Vision care is more than cool new frames

Who must report?

TSCA Section 8(e) requirements apply both to organizations and to individual employees engaged in manufacturing (including importing), processing, or distributing in commerce a chemical substance or mixture..

Tip: The statute offers no applicability exemptions for a facility’s size, production or import volumes, or commercial activities.

Those in the company who manage Section 8(e) obligations (“officers”) should ensure that the organization meets the requirements. Officers have personal civil and/or criminal liability to verify that SRNs are submitted.

Facilities may assume responsibility from employees and officials for reporting substantial risk information directly to EPA if they establish and implement internal procedures for employees to submit information to the company. The procedures should include:

• What information must be submitted;
• How submissions are prepared and who in the company receives them;
• The federal penalties for failing to report; and
• How officers and employees receive prompt written notification of whether the report was submitted to EPA (if information isn’t reported, the written notification has to mention the right of officers and employees to report the information directly to EPA).

If a business doesn’t have established SRN procedures, all of its employees and officials are individually responsible and liable for ensuring that substantial risk information is submitted directly to EPA.

Regardless of who submits the SRN to the agency, the report should be made within 30 calendar days of obtaining information about a substantial risk of injury.

What qualifies as a substantial risk?

The SRN guide defines substantial risk as “a risk of considerable concern” due to:

• The seriousness of the effect on human or environmental health (health effect), and
• The fact or probability that it will occur (level of exposure).

The type of health effect determines the weight of importance assigned to both factors. For instance, if the chemical’s health effect is severe (like causing birth defects), less weight is given to the level of exposure.

The types of health effects include:

• Human health effects (such as serious or prolonged incapacitation);
• Environmental effects from nonemergency environmental contamination (like widespread accumulation of a chemical substance in the air or water); and
• Emergency environmental contamination that seriously threatens:
  • Humans with cancer, birth defects, mutation, death, or incapacitation; or
  • Nonhuman organisms (e.g., fish, algae, etc.) with significant population destruction.

How are SRNs submitted?

You should submit SRNs electronically through the Chemical Information Submission System (CISS), which is accessed via the Chemical Safety and Pesticide Programs (CSPP) service on EPA’s Central Data Exchange (CDX).

Tip: Reference EPA’s CDX Chemical Safety and Pesticide Programs (CSPP) Registration User Guide for detailed registration instructions.

If your SRN includes confidential business information claims, you’re required to submit the notice electronically.

Key to remember: If your facility obtains information that a chemical you handle poses a substantial risk to human or environmental health, you must report the information to EPA immediately.

The results

From January 13–15, 2026, Operation SafeDRIVE investigated routes across D.C. and 26 states. These targeted enforcement actions resulted in 8,215 inspections with:

• 1,231 vehicles placed out of service;
• 704 drivers placed out of service; and
• 56 arrests.

The scope

The 26 states covered in addition to Washington D.C. in Operation SafeDRIVE’s scope included Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia.

The goal of the operation was to make sure all drivers are properly qualified and that their vehicles meet all the regulations.

Be ready, look ready

Looking prepared goes well beyond having a solid lesson plan. It’s about presenting yourself in a way that builds confidence before the session begins.

• Dress neatly and professionally to reinforce your credibility and show that the training matters.
• Bring enough handouts for every driver, plus a few extras.
• Arrive early to organize your materials, gather your thoughts, and welcome participants as they arrive.
• Make sure that all your electronic or technical equipment is set up and functions properly.

Start on time

Beginning your session at the scheduled time sends a clear message. It conveys that the training is important, and so are your drivers’ schedules. Starting late can frustrate those who arrived early or on time and can diminish your credibility before the session even begins. A timely start keeps the group focused and ready to learn.

Open with purpose and perspective

Begin each session by helping drivers understand the purpose of the training and why it matters.

To craft an effective introduction, put yourself in your drivers’ place. If you were attending the session, what would you want to know about it before starting? Framing the session from the drivers’ perspective creates early engagement and helps participants see the session’s value.

Set the tone

A lack of enthusiasm can quickly drain energy from a training session, no matter how strong the content. Displaying confidence and passion for the topic demonstrates your belief in its importance. When drivers see that you care, they’re far more likely to stay engaged.

