FMCSA Final Rule: Removal of Obsolete References to ''Water Carriers''

Why was the standard updated?

When ISO published ISO 14001:2015, many organizations focused primarily on regulatory compliance. While compliance remains a core component of an EMS, environmental managers today face a broader range of issues. Climate impacts, resource availability, supply chain disruptions, and stakeholder expectations can all affect environmental planning and performance. Rather than creating an entirely new framework, the 2026 version largely builds on concepts that already existed in the 2015 edition while expanding and clarifying expectations.

Environmental context receives greater attention

A major theme of the revision is a stronger focus on organizational context. Organizations are expected to look beyond day-to-day compliance activities when identifying environmental risks and opportunities.

The revised standard emphasizes consideration of environmental conditions that may affect the EMS, including climate-related concerns, biodiversity, ecosystem impacts, and natural resource availability. Organizations are expected to evaluate how external issues and stakeholder expectations may influence environmental objectives and planning.

For environmental managers, this may mean expanding annual EMS reviews to evaluate emerging environmental issues that could affect operations, compliance obligations, permit conditions, or environmental objectives.

Change management moves into the spotlight

The revised standard also introduces a more structured approach to managing change. Many organizations already evaluate environmental impacts when making operational changes, but those reviews are often informal.

ISO 14001:2026 expects organizations to plan, manage, and evaluate changes that may affect environmental performance. Examples include:

• Installing new equipment,
• Expanding production capacity,
• Changing raw materials,
• Modifying waste management practices,
• Switching suppliers, and
• Adding new products or processes.

This requirement should sound familiar to many environmental professionals. Operational changes can affect air emissions, waste generation, wastewater discharges, stormwater exposure, and permit applicability. A structured review process can help identify environmental impacts before changes are implemented.

Lifecycle thinking and supply chains gain importance

Lifecycle thinking was already part of ISO 14001:2015, but the revised standard places greater emphasis on it. Organizations are expected to consider environmental impacts throughout the lifecycle of products and services, including activities involving suppliers, contractors, and externally provided products and services.

This requirement doesn't mean organizations are responsible for every environmental impact within their supply chain. Rather, it encourages organizations to understand how purchasing decisions, outsourced activities, and supplier relationships may affect environmental performance.

For some organizations, this could mean greater emphasis on supplier evaluations, procurement procedures, contractor oversight, or product stewardship initiatives.

Leadership involvement becomes more visible

ISO 14001:2026 also strengthens expectations related to leadership accountability. Environmental management is no longer viewed solely as the responsibility of the environmental department.

The revised standard emphasizes visible leadership involvement and broader organizational participation. Environmental responsibilities may extend beyond EHS personnel to departments such as operations, purchasing, engineering, and management. Organizations will need to demonstrate that leadership is actively engaged in environmental planning, resource allocation, and performance evaluation activities.

What should organizations do now?

Although organizations have time to prepare for the transition, environmental managers may want to begin evaluating their programs now. Early reviews can help identify gaps and reduce the likelihood of surprises during future audits.

Questions organizations may want to consider include:

• Does the EMS adequately address climate, resources, and other emerging environmental issues?
• Is there a documented process for evaluating environmental impacts before operational changes are made?
• Are lifecycle considerations incorporated into purchasing and contractor management activities?
• Can leadership involvement be demonstrated through documented actions and decisions?
• Do environmental objectives show measurable performance improvements?

While ISO 14001:2026 is an evolution of the existing standard rather than a complete overhaul, organizations shouldn't assume existing EMS procedures will meet the revised expectations. Environmental managers may want to review how their systems address organizational context, change management, lifecycle considerations, and leadership involvement before their next audit.

Key to remember: For environmental professionals, the revised standard provides an opportunity to strengthen that connection and demonstrate the value that effective environmental management brings to the organization.

Compliance considerations

Backup generators help keep businesses running, but they also impact the environment. Companies must follow air quality regulations to reduce pollution and operate safely.

Air permits

• State agencies usually oversee air permits, but The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has granted many county and city agencies the authority to issue them. For major permits such as New Source Review (NSR) and Title V, federal regulations apply, but state or local governments may still manage the process.
  
• In some areas, businesses can apply for a general permit or permit-by-rule for emergency generators. These permits are often easier to obtain and take less time to process. Checking air permitting regulations will help determine if this option is available.
  
• Businesses should find out if they need a pre-construction or construction air permit before setting up an emergency generator. These permits are based on the proposed equipment’s potential to emit (PTE) of criteria pollutants such as NOx, SO2, CO, and CO2 and hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) such as formaldehyde and acrolein, which are emitted during the combustion of fuel. The type(s) of fuel used in the generator, such as diesel, natural gas, gasoline, or propane, will affect the calculated PTE. Read more about construction permits in this ezExplanation: New Source Review (NSR).

(Note: many state and local permitting agencies allow for the use of 500 hours for calculating PTE from an emergency engine, as per EPA’s 2011 Fox Memo, but some agencies still require using 8,760 hours and only accept 500 hours as an enforceable limit defined in a permit.)

