J. J. Keller® Compliance Network

The EPA definition: “RCRA empty” explained

Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), a container that once held hazardous waste is only legally “empty” if it meets particular criteria outlined in 40 CFR 261.7. The first standard that must be satisfied is that all material has been removed from the container using normal means such as pouring, pumping, or aspirating. Secondly, no more than 2.5 centimeters or 1 inch of residue remains on the container's bottom or inner lining. Additionally, if the container holds less than 110 gallons, it is empty if no more than 3 percent of the total weight or volume exists. Of course, sometimes special circumstances require further evaluation. For example, a gas cylinder is not empty until the pressure has reduced to atmospheric levels, and acute hazardous waste containers must be triple rinsed with an appropriate solvent or cleaned by another approved method. If these conditions are not met, the container is still legally considered to contain hazardous waste, even if it feels empty.

The OSHA definition: “Empty” under the Hazard Communication Standard

While EPA focuses on environmental disposal and waste management, OSHA’s concern with empty containers centers on worker safety, particularly the potential for exposure to hazardous residues or vapors. Under OSHA’s Hazard Communication Standard (29 CFR 1910.1200), a container that previously held hazardous chemicals must retain its original hazard label until it is adequately cleaned or until the employer removes the label following proper decontamination procedures. For example, a drum labeled “Flammable” must keep this label even if it appears empty, as residual material or vapors may still pose a significant ignition or fire risk. Removing such labels prematurely could lead to workplace hazards and violations of OSHA regulations.

How to stay compliant

Employers must first clearly determine which rules apply to them: whether the container held hazardous materials governed by EPA regulations, hazardous chemicals subject to OSHA requirements, or both. Emptying procedures should be followed, including properly draining the container, performing triple-rinsing when required, and thoroughly documenting all decontamination activities. Original hazard labels must be maintained on containers until they are thoroughly cleaned or reconditioned, as removing labels prematurely violates OSHA’s Hazard Communication Standard. Additionally, employers should provide employees with training on the proper handling, labeling, and disposal of containers and ensure they fully understand what constitutes an empty container under federal standards. Finally, a detailed record of all rinsing, draining, and cleaning processes should be maintained to demonstrate compliance during EPA or state inspections.

Keys to remember: Employers should educate their teams, enforce proper cleaning procedures, and maintain compliance records to ensure they are staying compliant with “empty” container standards.

Who will be affected?

The stricter PM2.5 rule will impact many industries, particularly those that emit a lot of fine particle pollution. Some of the most affected sectors include:

• Manufacturing & Heavy Industry – Factories making steel, cement, or chemicals may need stronger pollution controls.
• Power Generation – Coal and gas power plants may have tighter limits, requiring better filtration systems.
• Transportation & Logistics – Ports, rail yards, and trucking centers could have new rules reducing diesel pollution.
• Construction & Mining – Dust and particles from digging, moving materials, and using equipment may need stricter control.
• Agriculture – Large farms, especially those handling animals or grain, may need better dust control.
• Oil & Gas – Refineries and drilling sites may face tougher rules on pollution from burning fuel.

These industries may see higher costs, stricter permits, and changes to operations to meet the new standards.

Tougher pollution limits

Businesses in nonattainment areas must follow stricter PM2.5 rules. This may mean updating operations or investing in better pollution control technology. The goal is to reduce fine particle emissions that harm air quality and health.

New permit rules

Businesses expanding or changing operations that increase PM2.5 pollution may need new permits. These permits show compliance with tighter pollution limits.

State rules may change

States with nonattainment areas must update their air quality plans. This could mean new industry rules, such as lowering emissions, increasing monitoring, or changing reporting requirements.

Increased monitoring & reporting

Expect closer tracking of your business’ pollution levels, including real-time monitoring and more frequent reports. Compliance checks may be stricter in nonattainment areas.

Offsetting pollution

If a business increases PM2.5 pollution, it may need to offset that by reducing pollution somewhere else in the same area. This ensures the total pollution level does not rise.

Costs & economic effects

Businesses in nonattainment areas may see higher costs due to stricter rules. Local governments might offer rewards or fines to encourage pollution reductions. Companies may need to find cost-effective ways to lower their PM2.5 levels while staying efficient.