End on time

Running beyond the scheduled end time can make drivers restless and reduce the impact of your session. Plan to finish about 10 minutes early. This gives you flexibility for discussion, clarifications, or final questions, while still honoring everyone’s time. A timely wrap up helps ensure your session ends with clarity and confidence.

Key to remember: Applying these five core practices sets the foundation for efficient training sessions that keep drivers engaged and deliver lasting results.

What’s changing

Motor carriers should review the changes now to determine how they might impact their operations. Except as noted, the new rules take effect on March 23, 2026:

• Bumper labels: Motor carriers will no longer need to ensure that their vehicles’ rear-impact guards have a permanent certification label from the manufacturer. These labels often fall off or become unreadable over time, resulting in citations even when guards meet the safety standard.
• License-plate lamps: Tractors will no longer need a working rear license-plate lamp while pulling a trailer. If there’s no trailer, the light will need to be operational.
• Spare fuses (effective April 20, 2026): Drivers will no longer be required to carry spare fuses for powering required equipment. The FMCSA says today’s vehicles don’t commonly suffer from blown fuses, making the requirement unnecessary.
• eDVIRs: Though already allowed under 49 CFR 390.32, the vehicle inspection rules in Part 396 will explicitly allow drivers and motor carriers to use electronic drivers’ vehicle inspection reports (DVIRs).
• Auxiliary fuel pumps: Motor carriers will be able to use gravity- or siphon-fed auxiliary fuel pumps with tanks up to 5 gallons, mounted on the trailer and used only when the vehicle is not in motion. The rule revises 393.65(d) to reflect modern small-capacity auxiliary systems used for trailer-mounted equipment. capacity auxiliary systems used for trailer-mounted equipment.
• Fuel tank fill limit: It will no longer be a violation to use fuel tanks that can be filled beyond 95 percent of their capacity. Modern liquid-fuel tanks have vented caps that can safely accommodate a 100-percent fill, the FMCSA says.
• Liquid-burning flares: The FMCSA has removed the option to use liquid-burning flares as emergency warning devices. Drivers must use reflective triangles or solid-fuel flares instead.
• CDLs for military techs: Dual-status military technicians (as defined in 10 U.S.C. 10216) are now explicitly included in the commercial driver’s license (CDL) exemption for military vehicle operations. Previously, only National Guard technicians qualified; Air Force Reserve and Army Reserve technicians were excluded.
• Portable conveyors: Portable conveyors used in the aggregate industry and manufactured before 2010 are now exempt from the “brakes on all wheels” requirement, provided certain weight and speed limits are met.
• Tire markings: The FMCSA has clarified that its rules do not require tire load-rating markings on sidewalls. That requirement falls to manufacturers only, not motor carriers.
• Vision waivers: An obsolete grandfathering provision related to an old vision waiver study program has been removed from the regulations (391.64) in favor of today’s alternative vision standard in 391.44.
• Water carriers: The FMCSA has removed outdated references to “water carriers,” updating parts 365, 370, 379, 386, and 390 to reflect the agency’s lack of jurisdiction over maritime carriers.

More rules on the way?

Additional deregulatory actions proposed last May are still in process but are expected to be finalized soon. This includes rules to:

• Remove the need to carry a user manual for electronic logging devices (ELDs).
• Remove the requirement for drivers to self-report moving violations.
• End the requirement that carriers return completed roadside inspection reports unless requested by the issuing agency.
• Exempt certain buses and hazmat drivers from stopping at railroad crossings equipped with active warning devices (unless the devices are activated).
• Record information about accidents where medical treatment consisted only of imaging or a prescription without actual treatment.
• Delete the outdated requirement to retrofit older trailers with retroreflective tape.

Key to remember: The FMCSA has finalized 12 deregulatory actions among 18 proposed in May 2025. The changes could save time and money for both motor carriers and drivers.

More than general awareness

Hazmat general awareness training helps drivers recognize hazardous materials and understand basic requirements. Function-specific training goes a step further. For drivers, it focuses on tasks such as verifying shipping papers, maintaining placards, selecting safe parking locations, following routing restrictions, and responding appropriately when plans change.