• Federal law sets a limit on emergency generators, allowing less than 100 hours of non-emergency use per year. This includes maintenance and testing. Some permits may also restrict the times of day when the generator can be used for non-emergency purposes.
  
• The permit may require businesses to use the generator according to the manufacturer’s specifications. This is especially important if the business used manufacturer guarantees to calculate PTE.
  
• Businesses must track fuel use and operating hours to stay within the limits used in emissions calculations. They can do this using fuel records, fuel measuring devices, and hour meters that log the generator’s usage time.
  
• After getting a construction permit, a facility may need to apply for an operating permit within a year of the generator beginning operation. Some state and local agencies have stricter rules and deadlines. Check out J. J. Keller’s ezExplanation for Operating Permits: Clean Air Act: Operating Permits

EPA emission standards

The EPA enforces strict emissions regulations for stationary engines. Businesses must ensure their generators meet the New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for compression ignition (40 CFR 60 Subpart IIII) and spark ignition internal combustion engines (ICE) (40 CFR 60 Subpart JJJJ). Additionally, the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) apply to reciprocating internal combustion engines (RICE) (40 CFR 63 Subpart ZZZZ).

These rules, depending on the specific type of generator engine, will be required even if a permit is not necessary.

Other regulations

Keep in mind that using an emergency generator may also involve other factors depending on the type and amount of fuel stored:

• Aboveground Storage Tank (AST) Requirements
  
• Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plans
  
• EPCRA Tier II Reporting

Key to remember: When installing an emergency generator, companies must navigate complex air quality regulations to ensure compliance. By selecting the right fuel type and securing necessary permits, businesses can maintain reliable power while minimizing environmental impact.

What’s happened?

A quick look at the rule’s development shows:

• 7/28/2025 — OSHA received a petition for rulemaking that covers obligations for ladder retrofits under 1910.28(b)(9).
• 9/15/2025 — OSHA posted a memo confirming it intends to eliminate 1910.28(b)(9)(i)(D).
• 12/18/2025 — OSHA sent its Walking-Working Surfaces (WWS) - Fixed Ladders proposal to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA).
• 1/13/2026 — OIRA and OSHA met with the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM).
• 1/21/2026 — OIRA and OSHA met with the Employers OSHA Modernization Coalition.
• 1/27/2026 — OIRA plans to meet with attorneys representing the American Petroleum Institute (API).

What did the petition request?

The seven-page petition, written by legal counsel on behalf of the AFPM, API, and American Chemistry Council (ACC), requests that OSHA:

• Withdraw the provision under the WWS standard for fixed ladders that extend more than 24 feet to be equipped with personal fall arrest systems (allowing the continued use of ladder cages or wells); or
• Grandfather fixed ladders installed before a particular date (authorizing the continued use of existing ladder cages or wells for those ladders).

Unjustified provision?

Petitioners argue that OSHA, in its 2010 proposed WWS rule, failed to:

• Take comments on the effectiveness of cages in protecting workers from falls,
• Disclose that the agency was evaluating whether to prohibit cages, and
• Give stakeholders a chance to submit evidence regarding cages.

The petition outlines the differences between the earlier proposed and final rules, noting that the 2010 proposal gave employers the choice to use any of four fall-protection types — cages, wells, ladder safety systems, or personal fall protection systems. However, the 2016 final rule gave a 2036 phase-out date for cages and wells.

The petition goes on to contend that:

• OSHA lacks sufficient evidence to justify prohibiting cages and wells;
• Data collected during the rulemaking process leaned toward preserving employer choices for fall protection; and
• Although the 2016 rulemaking preamble acknowledged the shift away from cages and wells, it did not fully discuss evidence in favor of cages and wells.

Other arguments in the petition

The petition raises several points questioning the benefits of paragraph (b)(9)(i)(D), stating that:

• In the past decade, AFPM, API, and ACC facilities have suffered only a few injuries, with no fatalities involving cages and wells;
• Cages offer passive protection, whereas ladder safety systems and personal fall arrest systems require workers to take action to comply;
• Personal protective equipment (PPE) lies at the bottom of the hierarchy of controls;
• Safety risks also exist for ladder safety systems and personal fall arrest systems; and
• Installing new ladders or retrofitting existing ones introduces hazards to those performing that work.

Finally, the petition addresses significant compliance costs, estimating several billion dollars for tens of thousands of ladders at U.S. refineries alone. Petitioners also cited additional expenses for rerating pressure vessels and engineering any process equipment changes.

What does OSHA say?

OSHA officially announced in a September 2025 memo that it is proposing to remove 1910.28(b)(9)(i)(D). The agency calls it a deregulatory action in line with Executive Order 14192. The memo reasons, “OSHA anticipates this change will allow employers to update their ladders when the ladders reach the end of their service lives, accommodating the lengthy service life of fixed ladders, while significantly reducing costs and offering greater flexibility.”

The WWS - Fixed Ladders proposal reached OIRA on December 18. OIRA typically takes 90 to 120 days for review, but recently a maximum 28-day review period for deregulatory actions was implemented. That means we anticipate OIRA will rush this proposal, so that OSHA may publish it in the Federal Register.

