of an applicable threshold quantity in §372.25, §372.27, §372.28, or §372.29 at the facility as part of that mixture or trade name product.
(2) The owner or operator knows that a toxic chemical is present as a component of a mixture or trade name product (i) if the owner or operator knows or has been told the chemical identity or Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number of the chemical and the identity or Number corresponds to an identity or Number in §372.65 , or (ii) if the owner or operator has been told by the supplier of the mixture or trade name product that the mixture or trade name product contains a toxic chemical subject to section 313 of the Act or this part.
(3) To determine whether a toxic chemical which is a component of a mixture or trade name product has been imported, processed, or otherwise used in excess of an applicable threshold in §372.25, §372.27, §372.28, or §372.29 at the facility, the owner or operator shall consider only the portion of the mixture or trade name product that consists of the toxic chemical and that is imported, processed, or otherwise used at the facility, together with any other amounts of the same toxic chemical that the owner or operator manufactures, imports, processes, or otherwise uses at the facility as follows:
(i) If the owner or operator knows the specific chemical identity of the toxic chemical and the specific concentration at which it is present in the mixture or trade name product, the owner or operator shall determine the weight of the chemical imported, processed, or otherwise used as part of the mixture or trade name product at the facility and shall combine that with the weight of the toxic chemical manufactured (including imported), processed, or otherwise used at the facility other than as part of the mixture or trade name product. After combining these amounts, if the owner or operator determines that the toxic chemical was manufactured, processed, or otherwise used in excess of an applicable threshold in §372.25, §372.27, §372.28, or §372.29, the owner or operator shall report the specific chemical identity and all releases of the toxic chemical on EPA Form R in accordance with the instructions referred to in subpart E of this part.
(ii) If the owner or operator knows the specific chemical identity of the toxic chemical and does not know the specific concentration at which the chemical is present in the mixture or trade name product, but has been told the upper bound concentration of the chemical in the mixture or trade name product, the owner or operator shall assume that the toxic chemical is present in the mixture or trade name product at the upper bound concentration, shall determine whether the chemical has been manufactured, processed, or otherwise used at the facility in excess of an applicable threshold as provided in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section, and shall report as provided in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section.
(iii) If the owner or operator knows the specific chemical identity of the toxic chemical, does not know the specific concentration at which the chemical is present in the mixture or trade name product, has not been told the upper bound concentration of the chemical in the mixture or trade name product, and has not otherwise developed information on the composition of the chemical in the mixture or trade name product, then the owner or operator is not required to factor that chemical in that mixture or trade name product into threshold and release calculations for that chemical.
(iv) If the owner or operator has been told that a mixture or trade name product contains a toxic chemical, does not know the specific chemical identity of the chemical andknows the specific concentration at which it is present in the mixture or trade name product, the owner or operator shall determine the weight of the chemical imported, processed, or otherwise used as part of the mixture or trade name product at the facility. Since the owner or operator does not know the specific identity of the toxic chemical, the owner or operator shall make the threshold determination only for the weight of the toxic chemical in the mixture or trade name product. If the owner or operator determines that the toxic chemical was imported, processed, or otherwise used as part of the mixture or trade name product in excess of an applicable threshold in §372.25, §372.27, §372.28, or §372.29, the owner or operator shall report the generic chemical name of the toxic chemical, or a trade name if the generic chemical name is not known, and all releases of the toxic chemical on EPA Form R in accordance with the instructions referred to in subpart E of this part.
(v) If the owner or operator has been told that a mixture or trade name product contains a toxic chemical, does not know the specific chemical identity of the chemical, and does not know the specific concentration at which the chemical is present in the mixture or trade name product, but has been told the upper bound concentration of the chemical in the mixture or trade name product, the owner or operator shall assume that the toxic chemical is present in the mixture or trade name product at the upper bound concentration, shall determine whether the chemical has been imported, processed, or otherwise used at the facility in excess of an applicable threshold as provided in paragraph (b)(3)(iv) of this section, and shall report as provided in paragraph (b)(3)(iv) of this section.