Inspectors assume drivers understand these responsibilities because they are part of the driving job. When a driver cannot explain why a vehicle was parked in a certain location or why a specific route was chosen, the issue often becomes a training concern rather than a simple mistake.

Training gaps

Many training-related violations happen because drivers didn’t realize a rule applied to them. Parking and attendance are common examples. A driver may believe that locking the truck or parking in a familiar spot is sufficient. Inspectors expect drivers to know when attendance is required and how parking decisions affect public safety.

Routing decisions also reveal training gaps. Drivers who rely only on GPS may unknowingly travel through restricted areas. From an enforcement perspective, route selection is a driver function. Inspectors expect drivers to recognize when hazmat restrictions apply and when a route needs to be questioned.

In these situations, intent doesn’t matter. Inspectors focus on whether the driver was trained to perform the hazmat function correctly.

Training doesn't stop at the gate

One of the most important points for drivers to understand is that hazmat training doesn’t end when the truck leaves the facility. Every decision made with a hazmat load is part of a regulated function. That includes where to stop, how long to stay parked, which route to take, and what to do when delays or breakdowns occur.

Drivers who understand this tend to pause and ask questions when something feels questionable. That pause often prevents violations. Drivers who treat hazmat loads like general freight are more likely to make decisions that inspectors challenge.

Knowledge matters

During roadside inspections, inspectors are not just checking for compliance. They are assessing whether the driver understands the hazmat responsibilities tied to their role. When a driver can clearly explain their decisions, inspections tend to go more smoothly. When they can’t, inspectors are more likely to dig deeper and conduct a more thorough inspection.

Key to remember: Drivers are expected to understand how hazmat regulations apply to the decisions they make every day on the road. When drivers see those decisions as part of their training responsibility, they are better prepared for inspections and less likely to be surprised by citations.

What are restricted plates?

The IRP defines a “restricted plate” as:

• A plate that has a time, geographic area, distance, or commodity restriction; or
• A mass transit or other special plate issued for a bus leased or owned by a municipal government, a state or provincial transportation authority, or a private party, and operated as part of an urban mass transit system.

Definitions and limitations vary by the jurisdiction that issues the plate. Common examples of restricted plates include:

• Farm,
• Transporter,
• Dealer,
• Manufacturer,
• Repair,
• Special mobile equipment, and
• Forestry.

Understanding how restricted plates are defined is only the first step. Whether those plates are recognized outside the base jurisdiction depends on reciprocity.

It’s all about reciprocity

Under IRP, a vehicle displaying restricted plates is not an apportionable vehicle. When a vehicle is non-apportionable, it’s up to each jurisdiction to determine how the jurisdiction’s laws apply.

A non-apportionable vehicle (one operating with restricted plates) may or may not be granted reciprocity outside of the base jurisdiction. This varies by state, and you need to verify whether the states where you operate have reciprocity agreements in place with your base state to recognize those restricted plates.

For example, under a reciprocal agreement between Wisconsin and Minnesota:

• Commercial vehicles that display intrastate vehicle registration (license plates) from Minnesota may operate interstate within a 30-air-mile range of the Minnesota-Wisconsin boundary line without carrying any additional registration credentials, and
• Vehicles that display Wisconsin intrastate vehicle registration (license plates) may operate interstate in Minnesota within a 30-air-mile range of the Wisconsin border.

In contrast, many jurisdictions treat farm, dealer, or transporter plates as valid only in the state of issue, requiring full IRP or other registration (regardless of a trip permit). When there’s no reciprocity agreement, vehicles not apportioned are subject to registration and fee payment according to each base jurisdiction’s general registration statutes.

Because reciprocity is inconsistent — and often misunderstood — many carriers look to trip permits as a workaround. Unfortunately, that approach usually doesn’t solve the problem.

What about trip permits?

In most cases, full IRP apportioned registration is required, and trip permits don’t override the limitations of restricted plates.

In other words, trip permits do not convert an ineligible or restricted plate into an unrestricted interstate plate.

As a result, a vehicle operating on restricted plates may still be considered improperly registered for interstate travel — even if a trip permit has been purchased.