Key to remember

An upcoming OSHA proposal would withdraw 1910.28(b)(9)(i)(D). The rule was spurred by a petition.

1. 150-air-mile (CDL) exception

Who’s eligible? Drivers of property-carrying vehicles (“trucks”) that require a commercial driver’s license (CDL), and drivers of passenger-carrying vehicles (shuttles/vans/buses), who return to the starting location at the end of the day.

What are they exempt from? Standard grid-style logs (records of duty status), supporting documents (see 395.11), and 30-minute breaks (see 395.3(a)(3)(ii)).

What’s the maximum distance? 172.6 miles away from the reporting location (150 air miles) measured in a straight line in any direction.

What other conditions apply? On any day the exception is used, the driver must:

• Not drive a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) beyond the 150-air-mile radius,
• Return to the work-reporting location at the end of the day (unless classified as a driver-salesperson),
• Be completely off duty within 14 consecutive hours of the starting time, and
• Be off work for 8 (bus) or 10 (truck) consecutive hours before coming back on duty.

The driver remains subject to the daily limit of 10 (bus) or 11 (truck) driving hours and the weekly on-duty limit of 60 or 70 hours.

Which records are required? The motor carrier must have a record of the driver’s starting time, ending time, and total on-duty time for the day, and it must be retained for six months. “Driving” time does not need to be recorded separately from on-duty time, and drivers are not required to have records in the vehicle (though it is a recommended practice).

Where’s the rule? 49 CFR 395.1(e)(1)

2. 150-air-mile (non-CDL) exception

Who’s eligible? Drivers of property-carrying vehicles (“trucks”) that do NOT require a CDL and who return to the starting location at the end of the day.

What are they exempt from? Standard grid-style logs (records of duty status), supporting documents (see 395.11), 30-minute breaks (see 395.3(a)(3)(ii)), and — up to twice per week — the 14-hour limit (395.3(a)(2)).

What’s the maximum distance? 172.6 miles away from the reporting location (150 air miles) measured in a straight line in any direction.

What other conditions apply? On any day the exception is used, the driver must:

• Not drive a CMV beyond the 150-air-mile radius;
• Return to the work-reporting location at the end of the day (but does not necessarily need to go off duty); and
• Not drive after the 14th consecutive hour on at least five days out of any seven consecutive days, or after the 16th consecutive hour on up to two days out of seven.

The driver remains subject to the daily limit of 11 driving hours and the weekly on-duty limit of 60 or 70 hours, as well as the need for 10 hours off between shifts.

Which records are required? The motor carrier must have a record of the driver’s starting time, ending time, and total on-duty time for the day, and it must be retained for six months. “Driving” time does not need to be recorded separately from on-duty time, and drivers are not required to have records in the vehicle (though it is a recommended practice).

Where’s the rule? 49 CFR 395.1(e)(2)

3. 16-hour “big day”

Who’s eligible? Drivers of property-carrying CMVs who return to the reporting location daily.

What are they exempt from? The 14-hour limit (395.3(a)(2)).

What’s the maximum distance? None. Drivers must remain close enough to home base that they can return there before hitting the 16-hour limit (or any other limit).

What other conditions apply? This is the only short-haul exception with a “look back” requirement. On the day the exception is used, the driver must:

• Have returned to the starting location on the prior five work days (not including days off, and even if the driver got a 34-hour restart);
• Be back to the starting location and released from duty within 16 consecutive hours after the start of the day; and
• Only use the exception if it was not already used within the previous six consecutive days, unless the driver got a 34-hour restart.

The driver must also comply with the 30-minute break rule, the 11-hour driving limit, the 60/70-hour limit, and the need for 10 hours off.

Which records are required? The driver must use a standard grid-style log (395.8) and keep supporting documents (395.11). A driver cannot claim both this exception and one of the 150-air-mile exceptions on the same day.

Where’s the rule? 49 CFR 395.1(o)

4. Construction materials & equipment

Who’s eligible? Any driver primarily transporting construction materials and equipment. This means the transportation of construction and pavement materials, construction equipment, and construction maintenance vehicles, to or from an active construction site (a construction site between mobilization of equipment and materials to the site to the final completion of the construction project). Placarded vehicles are not eligible.

What are they exempt from? The need to remain off duty for 34 hours to restart the 60/70-hour limit. Instead, these drivers may get a restart with just 24 hours off.

What’s the maximum distance? 86.3 miles (75 air miles) away from the work-reporting location, measured in a straight line in any direction (though states are allowed to set the limit as low as 50 air miles for in-state-only operations).

What other conditions apply? Drivers remain subject to all other requirements: 10 hours off, 11 hours of driving within a 14-hour period, 30-minute breaks, and the 60/70-hour on-duty limit.

Which records are required? These drivers should qualify for a 150-air-mile exception as described above. Otherwise, a standard grid-style log and supporting documents are required (395.8 and 395.11).

Where’s the rule? 49 CFR 395.1(m)

5. Driver-salespersons

Who’s eligible? Any driver for a private carrier of property who:

• Is engaged both in selling goods*, services, or the use of goods, and in delivering (by CMV) the goods sold or provided or upon which the services are performed;
• Drives no more than half the total work hours; and
• Drives no more than 40 hours in any seven consecutive days.