(vi) If the owner or operator has been told that a mixture or trade name product contains a toxic chemical, does not know the specific chemical identity of the chemical, does not know the specific concentration at which the chemical is present in the mixture or trade name product, including information they have themselves developed, and has not been told the upper bound concentration of the chemical in the mixture or trade name product, the owner or operator is not required to report with respect to that toxic chemical.
§372.38 Exemptions.
* * * *
(a)(2) The exemption in this paragraph (a) applies whether the person received the mixture from another person, or the person produced the mixture, either by mixing the chemicals involved or by causing a chemical reaction which resulted in the creation of the toxic chemical in the mixture. However, this exemption applies only to the quantity of the toxic chemical present in the mixture. If the toxic chemical is also manufactured (including imported), processed, or otherwise used at the covered facility other than as part of the mixture or in a mixture at higher concentrations, in excess of an applicable threshold quantity set forth in §372.25, the person is required to report under §372.30. This exemption does not apply to toxic chemicals listed in §372.28, except for purposes of §372.45(d)(1).
(b) Articles. If a toxic chemical is present in an article at a covered facility, a person is not required to consider the quantity of the toxic chemical present in such article when determining whether an applicable threshold has been met under §372.25, §372.27, §372.28, or §372.29 or determining the amount of release to be reported under §372.30 . This exemption applies whether the person received the article from another person or the person produced the article. However, this exemption applies only to the quantity of the toxic chemical present in the article. If the toxic chemical is manufactured (including imported), processed, or otherwise used at the covered facility other than as part of the article, in excess of an applicable threshold quantity set forth in §372.25, §372.27, §372.28, or §372.29, the person is required to report under §372.30 . Persons potentially subject to this exemption should carefully review the definitions of "article" and "release" in §372.3 . If a release of a toxic chemical occurs as a result of the processing or use of an item at the facility, that item does not meet the definition of "article."
(c) Uses. If a toxic chemical is used at a covered facility for a purpose described in this paragraph (c) , a person is not required to consider the quantity of the toxic chemical used for such purpose when determining whether an applicable threshold has been met under §372.25, §372.27, §372.28, or §372.29 or determining the amount of releases to be reported under §372.30 . However, this exemption only applies to the quantity of the toxic chemical used for the purpose described in this paragraph (c) . If the toxic chemical is also manufactured (including imported), processed, or otherwise used at the covered facility other than as described in this paragraph (c) , in excess of an applicable threshold quantity set forth in §372.25, §372.27, §372.28, or §372.29, the person is required to report under §372.30 .
(1) Use as a structural component of the facility.
(2) Use of products for routine janitorial or facility grounds maintenance. Examples include use of janitorial cleaning supplies, fertilizers, and pesticides similar in type or concentration to consumer products.
(3) Personal use by employees or other persons at the facility of foods, drugs, cosmetics, or other personal items containing toxic chemicals, including supplies of such products within the facility such as in a facility operated cafeteria, store, or infirmary.
(4) Use of products containing toxic chemicals for the purpose of maintaining motor vehicles operated by the facility.
(5) Use of toxic chemicals present in process water and non-contact cooling water as drawn from the environment or from municipal sources, or toxic chemicals present in air used either as compressed air or as part of combustion.
(d) Activities in laboratories. If a toxic chemical is manufactured, processed, or used in a laboratory at a covered facility under the supervision of a technically qualified individual as defined in §720.3(ee) of this title, a person is not required to consider the quantity so manufactured, processed, or used when determining whether an applicable threshold has been met under §372.25, §372.27, §372.28, or §372.29 or determining the amount of release to be reported under §372.30 . This exemption does not apply in the following cases:
(1) Specialty chemical production.
(2) Manufacture, processing, or use of toxic chemicals in pilot plant scale operations.
(3) Activities conducted outside the laboratory.
(e) Certain owners of leased property. The owner of a covered facility is not subject to reporting under §372.30 if such owner's only interest in the facility is ownership of the real estate upon which the facility is operated. This exemption applies to owners of facilities such as industrial parks, all or part of which are leased to persons who operate establishments in any SIC code or NAICS code in §372.23 that is subject to the requirements of this part, where the owner has no other business interest in the operation of the covered facility.