Key to remember: Because restricted plate rules and reciprocity agreements vary by jurisdiction, carriers should verify registration requirements before operating interstate. When interstate travel is anticipated, full IRP apportioned registration is typically the safest and most compliant option.

Why MVR and PSP data matter

Divers with prior driving-related license suspensions are six times more likely to be involved in later incidents, according to a recent government study. Because license suspensions often follow repeated violations or serious offenses, such as driving under the influence (DUI), they’re important indicators of risk. Still, they shouldn’t be the only factor considered.

The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration expects carriers to review all available records to determine if a driver has shown a lack of regard for public safety. Carriers, however, must define what’s acceptable or not.

MVRs provide official state records of traffic convictions and license actions, while PSP reports include federal inspection history, Department of Transportation (DOT) reportable crash involvement, and roadside violations — regardless of citation or conviction. PSP reports, while not required, are great supplemental tools to help carriers evaluate a potential driver.

Staffing pressure shouldn’t replace safety

Driver shortages can create operational challenges, but lowering qualification standards to fill staffing gaps often leads to more crashes and increased legal risks. In litigation, hiring decisions are often examined in detail. Missing serious violations or ignoring available information can support claims of negligent hiring or retention.

A structured scoring process helps carriers show that their decisions were reasonable, documented, and based on established criteria, not based on convenience.

What a strong scoring model includes

A solid scoring model should be simple enough to be used consistently while still detailed enough to ensure only safe drivers are placed on the road. Important elements include:

Violation severity

• Assign higher points or issue disqualifications for major offenses such as DUI, reckless driving, excessive speeding, leaving the scene of an accident, etc.
• Count minor violations, but separate them by severity.

Time weighted

• Consider that older violations may carry less weight if the driver demonstrates improvement.

Crash history

• Score preventable crashes more heavily.
• Distinguish DOT recordable crashes from minor incidents. MVRs and PSP reports do not always indicate whether a driver is at fault.

License suspensions or revocations

Treat any suspension as a major risk factor. Consider whether the suspension was for driving or administrative issues.

Make an active suspension or invalid license a disqualifier.

PSP report inspection patterns

• Watch for repeated issues such as speeding, log falsification, or maintenance violations.
• Use PSP reports as a supplemental screening tool because they can only be used in pre-employment.

The goal isn’t to reject more drivers but to create a fair, transparent system documenting why a driver was accepted, declined, or accepted with conditions.

Common scoring approaches

Many carriers use one of the following approaches:

• Pass/fail criteria: Simple and fast, but offers little flexibility when staffing is tight.
• Tiered scoring (Accept / Conditional / Decline): Provides balanced flexibility but requires consistent use and close monitoring.

Consistency is the key when it comes to hiring safe drivers. A scoring process that isn’t followed can be more damaging than having no process at all.

Make monitoring part of the process

Don’t wait 12 months to review driving records. Many carriers use continuous MVR monitoring on active drivers to identify issues earlier and take timely action. In many states, monitoring may also meet the annual MVR requirement under 391.25.  

Key to remember:

A clear, consistent scoring system for evaluating MVR and PSP data helps carriers balance operational needs with the responsibility of putting safe drivers on the road.

Evaluate and encourage

Performance evaluations are a valuable tool for managers to both assess and encourage employees, and to address any workplace issues. They should let employees know how they’re doing, what they can improve, and acknowledge superior job performance. They should also allow employees to share their struggles and have input into developing goals.  

The process of conducting performance evaluations varies depending on a company's policy and culture. Some companies have formal performance review programs, while others have a policy of open communication. Both methods should cover any performance-related issues that arise.  

Strong performance evaluations:

• Define job-related expectations;
• Assess performance against expectations using observable behaviors or outcomes; and 
• Provide written documentation that supports the conclusions reached.   

Evaluations should be conducted by individuals who are knowledgeable about the role and able to make informed assessments based on real work conditions, rather than assumptions or isolated incidents. That means supervisors should base evaluations on regular interaction and documented feedback gathered throughout the review period.   