*“Selling goods” includes soliciting or obtaining reorders or new accounts, or other selling or merchandising activities designed to retain customers or to increase the sale of goods or services.

What are they exempt from? The 60-hour/7-day or 70-hour/8-day limit.

What’s the maximum distance? 100 miles (not air miles) away from the work-reporting location, measured in a straight line in any direction.

What other conditions apply? Drivers remain subject to all other requirements: 10 hours off, 11 hours of driving within a 14-hour period, and 30-minute breaks.

Which records are required? These drivers should qualify for a 150-air-mile exception as described above. Otherwise, a standard grid-style log and supporting documents are required (395.8 and 395.11). Note that if a driver-salesperson wants to take advantage of the option to not return to the starting location when using the 150-air-mile exception in 395.1(e)(1), the driver must remain within a radius of 100 miles.

Where’s the rule? 49 CFR 395.1(c)

What’s an ‘air mile’?

An air mile (also known as a nautical mile) is a bit longer than the standard “land” (statute) mile tracked on a vehicle’s odometer. One air mile is equivalent to 1.15 miles on the road. Therefore:

• 100 air miles = 115.1 land miles, and
• 150 air miles = 172.6 land miles.

What’s an “air-mile radius”?

A radius is a straight line from the center of a circle to its edge. If a driver must remain within a 150-air-mile radius of the starting location, for example, then the driver may travel up to 172.6 miles away from that location, measured in a straight line (“as the crow flies”) in any direction. Because most roads aren’t built in a straight line, drivers and motor carriers must refer to a map — or better yet, an online mapping tool — to determine where the geographic boundary lies.

Note that a driver limited to a 150-air-mile radius is not limited to driving a specific number of miles within the radius. For example, a truck driver may drive much more than 172 miles in a day and still claim the 150-air-mile exception, as long as all driving (up to 11 hours) took place within the 150-air-mile radius.

Aren’t we exempt from other safety rules?

Most short-haul exceptions are tied to the hours-of-service rules only. Short-haul operations are NOT exempt from rules governing driver qualification files, vehicle markings, daily and annual vehicle inspections, cargo securement, insurance, licensing, drug testing, and many other safety mandates.

Key to remember: Short-haul and regional drivers who return home each day are eligible for certain exceptions from portions of the hours-of-service rules, though state requirements may vary.

1. Cargo not properly secured

The most common hazmat violation so far this year involves hazardous materials that weren’t properly blocked, braced, or secured during transportation. Inspectors recorded more than 1,000 of these violations.

To avoid this issue, verify that hazmat packages are adequately secured before departure and periodically check cargo during transit. Drivers should never assume a load was secured properly without conducting their own inspection.

2. Failure to produce a current hazmat registration

More than 400 violations were issued for failing to produce a current Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration (PHMSA) hazmat registration certificate or registration number during an inspection.

Usually, the company is registered but can’t provide proof of registration. Make sure registrations are renewed on time, current certificates are maintained, and employees know where the documentation is located.

3. No required shipping paper

FMCSA reported more than 360 violations involving vehicles operating without a required hazmat shipping paper.

Before a vehicle leaves the facility, confirm that the required shipping paper is present and complete. A simple shipping paper review as part of the pre-trip process can help prevent this violation.

4. Damaged or obscured placards

Nearly 350 violations involved placards that were damaged, faded, dirty, or otherwise difficult to read.

Include placards in routine vehicle inspections and replace them when necessary. Also ensure mud, snow, road grime, or other materials aren't obstructing their visibility.

5. Shipping paper accessibility

Rounding out the top five is shipping paper accessibility, with more than 340 violations reported so far this year.

Having a shipping paper isn't enough. It also has to be readily accessible. Drivers should be trained on accessibility requirements and consistently store shipping papers in the designated location. The best place for hazmat shipping papers in a vehicle is in a holder on the inside of the driver’s door.

A common theme

What's striking about the top violations so far this year is that most involve basic compliance fundamentals rather than complex regulatory requirements. Cargo securement, documentation, and placarding remain the areas where inspectors are finding the most problems.

Key to remember: Don't overlook the basics. Regular pre-trip inspections, refresher training, and periodic compliance reviews can go a long way toward preventing the violations that inspectors continue to find most often on the road.

Is your registered weight still accurate?

One of the most common registration issues involves registered weight. A vehicle may be legally capable of hauling heavier loads, but that doesn't necessarily mean it’s registered to do so.

As business grows, carriers often begin hauling larger loads, adding customers, or expanding routes. If your vehicle's registered weight isn't updated to reflect those changes, you could face penalties for operating above the weight authorized by its registration.

This issue often goes unnoticed because the truck itself hasn't changed. However, enforcement officials are concerned with how the vehicle is registered, not just what it’s capable of hauling.

Whenever freight volumes, routes, or operating weights change, review your registration records to ensure they still align with actual operations.

Is the vehicle operating under the right plate type?