How to prepare

• Review your business’ pollution levels and find ways to lower them.
• Stay updated on new local and federal rules.
• Work with state agencies to understand new compliance expectations.
• Invest in cleaner technology to stay ahead of regulations.

Key to Remember: By having a plan for the possibility of nonattainment now, your business can adjust to the new PM2.5 rules while helping improve air quality and public health.

Who’s impacted?

The Third Rule impacts entities subject to RCRA’s manifest regulations. This article focuses on the manifest correction rules that apply to these waste handlers:

• Small and large quantity generators,
• Transporters, and
• TSDFs.

Note that the final rule amends post-manifest correction regulations for other entities, such as exporters, that are beyond the scope of this article.

What are the Third Rule changes?

EPA’s final rule maintains most of the post-receipt manifest data corrections process.

What’s the same?

Specifically:

• Any waste handler named on the manifest may voluntarily submit data corrections at any time,
• Waste handlers can make an unlimited number of voluntary corrections,
• Corrections may be applied to an individual record or batch of them, and
• Submissions must include a signature compliant with the Cross-Media Electronic Reporting Rule (CROMERR).

What’s different?

Previously, when EPA or a state regulatory agency requested corrections to data on a manifest, waste handlers weren’t required to make them. The Third Rule now mandates that waste handlers:

• Correct errors on the manifest within 30 days of a corrections request from EPA or a state agency, and
• Make data correction submissions electronically for paper or electronic manifest records.

Post-receipt corrections are made via the Hazardous Waste Electronic Manifest System (e-Manifest) on the RCRA Information (RCRAInfo) system.

The Third Rule also clarifies that receiving facilities (TSDFs) can make corrections only after the manifest is completed (i.e., signed and submitted to the e-Manifest system).

What’s the post-receipt manifest correction process?

Waste handlers submitting voluntary or mandatory post-receipt corrections to hazardous waste manifests must follow the process established at 40 CFR 264.71(l).

Follow this general process on the e-Manifest System:

• Certify that the manifest is complete. It must have the status “Signed-Completed."
• Determine how to submit the corrected data to the e-Manifest system. You can enter the data directly into e-Manifest or upload a file with data corrections to the system.
• Include for each correction submission:
  • The Manifest Tracking Number and date received by the facility associated with the data being corrected,
  • The Item Number(s) of the affected data fields on the manifest form (EPA Form 8700-22), and
  • The previously entered and corrected data.
• Save your corrections. The manifest’s status will change to “Under Correction."
• Re-sign the manifest to certify the corrections. The manifest’s status will change to “Corrected."

Manifest correction FAQs

Check out some top questions and answers about post-receipt manifest corrections.

What manifest information can I correct?

The type of waste handler your facility is determines which items on the manifest you can change for voluntary corrections or must change for mandatory corrections. Typically:

• Generators correct data in Items 1–15;
• Transporters correct data in Items 6–7, 14, and 17; and
• TSDFs correct data in Items 14 and 18–20.

What user role do I need on RCRAInfo to submit manifest corrections?

You must be registered in RCRAInfo as a user with the e-Manifest Certifier or Site Manager role for the facility’s site to submit manifest corrections.

What’s the CROMERR certification?

EPA requires manifest correction submitters to use a CROMERR-compliant electronic signature, which requires a higher level of identity proofing than the Quick Sign signature.

Can I revert to a previous manifest version?

Once the corrected manifest has been signed, you can’t revert it to a previous version. The e-Manifest system does, however, let you view all versions of the manifest.

Can brokers sign corrected manifests?

Although brokers can initiate a manifest correction for generators, they may not sign a corrected manifest unless they (a) operate at the generator’s facility and (b) can sign the manifest as an offeror of the waste shipment.

Key to remember: EPA’s Third Rule updates the process for making data corrections to RCRA hazardous waste manifests.

Pesticide registration tracking app

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

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

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

Policy changes impacting two forms

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Efficiencies and transparencies gained

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

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

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

Key to remember

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

Proposed legislation

Bipartisan legislation has recently been introduced in the House that would require businesses to provide restroom access to truckers who are loading or delivering cargo at their warehouses, manufacturers, distribution centers, retailers, and ports.