A living document

One common challenge with performance reviews is that they’re completed and then forgotten. To avoid this, evaluations should be positioned as a reference point for ongoing coaching; not the end of the conversation.

Evaluations may be used to decide whether training or corrective action has been effective and whether more support is needed. Similarly, managers should revisit performance goals during check-ins, tie them to development conversations, and use the evaluation as a living document that spells out? future expectations.   

To make sure evaluations are constructive, it’s important to pair clear expectations with a support plan. This includes showing specific areas for improvement, explaining why those expectations matter, and outlining what resources, training, or coaching will be provided.   

Evaluations should do more than find gaps; they should help determine what comes next and how the organization will support improvement. In practice, this means documenting next steps, timelines, and follow-up discussions, so employees understand both what’s expected and how they will be supported in meeting those expectations.  

Ask the right questions

While the specifics depend on position and job duties, here are 10 questions that can be used to get the ball rolling in a performance evaluation:   

1. What accomplishments in this review period are you most proud of?
2. What tasks or responsibilities have been most challenging for you?
3. Can you share examples of situations where you felt you performed particularly well?
4. Are there areas where you believe your performance could have been stronger?
5. Have expectations been clear, and where could they be clearer?
6. Were there times when you felt unprepared to perform a task? If so, why?
7. What additional training or resources would help you perform your job more effectively?
8. What specific goals should we set for the next review period?
9. What support, training, or tools will help you achieve those goals?
10. How will we measure progress and success?  

Key to remember: Performance evaluations should clearly set expectations, use documented, observable feedback, and serve as a foundation for ongoing coaching, goal setting, and support. They should be more than a one-time conversation.

FMLA certification basics

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

The forms are as follows:

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

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

Who can fill out an FMLA certification?

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

Under the FMLA, a health care provider includes:

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

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

What about doctors in a foreign country?

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

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

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

Look for systemic patterns

A pattern of incidents at one battery construction site is a great example of how individual decisions and company safety systems intertwine to determine the outcome of daily events. OSHA’s report on the March 2025 death of a company CEO showed that while individual decisions played a role, the fatality occurred within a broader pattern of systemic safety failures at the construction site.

According to Agency findings, the employee chose to cross a roadway while wearing a black vest instead of the required high visibility vest, which drastically reduced the employee’s visibility. At the same time, a site forklift driver was reportedly talking on the phone while operating the vehicle which also contributed to the result of the incident.

OSHA’s conclusions made clear that organizational systems and controls, not just the individuals’ choices, were the primary shortcomings. Multiple companies on site failed to enforce safety rules, maintain traffic controls, or ensure proper operator behavior. For example, the forklift driver’s employer received the largest fine for exposing workers to struck-by hazards and failing to ensure operators followed basic safety practices such as speed limits, phone use, use of spotters, and horn use when visibility was obstructed.

The report reflected an even larger pattern, finding that the employee’s death was one of many safety incidents at the construction mega site, which had recorded dozens of previous traumatic injuries, multiple fatalities, and at least 15 OSHA investigations. Previous incidents included falls, other forklift injuries, a conveyor entrapment, a pipe explosion, and a fatal crushing incident earlier in 2025. This track record should have been an early warning that system-level safety gaps and inconsistent safety management were key contributors, far outweighing any single person’s decisions.

Stomp out systemic failures

While individual decisions like walking into a traffic zone or operating equipment while distracted may influence an incident, they rarely tell the whole story. Root causes usually reflect deeper underlying weaknesses in the organization’s safety systems, such as:

• Fragmented safety oversight that leads to inconsistent enforcement of safety rules, policies, PPE requirements, and behavioral expectations;
• Inadequate traffic and equipment controls that invite a mingling of vehicles with pedestrians or dangerous forklift operational habits;
• Breakdowns in communication between workers including unreported injuries, language barriers, or inadequate signage that results in workers missing warnings or misunderstanding proper procedures; and
• Normalized incidents or near misses, which eventually become serious incidents and fatalities and result in a reactive rather than proactive safety culture.

These conditions can quickly create an environment where ordinary human mistakes are far more likely to lead to severe or fatal outcomes. Employers need to look beyond the individual employee decisions and investigate which systemic failures allowed the decision to become deadly. This is where OSHA regulations help.