Not all registrations are created equal. Many states offer specialty or reduced-fee registrations for certain operations, such as:

• Farm vehicles,
• Natural resource vehicles,
• Forestry operations, or
• Other restricted uses.

Specialty plates can save money, but they also come with strings attached. Carriers must comply with those limits for the registration to remain valid. Problems arise when a vehicle's operation changes but its registration does not.

For example, a vehicle may have been properly registered under a specialty plate when it was performing one type of work. If the vehicle later begins hauling different commodities, traveling outside permitted areas, or performing general commercial transportation, it may no longer qualify for that registration class.

A good practice is to review registration classifications whenever equipment is reassigned, new customers are added, or business activities expand beyond their original scope. The registration and the vehicle's use must continue to match.

Has interstate travel changed the rules?

Another common issue occurs when operations expand beyond your home state.

A vehicle that is properly registered for intrastate operations may require additional credentials or registrations once it begins operating across state lines. What starts as an occasional out-of-state trip can gradually evolve into a regular part of the business.

Because the change often happens incrementally, carriers may not realize that their registration and credentialing requirements have changed along with their operations.

Before crossing state lines, evaluate whether additional registration, apportioned registration, permits, or other interstate credentials are required. Waiting until a roadside inspection or audit to discover a registration issue can be a costly mistake.

Three questions to ask

New customers, new commodities, expanded routes, and heavier loads can all affect registration requirements. Before a vehicle goes back on the road after business changes, ask:

1. Is this vehicle registered for the weight I'm operating at?
2. Does the registration type still match how I'm using the vehicle?
3. Has my operating area expanded beyond what the registration was intended to cover?

If the answer to any of those questions is "I'm not sure," it's time for a registration review.

Key to remember: Registration should never be treated as “set it and forget it.” If the operation changes, the registration may need to change with it.

Limitations

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

Packing

The following packing instructions have been updated:

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

Packaging specifications and performance tests

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

Documentation

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

Radioactive materials

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

Appendices

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

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

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

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

What do your drivers need?

The equipment requirements can vary slightly based on the type of vehicle, what it is hauling, and where it is operating. As a result, it can be confusing to find and understand minimum requirements. As a best practice, making sure the following emergency equipment is in your vehicles is a great start:

• Three bi-directional emergency reflective triangles;,
• Six flares capable of burning for 30 minutes or three liquid-burning flares that contain enough fuel to burn continuously for at least 60 minutes,
• A fire extinguisher,
• A first aid kit,
• A spare tire and jack,
• A flashlight and batteries, and
• Jumper cables.

Carriers that haul certain types of dangerous goods in Canada must also carry fire extinguishers in accordance with the Transportation of Dangerous Goods Regulations, so be sure to check these regulations for specific details.

It is highly recommended that you check with the jurisdiction where you operate your commercial motor vehicle for the specific requirements and regulations that apply to you.

When to take the necessary action

Whenever any commercial motor vehicle or trailer is disabled, stalled, broken down, or in a collision, the driver should quickly and calmly take the necessary actions to safeguard the vehicle and other motorists.

Having the vehicle equipped with the above-listed items will ensure that the driver can respond to the emergency efficiently and effectively. This is especially important on busy or high-speed roads. Ensure you also teach your drivers how to use the equipment. For example, if the truck breaks down – ensure they know where to put the emergency triangles, they know how to use the fire extinguisher properly and they have instructions on how to use jumper cables correctly.

It is recommended to use emergency warning devices for all emergencies, whether they occur during the day or night, or on-road or off the road, to ensure everyone’s safety.

What about south of the border?

Those of you that operate in the United States must meet U.S. regulations for emergency equipment in your vehicles. The minimum requirements can be found in section 393.95 of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, which requires:

• A fire extinguisher (there are different types for whether the vehicle is carrying dangerous goods or not),
• Spare fuses, and
• Warning devices to use when stopped on a highway.

Other considerations

Ensure your commercial vehicles carry additional emergency equipment to protect the driver, other workers, and any passengers. For example, extra food and water should be carried along with weather-appropriate clothing to protect the driver in the event the vehicle breaks down and the driver is stranded until help can arrive. And, as always, make sure drivers have tire chains easily accessible. If they get hit by a sudden snowstorm, then they will be prepared. In fact, carrying tire chains is a requirement in some jurisdictions.

Dealing with on-road emergencies is no fun for drivers. Don’t make it more difficult for them in an already stressful situation. Be sure to properly equip your trucks with emergency-related safety equipment and ensure drivers know how to use the equipment.

If you don’t have the proper emergency equipment in your truck, it can result in a fine or penalty. Commercial motor vehicles and their drivers must meet strict safety standards and follow all commercial vehicle-related regulations. Police and transportation enforcement officers regularly inspect vehicles, and the penalties for not having the proper safety equipment can be severe.

Key to remember: Before your drivers get in your trucks and hit the road, make sure you’ve equipped them with all the essential emergency safety gear. Safety is the first priority, especially on the road.

What the date means

These government documents are subject to certain checks and balances, such as the following:

• OMB control number 1235‑0003 governs the collection of information from employers and employees for DOL compliance purposes.
• The June 30, 2026, date is when the latest version of the forms will be replaced by a new OMB‑approved version.