(f) Reporting by certain operators of establishments on leased property such as industrial parks. If two or more persons, who do not have any common corporate or business interest (including common ownership or control), operate separate establishments within a single facility, each such person shall treat the establishments it operates as a facility for purposes of this part. The determinations in §372.22 and §372.25, §372.27, §372.28, or §372.29 shall be made for those establishments. If any such operator determines that its establishment is a covered facility under §372.22 and that a toxic chemical has been manufactured (including imported), processed, or otherwise used at the establishment in excess of an applicable threshold in §372.25, §372.27, §372.28, or §372.29 for a calendar year, the operator shall submit a report in accordance with §372.30 for the establishment. For purposes of this paragraph (f), a common corporate or business interest includes ownership, partnership, joint ventures, ownership of a controlling interest in one person by the other, or ownership of a controlling interest in both persons by a third person.
(g) Coal extraction activities . If a toxic chemical is manufactured, processed, or otherwise used in extraction by facilities in SIC code 12, or in NAICS codes 212111, 212112 or 212113, a person is not required to consider the quantity of the toxic chemical so manufactured, processed, or otherwise used when determining whether an applicable threshold has been met under §372.25, §372.27, §372.28, or §372.29, or determining the amounts to be reported under §372.30.
(h) Metal mining overburden . If a toxic chemical that is a constituent of overburden is processed or otherwise used by facilities in SIC code 10, or in NAICS codes 212221, 212222, 212230 or 212299, a person is not required to consider the quantity of the toxic chemical so processed, or otherwise used when determining whether an applicable threshold has been met under §372.25, §372.27, §372.28, or §372.29, or determining the amounts to be reported under §372.30.
§372.45 Notification about toxic chemicals.
* * * *
(d)(1) If a mixture or trade name product contains no toxic chemical in excess of the applicable de minimis concentration as specified in §372.38(a) .
Most Recent Highlights In Safety & Health
EPA deletes de minimis exemption for TRI-listed PFAS
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized a rule impacting all reporting facilities that manufacture, process, or otherwise use per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) subject to Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) reporting (listed at 40 CFR 372.65 ). The agency is:
- Designating all TRI-listed PFAS as “chemicals of special concern,” and
- Removing the de minimis exemption for supplier notification requirements to downstream facilities for all chemicals on the list of chemicals of special concern.
Impact on reporting entities
The final rule categorizes all PFAS on the TRI as chemicals of special concern. This action:
- Eliminates the de minimis exemption, which allowed facilities to avoid reporting information on PFAS that were used in small ( de minimis ) quantities (below the 100-pound threshold);
- Removes eligibility to use reporting Form A, which simplified reporting for facilities that didn’t exceed the thresholds for the total annual reportable amount of PFAS (500 pounds) and for the amounts of PFAS manufactured, processed, or used (1 million pounds); and
- Limits range reporting for PFAS.
Reporting facilities will now be required to report all quantities of PFAS they manage or release into the environment.
Additionally, EPA eliminated the de minimi s exemption for the supplier notification requirements (at 372.45 ) to downstream facilities for facilities that manufacture or process any chemical on the list of chemicals of special concern. Previously, suppliers weren’t required to notify product users of certain chemicals present in mixtures if their concentrations were less than 1 percent (less than 0.1 percent for carcinogens). Suppliers will now be required to notify users of any amount of a chemical of special concern contained in the mixture.
Future PFAS added to TRI
The final rule also stipulates that when PFAS are added to the TRI in the future, they will also be added to the list of chemicals of special concern on the same date. This helps EPA avoid delays in reporting requirements since the 100-pound reporting threshold for PFAS will remain in the regulations.
The final rule’s changes take effect for the reporting year beginning on January 1, 2024. The annual TRI reports for 2024 are due to EPA on July 1, 2025.