Leverage OSHA regulations

You’ve likely heard the saying, “OSHA regulations have been written in blood” meaning someone (or many someones) have been seriously injured in the workplace which resulted in regulations aimed at protecting others from a repeat of similar situations.

Since OSHA was established nearly 55 years ago, its standards and enforcement efforts have helped save more than 712,000 workers’ lives. Even so, employers must continue to identify and strengthen gaps in their safety programs and systems to shield workers from the consequences of inevitable human decisions.

Employers shouldn’t just use OSHA regulations as a means for compliance but to actively protect workers by controlling hazards and setting clear expectations for safe work. Standards such as 1910.147 (Lockout/Tagout), 1910.1200 (Hazard Communication), 1926.501 (Fall Protection), and 1910.178 (Powered Industrial Trucks) give employers concrete requirements for preventing injuries and keeping employees safe on the job. Filling systemic safety gaps by using these standards can prevent thousands of serious injuries and fatalities every year. As demonstrated with this forklift struck-by fatality, most workplace deaths stem from hazards that OSHA rules are designed to control.

Key to remember: Serious incidents and fatalities are rarely caused by individual decisions but by broader system failures like insufficient safety oversight, inconsistent rule enforcement, and poor worksite communication. Employers can prevent these incidents by leveraging regulatory compliance to identify and correct weaknesses in their safety systems.

What is “chip guarding”?

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

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

What about the psi requirement?

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

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

What about cleaning clothing/bodies?

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

The dangers

There are numerous dangers of improperly using compressed air:

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

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

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

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

Choosing a NAICS code

OSHA does not assign NAICS codes. Employers know their operations best and must select the most applicable code. For example, suppose a company engages in both plastics manufacturing and chemical manufacturing. The plastics division has the most employees, but the chemical division generates the most revenue. Which NAICS code should the company use? The company could use either, but might consider the electronic filing obligations.

Plastics manufacturers must file the 300A, 300 Log, and 301 Forms if the establishment has 100 or more employees. However, chemical manufacturers file only the 300A regardless of employee count. This company might choose the NAICS code for chemical manufacturing since that generates the most revenue and would only have to file the 300A.

One location, two establishments?

Normally, a single physical location counts as one “establishment” for injury recordkeeping. In rare cases, a single location with more than one business operation might be divided into more than one establishment. If this happens, each establishment (operation) would maintain a separate 300 Log and could even have different electronic reporting obligations.

The previous example of a chemical and plastics manufacturer probably doesn’t qualify as two separate establishments. OSHA offers an example where two separate business establishments operate from the same physical address. The agency noted, “if an employer operates a construction company at the same location as a lumber yard, the employer may consider each business to be a separate establishment.”

According to the regulation at 1904.46, an employer might consider two or more separate businesses that share a single location to be separate establishments only when:

• Each of the establishments represents a distinctly separate business;
• Each business is engaged in a different economic activity;
• No single NAICS code applies to the joint activities; and
• Separate reports are routinely prepared for each establishment on the number of employees, their wages and salaries, sales or receipts, and other business information.

If these criteria do not apply, the employer must choose one NAICS code for the entire operation.

Employer Identification Number (EIN)

When preparing for electronic submission of injury records, employers also need to include their Employer Identification Number, or EIN. This is a tax identification number for a company, similar to a Social Security Number, but for a business.

Some locations might have more than one EIN. That does not automatically mean the location constitutes two or more “establishments” for OSHA recordkeeping and reporting. However, if each operation meets the criteria for separate businesses, the employer might maintain separate 300 Logs (and potentially have different e-reporting obligations) for each business operation.

Key to remember: If more than one NAICS could apply, the employer chooses which code to use for electronic filing of injury data. Though unusual, a single location might be divided into separate business operations and treated as two establishments.