The OMB has to review the FMLA notices and certification forms every 3 years. The last time it did so, it didn’t make any material changes.

The OMB is part of the U.S. Executive Office and helps the president meet policy and budget, manage details, oversee regulatory objectives, and helps fulfill the agency’s statutory responsibilities.

Model forms optional

Employers aren’t required to use the DOL’s model forms. Many do, however, because it’s easier than creating their own forms. Using the DOL’s forms also helps ensure the notices provide enough information and the certifications don’t ask employees for information beyond what the FMLA allows.

Key to remember: The June 30, 2026, expiration date of FMLA documents is just a form‑collection deadline, not a legal cutoff for FMLA leave or certification. Employers may still use the current forms until a new version is issued.

Joint employer proposed rule: July 2026

Since 2021, the WHD has had no regulatory guidance addressing joint employer liability under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The WHD is considering a proposed rule to adopt regulations that would guide WHD enforcement of joint employer liability under the FLSA, the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), and the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Workers Protection Act (MSPA). The WHD says that joint employer status under the FMLA and MSPA should be determined using the FLSA analysis.

When a rule is earmarked in the regulatory agenda as a “proposed rule,” that means the public expects to see written documentation on which they can provide their comments. The agencies involved then review the comments, and the rule moves to the next step in the legislative process. The dates listed are estimates that the agencies think they’ll have something posted for review.

Independent contractor final rule: October 2026

In 2024, the WHD published a final rule providing an analysis for determining employee or independent contractor (IC) classification under the FLSA. The 2024 IC rule took effect on March 11, 2024. The 2024 IC rule, however, is the subject of legal challenges. The WHD intends to rescind the 2024 IC rule. The WHD has also proposed to modify regulations interpreting the FMLA and MSPA to clarify that the analysis for determining employee or IC status under the FLSA also applies under the FMLA and MSPA.

The WHD considered three alternatives to the proposed rule, listed below from least to most restrictive:

1. Adopting the common law control test, which applies in distinguishing between employees and ICs under various other federal laws;
2. Adopting the WHD’s current enforcement policy, which is comprised of sub-regulatory guidance from before 2021 applying a multifactor economic reality balancing test; and
3. Adopting a 3-pronged “ABC” test (which several states have adopted).

The WHD issued a proposed rule in February 2026, and the comment period ended on April 28.

A final rule addresses the public comments submitted in response to a proposed rule to help determine the final regulatory language. When an agency publishes a final rule, generally the rule is effective no less than 30 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register. A final rule doesn’t take effect until its “effective date” is reached.

Key to remember: The Wage and Hour Division is looking to revise the joint employer and independent contractor regulations.

Recognized hazards

OSHA determines whether a hazard is “recognized” by looking at several sources, including:

• Industry consensus standards like the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) or the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA);
• An employer’s own safety rules and training materials;
• Previous incidents involving the hazard; and
• Industry recognition of the hazard, such as statements by safety or health experts who are familiar with the relevant conditions, and evidence of implementation of abatement methods to deal with the particular hazard by other members of the employer's industry.

Examples of recognized hazards include:

• Employees operating forklifts without wearing available seat belts;
• Damaged warehouse racks that could collapse;
• Workplace violence risks in certain settings, such as healthcare or gas stations, where the hazard is well documented; and
• Employees riding on the exterior rear step of refuse-collection trucks while vehicles are in transit.

Struck-by hazards and combustible dust are also recognized hazards. Recent cases where OSHA cited the GDC include:

• Employees walking in poorly illuminated areas on a jobsite where heavy vehicle traffic was present, and
• Employees exposed to fire and explosions associated with combustible dust generated during the manufacturing of dietary supplements.

Ergonomic hazards include strain from activities such as lifting, pushing, or repetitive motion. Musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) like tendonitis, carpal tunnel syndrome, and back injuries can result from these exposures.

Identifying and controlling recognized hazards

A proactive approach is the best defense against a GDC citation. Conducting a job hazard analysis (JHA) helps identify hazards that might otherwise be missed. Observe employees as they perform tasks and ask for their input. They may identify hazards that employers or safety professionals don’t recognize, especially with tasks that occur infrequently or only under specific conditions.

In addition to JHAs, reviewing injury and illness records, near-miss reports, incident investigations, equipment manuals, workers’ compensation claims, industry guidance, and consensus standards can also provide insights.

Once you identify hazards, determine which ones don’t have an OSHA standard, like heat or ergonomics, and prioritize those that could cause serious physical harm or death. Consider the hierarchy of controls and whether the hazard can be eliminated or reduced.

Put reasonable controls in place (such as water, rest breaks, and shade for heat, or lift-assist devices for repeated manual lifting) and keep records showing what’s been done. Documented JHAs, training records, inspection logs, and corrective action reports can all help show that you took the hazard seriously and acted to protect employees.