Key to remember: EPA’s recent final rule requires covered facilities to include all quantities of PFAS on their TRI reports and mandates that suppliers notify product users of the presence of any chemicals of special concern contained in the mixture or product.
EPA: Procedures for Chemical Risk Evaluation Under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA, “the Agency”) is proposing to amend the procedural framework rule for conducting risk evaluations under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The purpose of risk evaluations under TSCA is to determine whether a chemical substance presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment, without consideration of costs or non-risk factors, including unreasonable risk to potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulations identified as relevant to the risk evaluation by EPA, under the conditions of use. EPA has reconsidered the procedural framework rule for conducting such risk evaluations and determined that certain aspects of that framework should be revised to better align with applicable court decisions and the statutory text, to reflect the Agency's experience implementing the risk evaluation program following enactment of the 2016 TSCA amendments, and to allow for consideration of future scientific advances in the risk evaluation process without need to further amend the Agency's procedural rule.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 14, 2023, published in the Federal Register October 30, 2023, page 74292.
View proposed rule .
EHS Monthly Roundup - March 2023
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. OSHA revised its combustible dust national emphasis program . It adds several industries with a higher likelihood of having combustible dust hazards.
California’s Safety and Health Appeals Board says drinking water must be “as close as practicable” to outdoor employees.
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration says that some forklift operators may be considered hazmat employees . If operators handle hazmat cargo, such as moving it from the truck to an aircraft, they need hazmat training.
OSHA posted a letter of interpretation that answers hazard communication questions related to lithium batteries. The agency says workers may be exposed to hazards during storage, handling, and maintenance activities.
Stand Up 4 Grain Safety Week was held the week of March 27. Employers were encouraged to hold toolbox talks or safety demonstrations related to grain handling and storage.
Turning to environmental news, EPA issued significant new use rules for chemical substances that were the subject of premanufacture notices. This change brings added reporting and recordkeeping.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
EHS Monthly Roundup - February 2023
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. Machine guarding and hazard communication topped OSHA’s list of most frequently cited serious violations in fiscal year 2022. Over 1,300 citations were issued for machine guarding and over 1,800 were issued for HazCom.
Effective March 26, OSHA will cite certain types of violations as “instance-by-instance” citations , when inspectors identify high-gravity, serious violations specific to the following: falls, trenching, machine guarding, respiratory protection, permit required confined space, and lockout/tagout, as well as other-than-serious violations specific to recordkeeping.
California’s COVID-19 prevention non-emergency regulations , which require employers to protect workers from the hazards related to COVID-19, took effect February 3, and will remain in effect for two years.
A new OSHA fact sheet outlines measures to protect shipyard employees from the physical hazards of confined spaces. In the maritime sector, physical hazards in confined spaces can increase a worker’s risk of injury.
OSHA says it will withdraw its proposal to revoke Arizona’s State Plan . The state has taken measures to remain compliant with federal OSHA. However, OSHA continues to work closely with Arizona to address other state-plan concerns that weren’t part of its original withdrawal proposal.
And turning to environmental news, EPA issued a rule that finalizes first-time standards for inorganic hazardous air pollutants in miscellaneous coating manufacturing that will limit emissions and require effective controls. Final amendments include provisions for inorganic hazardous air pollutant standards for process vessels. The rule took effect February 22.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We'll see you next month!
EPA: Phasedown of Hydrofluorocarbons: Restrictions on the Use of Certain Hydrofluorocarbons Under the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act of 2020
SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is issuing regulations to implement certain provisions of the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act, as enacted on December 27, 2020. This rulemaking restricts the use of hydrofluorocarbons in specific sectors or subsectors in which they are used; establishes a process for submitting technology transitions petitions; establishes recordkeeping and reporting requirements; and addresses certain other elements related to the effective implementation of the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act. These restrictions on the use of hydrofluorocarbons address petitions granted on October 7, 2021, and September 19, 2022.
DATES: This rule is effective December 26, 2023, published in the Federal Register October 24, 2023, page 73098.
View final rule .