Supported by leading organizations in the trucking industry, the Trucker Bathroom Access Act (H.R. 9592) was introduced on Dec. 15, 2022. The bill requires retailers, warehouses, and other establishments with existing restrooms to provide access to drivers who are loading or delivering cargo. Additionally, operators of ports and marine terminals must provide access for drayage and parking while accessing such restrooms.

This amendment to Title 49 would exempt some employers from the bill including filling and service stations, and restaurants 800-square feet or smaller with restrooms intended for employee use only. The bill doesn’t require employers to construct new restrooms but to give truck drivers the same access as employees or customers.

Your restroom availability affects their health

Commercial truckers and delivery drivers are the lifeline of our supply chain of supplies, products, and consumables. Working tirelessly all hours, during holidays and weekends, and throughout the pandemic, they continue to deliver critical food and emergency supplies to companies everywhere. Employers have the privilege of demonstrating gratitude to truckers and delivery drivers with a positive work environment.

The benefits of allowing truckers and delivery drivers the convenience and safety of readily available, sanitary restroom facilities are plenty. They’re able to rest and reset when necessary, which keeps them and others safer on the roads. Equally important, restroom availability prevents drivers from having to search for available facilities elsewhere, allowing them to keep a timely delivery schedule, limit supply chain delays, and ultimately lower costs for employers and customers.

Keys to remember

The proposed Trucker Bathroom Access Act will require retailers, warehouses, and other establishments with existing restrooms to provide access to truckers and delivery drivers who are loading or delivering cargo. Access to restrooms keeps them refreshed and ready to deliver essential supplies to companies across the country.

Identifying who is subject to Part 382

Knowing who is subject to DOT drug and alcohol testing is critical to running a compliant program. If there is any misunderstanding of which drivers are subject to Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) testing (49 CFR Part 382), it will have a trickle-down effect and create a series of violations.

A driver in a safety-sensitive position is anyone operating or called upon to operate a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) requiring a commercial driver’s license (CDL).

Some carriers fail to include all covered drivers. This often occurs when drivers:

• Have other job titles (mechanic, dispatcher, supervisor);
• Are backup, seasonal, or intermittent drivers;
• Are provided by a staffing service; and/or
• Are leased owner-operators.

Then there are administrative mistakes, including instances when:

• New hires are forgotten from the list,
• Those holding commercial learners permits (CLPs) are not considered full drivers, or
• Current drivers are mistakenly removed from the list when on a leave of absence.

Individuals who don’t qualify for testing

On the flip side, it’s just as much a violation to include those who don’t qualify as it is to forget to add drivers who do.

Common errors include:

• Tagging everyone with a CDL as subject to Part 382, regardless of what vehicle they might operate;
• Placing those operating non-CDL CMVs in the DOT testing program; and
• Failing to remove drivers who have left the company or switched to a non-regulated role at the carrier.

How an inaccurate roster can domino into noncompliance

When drivers who are subject to DOT FMCSA testing are inadvertently omitted from the driver list, it can result in:

• Missed new-hire tasks, such as:
  • A pre-employment drug test;
  • Requests of DOT testing history, including a pre-employment Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse query; and
  • Issuance of the company drug and alcohol policy; and/or
• Failing to run annual Clearinghouse queries.

And the most serious issue of all might be using a driver who is under the influence of drugs or alcohol, and DOT testing was not used to help detect the safety concern.

If a driver is included in the DOT testing program when they should not be, there are several violations that can happen. A top one is representing a test as being required under DOT when it is not.

Several administrative issues can arise from this misidentification. For instance, if a carrier requests a Clearinghouse query on a driver who doesn’t hold at least a CLP, they will likely receive a message that the driver does not exist in the database. The driver will also have difficulty trying to register with the Clearinghouse when asked to do so by the employer since they are not in the CDL database.

In both examples, if drivers are left out or added in error, the random selection will be skewed. The average number of driving positions will not be correct, and any tests completed on non-safety-sensitive positions can’t be counted toward your annual testing rate in the event of an audit. Everything must be recalculated in both scenarios.

Data in the Clearinghouse

When a driver in a non-safety-sensitive position fails a DOT drug or alcohol test and the incident is reported to the Clearinghouse, this creates a record for the driver.

For the non-CDL holder, it has a lesser consequence because the system is unable to tie it to a CDL. The test will be downgraded by the FMCSA if the driver or employer uses DataQs to remove it.