The GDC and “inherently risky professions”

On July 1, 2025, OSHA issued a proposed rule that would limit the scope of the GDC. If finalized, OSHA could no longer use the GDC to cite employers of “inherently risky professions,” which includes such activities as motor sports, animal handling and performance, and combat simulation training. (See our related article, “OSHA proposes giving employers with ‘inherently risky professions’ a free pass.”) The agency’s most recent regulatory and deregulatory agenda, published July 3, 2026, reveals OSHA intends to hold public hearings on the proposal starting mid-August.

Key to remember: OSHA uses the General Duty Clause to cite serious, recognized hazards for which there’s no OSHA standard. When you identify and control these hazards and document your actions, OSHA may find it more difficult to establish the four elements necessary for a GDC citation.

Where lifting risks begin

They often build from small decisions that seem harmless at the time: using a sling “just one more time,” assuming the load weight is close enough, ignoring a worn edge, or grabbing whatever sling is nearby because the job needs to keep moving.

Slings aren’t all designed for the same conditions. Alloy steel chain, wire rope, synthetic web, synthetic round slings, metal mesh, and fiber rope all have different strengths, limits, and inspection concerns. A sling that works well for one task may be a poor choice for another if the load has sharp edges, high heat, chemical exposure, abrasion points, or an unstable center of gravity.

Additionally, many incidents lead back to load control. A suspended load does not have to fall straight down to hurt someone. It can swing, shift, rotate, pinch, or strike nearby workers if the lift is not planned and controlled.

Controls that help keep the load secure

Those risks are why the inspection and planning steps cannot be treated as a quick formality. Before the hook is raised, the crew needs to confirm that the sling fits the load, the conditions, and the way the load will move. OSHA’s sling requirements for general industry are found in 1910.184, and construction rigging requirements are addressed under 1926.251, but the practical goal is the same: use a sling that is suitable, inspected, properly identified, and within its rated capacity.

A stronger lift starts with slowing down long enough to answer a few basic questions during the setup:

• Load planning: Confirm the weight, center of gravity, attachment points, hitch type, sling angle, and travel path at the planning stage. Guessing may feel faster, but it removes the safety margin the lift depends on.
• Sling inspection: Look for cuts, burns, broken wires, crushed areas, stretched links, chemical damage, corrosion, damaged stitching, knots, or hardware that does not match the sling’s capacity. If the sling is damaged, questionable, or missing required identification, remove it from service.
• Edge and surface protection: Protect slings from sharp, rough, or abrasive load edges that can cut, crush, or wear down the material once tension is applied. Padding, sleeves, corner protectors, or a different sling type may be needed based on the load and conditions.
• Worker positioning and communication: Keep employees clear of areas where the load could swing, shift, or fall. Use clear signals, taglines when appropriate, and stop the lift if conditions change or communication breaks down.

The compliance side of sling safety

The requirements should show up in everyday lifting practices, not just in the written program. Slings must be inspected before use, damaged or defective slings must be removed from service, and slings must not be loaded beyond their rated capacity. In construction, rigging equipment must also have permanently affixed and legible identification markings that show the recommended safe working load, and equipment without those markings cannot be used.

The tag matters. The condition matters. The configuration matters. And the person selecting and using the sling needs to understand how those pieces work together while the load is still on the ground.

Key to remember: Every lift depends on using the right sling the right way. Confirm that it is rated, marked, and protected from damage, and keep employees clear of the suspended load.

Contemporaneous defined

OSHA does not define “contemporaneous” in the regulations, but offered clarification in a letter of interpretation (LOI) dated May 15, 2007. The evaluations must be conducted when the signs or symptoms are in the same stage of development, same degree of severity, and the condition is evaluated in similar context.

Opinions obtained on the same day would be contemporaneous. Acceptable time delays may differ depending on circumstances, including the type and severity of the condition. For instance, if the employee’s condition either improved or worsened between examinations, the condition would not be evaluated at the same stage.

An employer presented a scenario in an LOI dated September 24, 2010. An employee fell from a chair, went to the emergency room, and was given restrictions that did not affect his duties. Ten days later, the employee visited an occupational clinic and was released to full duty. Finally, after another four days (14 days after the initial ER visit), the employee visited a chiropractor who recommended days away. The employer wanted to consider the initial opinions as more “authoritative” to avoid recording days away. However, OSHA noted that the opinions were not contemporaneous so the question of authority was moot. The employer had to record the case. The employee’s injury might have worsened due to activities outside work, but since the condition started at work, OSHA considers it work-related.

In another LOI dated February 25, 2011, OSHA offered additional considerations regarding “contemporaneous” opinions to include:

• Whether the examination was in person (reviewing documents is not sufficient);
• Whether the examinations were done on the same day;
• Whether the employee was subjected to additional events or exposures between the examinations; and
• Whether medical treatment, restricted work activity, or days away occurred between the examinations.

Authoritative defined

The regulation at 1904.6(b)(3) defines “authoritative” as the “best documented, best reasoned, or most authoritative.” The 2010 LOI mentioned previously clarifies that the most authoritative opinion is “the best documented, the best reasoned, or the most persuasive.”

OSHA allows employers to make that determination. In fact, the preamble published in 2001 says, “the rule requires the employer to rely on the one judged by the employer to be most authoritative.” Also, a frequently asked question in OSHA’s Recordkeeping Policies and Procedures Manual (CPL 02-00-135) states, “the employer may determine which recommendation is the most authoritative and record on that basis.”