Part 84—Phasedown of Hydrofluorocarbons | ||
Subpart B—Restrictions on the Use of Hydrofluorocarbons | Added | View text |
Most Recent Highlights In Human Resources
EPA: Guideline on Air Quality Models; Enhancements to the AERMOD Dispersion Modeling System
SUMMARY: In this action, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposes to revise the Guideline on Air Quality Models (“ Guideline ”). The Guideline has been incorporated into EPA's regulations, satisfying a requirement under the Clean Air Act (CAA) section 165(e)(3)(D) for the EPA to specify, with reasonable particularity, models to be used in the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program. It provides EPA-preferred models and other recommended techniques, as well as guidance for their use in predicting ambient concentrations of air pollutants. In this action, the EPA is proposing revisions to the Guideline, including enhancements to the formulation and application of the EPA's near-field dispersion modeling system, AERMOD, and updates to the recommendations for the development of appropriate background concentration for cumulative impact analyses. Within this action, the EPA is also announcing the Thirteenth Conference on Air Quality Modeling and invites the public to participate in the conference. The conference will focus on the proposed revisions to the Guideline, and part of the conference will also serve as the public hearing for these revisions.
DATES: This proposed rule is published in the Federal Register October 23, 2023, page 72826.
View proposed rule .
EPA: Phasedown of Hydrofluorocarbons: Management of Certain Hydrofluorocarbons and Substitutes under Subsection (h) of the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act of 2020
SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is proposing to issue regulations to implement certain provisions of the American Innovation and Manufacturing Act of 2020. This rulemaking proposes to establish a program for the management of hydrofluorocarbons that includes requirements for leak repair and use of automatic leak detection systems for certain equipment using refrigerants containing hydrofluorocarbons and certain substitutes; requirements for the use of reclaimed hydrofluorocarbons in certain sectors or subsectors; the use of recycled hydrofluorocarbons in fire suppression equipment; recovery of hydrofluorocarbons from cylinders; container tracking; and certain recordkeeping, reporting, and labeling requirements. The Environmental Protection Agency is also proposing alternative Resource Conservation and Recovery Act standards for spent ignitable refrigerants being recycled for reuse. Finally, EPA requests advance comment on approaches for establishing requirements for technician training and/or certification.
DATES: Comments on this notice of proposed rulemaking must be received on or before December 18, 2023, published in the Federal Register October 19, 2023, page 72216.
View proposed rule .
EPA: Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Updates Related to the Use of Ozone-Depleting Substances as Process Agents
SUMMARY: This action proposes to establish recordkeeping and reporting requirements for uses of ozone-depleting substances as process agents and to update definitions to reflect current practice. Codified recordkeeping and reporting requirements would provide clear and consistent notice each year of information EPA collects, aggregates, and reports as a party to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer; effectively monitor these narrow uses in a more routine and consistent manner under the Clean Air Act; and enhance understanding of emissions of substances harmful to the ozone layer.
DATES: Comments on this notice of proposed rulemaking must be received on or before December 4, 2023, published in the Federal Register October 19, 2023, page 72027.
View proposed rule .
EPA: Vessel Incidental Discharge National Standards of Performance
SUMMARY: On October 26, 2020, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed under the Vessel Incidental Discharge Act (VIDA) national standards of performance for marine pollution control devices for discharges incidental to the normal operation of primarily non-military and non-recreational vessels 79 feet in length and above into the waters of the United States or the waters of the contiguous zone (hereafter, “the proposed rule”). This supplemental notice presents ballast water management system type-approval data EPA received from the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) since the proposed rule and supplements the proposed rule with supplemental regulatory options that EPA is considering for discharges from ballast tanks, hulls and niche areas, and graywater systems. These supplemental options are informed by comments received during the first public comment period and subsequent meetings with interested states, tribes, and other stakeholders held between August and November 2021. EPA solicits public comment solely about the information presented in this document; the Agency is not soliciting public comment on any other aspects of the proposed rule that are not addressed in this document. All comments on this document and the comments on the proposed rule will be considered during the development of the final rule.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 18, 2023, published in the Federal Register October 18, 2023, page 71788.
View proposed rule .