It gets tricky when the individual holds a CDL and wants the violation stricken from the record. The employer and driver can try to get it removed using DataQs, since an MRO will not downgrade the test.

However, even if the carrier admits the error through DataQs, FMCSA will more than likely not accept the excuse that the driver should never have been tested. The agency typically doesn’t downgrade a failed DOT test if the driver holds a CDL or CLP. This reported violation will result in a prohibited status in the Clearinghouse and a downgraded CDL or CLP.

Key to remember: When assembling a driver roster for DOT testing, always look at who is operating a CDL CMV for you — even occasionally. Don’t include drivers based on licensing alone or the operation of non-CDL regulated vehicles. Both omission of an eligible driver or inclusion of an employee who does not qualify will result in violations.

The basics of logging exemptions

To be able to use this logging exemption in 395.1(e)(1), the driver must:

• Stay within 150 air-miles of the work reporting location for the day (draw a 150 air-mile radius circle around the work reporting location for the day — the driver must stay within this circle),
• Be back to — and released from — the work reporting location for his/her 8- or 10-hour break within 14 hours, and
• Include the starting and ending times for the day and the total hours on duty on the time record for the day.

The company must retain the time record and have it available for inspection for six months.

What if the driver goes too far or works too many hours?

If the driver cannot meet the terms of the exemption (he or she goes too far or works too many hours), the driver must complete a regular driver’s log for the day as soon as the exemption no longer applies.

If the driver has had to complete a log 8 or fewer days out of the last 30 days, the driver can use a paper log for the day. If the driver had to complete a log more than 8 days out of the last 30 days, the driver needs to use an electronic log for the day (unless one of the ELD exemptions applies, such as operating a vehicle older than model year 2000).

30-minute break exemption

When a property-carrying driver is operating under the 150 air-mile exemption, the driver is also exempt from having to take the required 30-minute break (see 395.3(a)(3)(ii)).

If the driver began the day as a 150 air-mile driver and has driven more than 8 consecutive hours without a break, and something unexpected happens and the driver can no longer use the 150 air-mile exemption, the driver must stop and immediately take the 30-minute break as well as start logging. If the driver went outside of the 150 air-mile area before the driver had 8 hours of driving without a break from driving, the driver would be expected to take the break at the appropriate time.

Common myths

Here are some of the common myths and misunderstandings about the 150 air-mile exemption:

• The driver must have the time records in the vehicle. Myth. The driver simply needs to explain to an officer during a roadside inspection that he/she does not have logs due to operating under the 150 air-mile exemption and that the required time records are back at the carrier’s office (just telling the officer, “I don’t have any logs” will lead to a violation, so the driver needs to know to provide the full explanation).
• The driver must log the previous seven days if he/she had been using this exemption and suddenly can’t. Myth. If the driver cannot use the exemption on one particular day, that is the only day the driver must use a regular log (either paper or electronic).
• Passenger-carrying drivers and drivers hauling hazardous materials cannot use this exemption. Myth. There are no restrictions on the use of this exemption, so any commercial driver can use it.
• A driver that crosses state lines cannot use this exemption. Myth. As this exemption appears in the Federal Motor Carrier Administration (FMCSA) regulations, it can be used by interstate drivers.
• Only drivers that operate out of a “company terminal” can use the 150 air-mile exemption. Myth. As long as the driver makes it back to the work reporting location for the day within the appropriate number of hours, the driver can use the exemption.
• Drivers that move from one jobsite to another every few weeks cannot use this exemption. Myth. If a driver that normally uses this exemption switches work reporting locations, the day the driver switches work reporting locations is the only day the driver cannot use the exemption.
• Drivers covered by this exemption are also exempt from the driver qualification (licensing and medical cards), driving, and vehicle inspection requirements. Myth. The only rules the driver is exempt from are the logging requirement in 395.8 and the 30-minute break requirement in 395.3.
• The driver cannot drive more than 150 miles for the day. Myth. The driver can drive as many miles as he/she wants to or needs to, as long as the driver stays within the 150 air-mile radius circle and gets back to the work reporting location within the appropriate number of hours.
• If a 150 air-mile driver gets into a vehicle with an ELD, the driver must use it. Myth. The carrier can have the driver log in and have the driver entered into the system as an “exempt driver,” or the carrier can request that the driver not log into the device and then attach a comment to the unassigned driving time generated by the driver’s movements. The comment would need to explain that the driver using the vehicle was a 150 air-mile driver who submitted a time record. It is up to the carrier to decide which option to use. If stopped for a roadside inspection, the driver will need to be able to explain to the inspector that he/she is an exempt driver using the 150 air-mile exemption, so using the electronic log is not required.