So, if an injured employee gets a recommendation for medical treatment, restrictions, or days away, but the employer obtains a contemporaneous opinion contradicting that recommendation and the second opinion is more authoritative, the employer may follow the second opinion. However, once medical treatment is provided, the employer must record the case. A subsequent recommendation cannot “undo” a recommendation that was already followed or implemented.

Key to remember: Employers can record cases based on second opinions if the evaluation was both contemporaneous and more authoritative.

Employee rights

The OSHA regulation at 1904.35 says that employers can’t discharge or discriminate against employees for reporting a work-related injury or illness. From a workers’ comp standpoint, imposing discipline can create the impression of retaliation for filing a claim (which is a worker’s right).

To illustrate, suppose an employee frequently removes his hard hat. The supervisor is inconsistent about addressing this and never documents any reminders given. Eventually, the employee gets a head injury that would have been prevented by the hard hat. The supervisor wants to fire the worker for the repeated safety violation.

If the terminated employee files an OSHA whistleblower claim or a workers’ comp retaliation claim, he’ll likely say that he was disciplined for reporting the injury or filing the claim. The company will have a chance to refute the claim, but this can be challenging when there’s little or no documentation of a recurring problem.

For related information, see Preventing Retaliation: OSHA's Whistleblower Protection Program.

Justifying the adverse action

If the company consistently enforces its rules (with documentation), then a termination should be easier to justify. An investigator might ask questions like:

• What is your policy on disciplining employees for safety violations?
• If the policy says that a second warning will be in writing and a third violation will result in termination, do you have documentation of previous warnings?
• Have you disciplined or terminated employees for safety violations even if they didn’t get injured?

If the company can’t show that it consistently enforces safety rules (regardless of injuries) then firing an employee who got injured can look like unlawful retaliation.

To use the hard hat example again, suppose the supervisor issued a verbal warning on June 14 and documented (for the supervisor’s own records) that she issued a verbal warning. On August 24, the supervisor issued a written warning to the same employee about not wearing a hard hat. Finally, on October 10, the employee got injured while not wearing a hard hat. If the policy says that a third violation results in termination, the employee can be fired, regardless of the injury. If the employee files a retaliation claim, the termination should be more defensible.

Follow the policy

Now, a company policy might not stipulate termination after the third warning. Maybe that’s the fourth step after a verbal warning, written warning, and suspension. Also, safety disciplinary policies sometimes have time limits, like all warnings must occur within a rolling 24-month period, so supervisors aren’t looking back many years for previous warnings.

For potentially life-threatening violations (like working at heights without fall protection) a policy might start with a written warning or suspension, then termination on the second violation. Employers can choose to apply different standards based on the seriousness of the violation. But once established, supervisors must enforce the policy consistently and document all warnings.

Key to remember: It’s not against the law to fire an employee who got injured if employers consistently follow their enforcement policies. However, employers cannot fire an employee “because of” the injury or for reporting an injury.

Employee types

You may have employees who:

• Service and perform maintenance on equipment in your facility (authorized),
• Operate or use machines to which lockout/tagout devices are applied (affected), or
• Work in an area where lockout/tagout is performed (other).

They all need to know how to avoid the dangers involved when hazardous energy sources are not locked out and/or tagged out.

Authorized employees need the most detailed training. Train them to recognize hazardous energy sources, the type and magnitude of the energy available in the workplace, and they must know how to isolate equipment from its energy sources.

Affected employees must be trained to recognize a machine malfunction and know how to report the problem to authorized employees.

Other employees are those whose work activities are in the area where lock/out tag/tagout is being used. Train them on lockout/tagout procedures, and about the prohibition relating to attempts to restart or re-energize machines or equipment which are locked or tagged out.

Know the requirements

OSHA establishes requirements that employers must follow when employees are exposed to hazardous energy while servicing and maintaining equipment and machinery. Some of the most critical requirements from the standard are outlined below:

• Develop, implement, and enforce an energy control program.
• Use lockout devices for equipment that can be locked out. Tagout devices may be used instead of lockout devices only if the tagout program provides employee protection equivalent to that provided through a lockout program.
• Ensure that new or overhauled equipment is capable of being locked out.
• Develop, implement, and enforce an effective tagout program if machines or equipment are not capable of being locked out.
• Develop, document, implement, and enforce energy control procedures.
• Use only lockout/tagout devices authorized for the particular equipment or machinery and ensure that they are durable, standardized, and substantial.
• Ensure that lockout/tagout devices identify the employee who applied the devices.
• Establish a policy that permits only the employee who applied a lockout/tagout device to remove it.
• Inspect energy control procedures at least annually.
• Provide effective training as required for all covered employees.
• Comply with the additional energy control provisions in OSHA standards when machines or equipment must be tested or repositioned, when outside contractors work at the site, in group lockout situations, and during shift or personnel changes.

Key to remember

Implementing proper lockout/tagout procedures and training is necessary to protect your authorized, affected, and other employees from injury and death.