EPA: Non-Hazardous Secondary Material Standards; Response to Petition
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency is finalizing its denial of a rulemaking petition from American Forest and Paper Association et al. requesting amendments to the Non-Hazardous Secondary Materials regulations, initially promulgated on March 21, 2011, and amended on February 7, 2013, February 8, 2016, and February 7, 2018, under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. These regulations establish standards and procedures for identifying whether non-hazardous secondary materials are solid wastes when legitimately used as fuels or ingredients in combustion units. The petition requested the following amendments: Change the legitimacy criterion for comparison of contaminants in the non-hazardous secondary material against those in the traditional fuel the unit is designed to burn from mandatory to “should consider”; remove associated designed to burn and other limitations for creosote-treated railroad ties; and revise the definition of “paper recycling residuals” to remove the limit on non-fiber materials in paper recycling residuals that can be burned as a non-waste fuel. The Environmental Protection Agency proposed to deny the petition on January 28, 2022. After review of the public comments, the Agency is finalizing its denial of the requested amendments. In addition to denying this rulemaking petition, the Agency is revising the definition of paper recycling residuals to limit the impact non-fiber materials may have on the heat value of paper recycling residuals in order for them to be considered a non-waste fuel.
DATES: This final rule is effective on December 18, 2023, published in the Federal Register October 18, 2023, page 71788.
View final rule .
§241.2 Definitions. | ||
Definition of ”Paper recycling residuals” | Revised | View text |
Previous Text
§241.2 Definitions.
Paper recycling residuals means the secondary material generated from the recycling of paper, paperboard and corrugated containers composed primarily of wet strength and short wood fibers that cannot be used to make new paper and paperboard products. Paper recycling residuals that contain more than small amounts of non-fiber materials including polystyrene foam, polyethylene film, other plastics, waxes and adhesives, dyes and inks, clays, starches and other coating and filler material are not paper recycling residuals for purposes of this definition.
Most Popular Highlights In Environmental
Are you meeting OSHA’s requirements for CPR and AEDs in the workplace?
Quick action using cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and automated external defibrillators (AEDs) can save the lives of the nearly 350,000 cardiac event victims each year outside of a hospital setting. But what does OSHA require for the workplace? What you didn’t know about OSHA regulations regarding AEDs may surprise you.
The importance of CPR and early defibrillation
For every minute a patient is in cardiac arrest, their chances of survival decrease dramatically. When a patient doesn’t have a pulse and isn’t breathing, CPR should be performed until an AED is available. It’s important to note that CPR alone does not restart the heart. CPR is an oxygen circulation procedure. AEDs, on the other hand, are meant for lifesaving intervention.
CPR and early defibrillation are vital components of the emergency medical services (EMS) chain of survival that increases the odds of cardiac patient survival. However, according to the American Heart Association (AHA), even the best CPR can’t provide enough circulation of oxygen to the brain and heart for more than a few minutes. In fact, a patient whose brain is deprived of oxygen for 10 minutes or more seldom recovers.
Signs and symptoms of cardiac compromise
Just like a reliable vehicle, the circulatory system is the human body’s blood transportation system, and the heart is the engine. Amazingly, the heart generates its own electrical impulses, pumping in a regular, rhythmic manner. As with any engine, the heart requires a certain amount of pressure to function and doesn’t work well when clogged with grease or debris. The most common causes of sudden cardiac arrest include a heart attack, electrocution, and asphyxiation — all of which could occur in the workplace. Common signs and symptoms include:
- Chest pain accompanied by a crushing or squeezing sensation,
- Pain that radiates to the jaw or arm,
- Irregular pulse and/or abnormal blood pressure,
- Shortness of breath,
- Cool and sweaty skin,
- Nausea and vomiting, and
- Anxiety or feeling of impending doom.
CPR provides the pressure for the body’s “engine” to oxygen circulating, while an AED provides the electrical impulses to keep the engine pumping.