Why DES slips under the radar

DES has a quantity of uncomfortable symptoms like dry or irritated eyes, blurred vision, headaches, neck pain, and even double vision. These symptoms can be signals of significant eye fatigue. The reason DES remains an "invisible epidemic" in many workplace safety discussions is due to a few factors:

• Non-Acute nature: Unlike a sudden injury, DES symptoms develop gradually. Employees might attribute discomfort to lack of sleep, allergies, or general stress rather than prolonged screen time.
• Lack of formal reporting: There isn't a standardized protocol for reporting "tired eyes" or "mild headaches" as a workplace injury, leading to under-reported statistics.
• Perceived normalcy: Many assume eye discomfort is an inevitable part of office work, normalizing symptoms that should be addressed.
• Focus on physical hazards: Traditional workplace safety prioritizes tangible physical risks, often overlooking ergonomic and visual health factors associated with digital work.

A 2025 Workplace Vision Health Report from VSP Vision Care shows just how impactful Digital Eye Strain can be. According to the report, nearly six in ten employees say digital eye strain negatively affects their productivity and effectiveness on the job. About half report that it diminishes their overall well-being and leaves them too tired to enjoy time outside of work and makes them more irritable throughout the day. Even more concerning, 27 percent of employees have taken time off due to eye strain.

How companies can integrate DES awareness

Luckily, there are prevention methods. Raising awareness and prevention of DES can be done by:

• Promoting the "20-20-20 Rule": This simple yet powerful rule is a cornerstone of DES prevention. Every 20 minutes, employees should look at something 20 feet away for at least 20 seconds. This helps relax the focusing muscles of the eyes and reduces dryness. Companies can implement gentle reminders through desktop pop-ups or shared calendar events.
• Self-Assessment Checklists: Provide employees with simple checklists to evaluate their own workstation ergonomics (screen distance, lighting, chair height).
• Invest in Eye-Friendly Tech: Encourage the use of anti-glare screen filters, adjustable monitor arms, and high-resolution displays. Offer or subsidize computer glasses designed to filter blue light and enhance contrast.
• Optimal Lighting: Educate employees on the importance of ambient lighting that minimizes glare on screens and avoids harsh overhead lights.
• Encouraging Regular Eye Exams: Promote the value of annual eye exams. Many DES symptoms can mimic or worsen underlying vision problems that only a professional can diagnose. Emphasize that these exams are not just for vision correction but for overall eye health monitoring.

Keys to remember: By proactively addressing Digital Eye Strain, companies don't just reduce discomfort; they invest in a more focused, productive, and healthier workforce.

Choosing to follow safety rules

Workplace safety rules should communicate expectations and should be self-evidently good practices. Although objections ought to be nonexistent, non-compliance is far too common. Rules may be necessary, but they’re effective only if people follow them, and some employees might grudgingly comply under an attitude of “we HAVE to do it this way.”

Internal constraints are more effective because employees choose to follow safety rules. Employees make these choices when they see the benefits to themselves, not simply to avoid discipline for rule violations. They recognize that the safety rules are reasonable and designed to protect them, so they choose to stay safe. For related information, see our article, To improve safety culture, focus on employees' experiences.

In other words, rules tell employees what choices to make, but internal constraints tell them why they should make those choices. When internal constraints drive behaviors, the rules are (in a sense) unnecessary because people would make the right choices anyway.

Valuing safety

When a company says that it values safety, the company strives to help everyone understand the value of safety. Employees should work safely because they recognize the benefits to the company as well as the benefits to themselves. The goal is to reach a point where rules serve as guidelines, and employees choose safe behaviors for the benefits, not to avoid consequences.

Helping employees develop internal constraints means helping them recognize the value of safety to themselves to the point that they adopt that value. This may require imposing consequences, but consequences can be negative (like discipline for making the wrong choice) or positive (like a bonus or recognition for doing the right thing). Even discipline can be delivered in a way that helps build internal constraints, such as issuing reminders along the lines of “because it keeps you from getting injured.” For related information, see our article, Giving positive feedback beyond 'good job'.

Accidents may still happen, but could provide an opportunity to evaluate whether an employee made the wrong choice and whether a different behavior could have changed the outcome. Although an accident usually means something went wrong, those failures are also learning opportunities that can help demonstrate the “why” for adopting safety as a value.

Key to remember: When safety becomes a value among the workforce, employees will choose to stay safe for their own benefit, not merely because the rules require it.