OSHA requirements regarding CPR
OSHA 1910.151 requires first aid treatment be provided in the absence of an infirmary, clinic, or hospital in near proximity to the workplace used to treat injured employees. This may include assisting a victim of cardiac arrest using CPR or defibrillation.
OSHA requirements for CPR and defibrillation differ considerably. Standards requiring CPR include:
- 1910.146 Permit-required Confined Spaces
- 1910.266 Appendix B: Logging Operations – First Aid and CPR Training
- 1910.269 Electric Power Generation, Transmission, and Distribution
- 1910.410 Qualifications of Dive Team and
- 1926.950 Construction Subpart V, Power Transmission and Distribution
OSHA recommends basic adult CPR refresher training and retesting every year, and first aid training at least once every three years. CPR training include facilitated discussion along with ’hands-on’ skills training that uses mannequins and partner practice.
OSHA requirements regarding AEDs — you might need a prescription
Though OSHA recognizes AEDs as important lifesaving technology that plays a role in treating cardiac arrest, the agency doesn’t currently require their use in the workplace. Instead, OSHA wants employers to assess their own requirements for AEDs as part of their first aid response.
AEDs are considered Class III medical devices which means the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has some oversight on their use. Almost all AEDs require the purchaser to obtain a prescription from a physician under FDA regulations. The prescription process is meant as a quality control mechanism to ensure AEDs are properly maintained, that all designated responders are properly trained, and assist employers with establishing an emergency response plan for their workplace AED program.
The AHA requires AED operators to also receive CPR training as an “integral part of providing lifesaving aid to people suffering sudden cardiac arrest.” Though easy to use, each AED is slightly different, so training helps users understand the unique traits and supplies for the individual units at their workplace. Additionally, AED users must be trained to understand the signs of a sudden cardiac arrest, when to activate the EMS system, and how to perform CPR.
AEDs are light, portable, easy to use, and inexpensive. They’re best placed near high-hazard areas such as confined spaces, near electrical energy, or in remote work areas. Response time to reach AEDs should be kept within 3–5-minutes.
Need more information on defibrillators in the workplace? See our ezExplanation on AEDs . |
Training requirements
Many states require or encourage CPR and AED training from nationally recognized organizations. Any AED training should include CPR training. OSHA doesn’t offer first aid or CPR training, nor certify trainers. Training by a nationally recognized organization, such as AHA, the American Red Cross, or National Safety Council is recommended.
Keys to Remember
While OSHA doesn’t currently require the use of AEDs in the workplace, they do expect employers to assess their own AED requirements as part of their first aid response. AED training is required by most states and should include CPR with a hands-on practical component.
Giving truck drivers rights to your restrooms
OSHA requires employers to provide all workers with immediately available and sanitary restroom or toilet facilities. But does this include truckers and delivery drivers that stop at your facilities? The sanitation standards (1910.141, 1926.51, and 1928.110) are meant to protect all workers from adverse health effects from unsanitary toilets facilities, or the unavailability of facilities when needed.
Proposed legislation
Bipartisan legislation has recently been introduced in the House that would require businesses to provide restroom access to truckers who are loading or delivering cargo at their warehouses, manufacturers, distribution centers, retailers, and ports.
Supported by leading organizations in the trucking industry, the Trucker Bathroom Access Act (H.R. 9592) was introduced on Dec. 15, 2022. The bill requires retailers, warehouses, and other establishments with existing restrooms to provide access to drivers who are loading or delivering cargo. Additionally, operators of ports and marine terminals must provide access for drayage and parking while accessing such restrooms.
This amendment to Title 49 would exempt some employers from the bill including filling and service stations, and restaurants 800-square feet or smaller with restrooms intended for employee use only. The bill doesn’t require employers to construct new restrooms but to give truck drivers the same access as employees or customers.
Your restroom availability affects their health
Commercial truckers and delivery drivers are the lifeline of our supply chain of supplies, products, and consumables. Working tirelessly all hours, during holidays and weekends, and throughout the pandemic, they continue to deliver critical food and emergency supplies to companies everywhere. Employers have the privilege of demonstrating gratitude to truckers and delivery drivers with a positive work environment.
The benefits of allowing truckers and delivery drivers the convenience and safety of readily available, sanitary restroom facilities are plenty. They’re able to rest and reset when necessary, which keeps them and others safer on the roads. Equally important, restroom availability prevents drivers from having to search for available facilities elsewhere, allowing them to keep a timely delivery schedule, limit supply chain delays, and ultimately lower costs for employers and customers.
Keys to Remember
The proposed Trucker Bathroom Access Act will require retailers, warehouses, and other establishments with existing restrooms to provide access to truckers and delivery drivers who are loading or delivering cargo. Access to restrooms keeps them refreshed and ready to deliver essential supplies to companies across the country.
Do your safety signs have your employees seeing red?
Safety has the workforce brimming with color. In fact, 29 CFR 1910.144 and 1910.145 tell us precisely what OSHA expects for safety color coding to identify hazards in the workplace. Signs, warning labels, symbols, and other color coding in your facilities should have your employees seeing red. But what if they can't?
Though rare, color blindness is the inability to distinguish between colors as most people do. This makes it difficult for workers to see colors intended to protect them from harm. Color blindness can vary, making it difficult to distinguish between red and green or blue and yellow hues - the very shades of safety.
Some individuals can't see any colors, which is called monochromacy. Workers with this type of color blindness may have trouble seeing clearly and may be more sensitive to light. Employers must collaborate with these employees to ensure alternative measures are taken to protect their eyes and clearly communicate warnings and hazards.
The colors of safety
The color identifiers below differentiate the various levels of risk and hazards for workplace safety. Employers must ensure workers with color blindness are able to understand hazards in the workplace and the meaning of signs and warning labels.
RED - identifies fire and fire protective apparatus, danger, and emergency stops. It marks areas near open flames or flammable materials, fire extinguishers, and where workers are directed to stop an action.
ORANGE - warns workers of hazardous parts of equipment that could physically harm people or the facility. Typically used as labels on machinery, orange may also be used on signs, hard hats, safety vests, and other objects.
YELLOW - designates caution and is used for marking physical hazards, such as falling, pinch points, contact hazards, and other similar hazards.
GREEN - identifies directional safety information. This includes pointing workers to emergency egresses, safety showers or eyewash stations, first aid stations, and other safety equipment.
BLUE - not always safety-related, provides information regarding a particular location, process, or item. Employers may use blue signs to convey workplace policies, instructions, or locations, such as "Employees Only."
PURPLE - often combined with yellow, alerts workers to radiation hazards.
BLACK/WHITE - provides instructional and directional information. This includes speed limits, one-way traffic, and aisle markings.
Having a standardized color-coding system for safety is effective for alerting employees of workplace hazards - if they can see the colors properly. For those who can't, employers must ensure these workers understand the hazards and warning signs throughout the workplace.
Interested in learning more? See our ezExplanation on Color Coding . |
Are you contributing to color blindness?
Not only are employers required to ensure workers understand warning signs and colors, but they must also protect workers from becoming color blind. That's right - color blindness can be acquired. Exposure to lead or carbon disulfide can cause color blindness, even at low levels. Terminal illness and alcohol consumption can also contribute to color blindness, so employers should promote health as part of their safety and health programs.
What does ADA have to say?
Color blindness is considered a disability according to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Employers are required to reasonably accommodate employees with disabilities.
Keys to Remember
Employers must ensure employees with color blindness are able to understand hazards in the workplace and the meaning of signs and warning labels. The ADA requires employers to make reasonable accommodations for workers with disabilities, including color blindness.
EPA: Used Drum Management and Reconditioning Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
SUMMARY: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (the EPA) is soliciting information and requesting comments to assist in the potential development of non-regulatory and regulatory options that would ensure the proper management of used industrial containers that held hazardous chemicals or hazardous waste, up to and including the drum reconditioning process. Options could include revising the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) regulations or other, non-regulatory options. This Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) does not propose any regulatory requirements or change any existing regulatory requirements.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 22, 2023, published in the Federal Register August 11, 2023, page 54537.
View proposed rule .