What’s different with the ‘150 air-mile non-CDL property-carrying drivers’

The 150 air-mile exemption at 395.1(e)(2) only applies to drivers that: Operate property-carrying vehicles that do not require a CDL to operate, and Stay within the 150 air-miles of their work reporting location.

If the driver stays within the 150 air-mile radius of the work reporting location, and returns to the work reporting location within 14 hours on 5 of the last 7 days, and 16 hours on 2 of the last seven days, the driver is allowed to use a time record in place of a log.

If the driver does not meet the terms of the exception, the driver will need to complete a log for the day. If the driver had to log more than 8 days out of the last 30 days, the driver will need to use an electronic log for the day. All of the other issues discussed above would apply to these drivers as well.

Managing the use

If you have drivers that use these exemptions, you will need to check time records to make sure they are complying with the appropriate time limits. You will also need to check movement records to verify that the drivers using these exemptions are staying within the mandated area (within 150 air-miles of the work reporting location for the day).

If a driver is over the hours limit, or has gone too far, you need to verify that the submitted a log for the day, either paper or electronic, depending on how many days the driver had to log out of the previous 30 days.

Verifying compliance is important

During an audit, if it is discovered that your drivers are using these exemptions incorrectly, you will be cited for not having drivers’ logs when required. Each day this occurred will be another violation, so the fine could be rather large if you are not managing the use of these exemptions!

How it works today

If a driver or motor carrier files an RDR, it gets forwarded to the agency that generated the record, such as the State Patrol in the case of a crash or roadside inspection. The agency then reviews the RDR, does an investigation, and makes a decision to either change the data or reject the request.

If the RDR is rejected, the requester can submit an appeal, but the state agency may require new information before reviewing the matter or may let the same people who rejected the initial RDR also review the appeal, creating a conflict of interest.

Once the appeal is decided, the state agency and FMCSA consider the case closed.

Proposed changes

The FMCSA says it wants to “improve the impartiality, timeliness, transparency, and fundamental fairness of the RDR process.” Though in 2023 it had proposed injecting itself into the appeals process, the agency now wants the states to handle it. Among other changes being proposed:

• Good-faith reviews: States must conduct a good-faith review of RDRs that are submitted within three years from the date of an inspection or five years from the date of a crash, and must have established points of contact for RDRs.
• State plans: States must submit a “DataQs Implementation Plan” detailing how they will process RDRs and how they will address any existing or future backlog of RDRs. The plan would have to be made public and be reviewed and updated annually.
• Appeals: Requesters will be allowed two appeals. When a state receives an initial RDR, a first-level appeal (known as a “reconsideration review”), or a request for a “final review,” the state will be expected to open the request within seven days of submission and then respond within 21 days, or 30 days for a final review. If the state requests more information, the requester will be given 14 days to provide it, and the clock will stop while the requester gathers additional information. Requesters are expected to have a valid reason for any appeal.
• Rejections: When a state closes an RDR or appeal without correcting any data, the issuing officer/inspector cannot be the sole decisionmaker and the state must explain the facts and analysis supporting the decision.
• Expertise: Appeals must go before a person or panel with “appropriate subject matter expertise” and cannot be reviewed or decided by the issuing officer/inspector nor their direct supervisor. A “final review” must be done by someone outside the chain of command for the issuing officer/inspector, and a panel may be used to provide recommendations to that person.

The state’s decision would be considered final by the FMCSA after the state’s final review is complete.

States that fail to live up to their DataQs obligations would be at risk of losing highway funds.

Five questions

The FMCSA is asking for input on five key questions related to their proposal:

1. What are the potential benefits and challenges of the proposed changes?
2. What challenges will states face in adhering to the timelines for each stage of the RDR process? How should delays be handled?
3. How should states be held accountable for compliance?
4. If a requester doesn’t respond with additional or proper information when requested, how should the RDR be handled?
5. To what extent should FMCSA define the criteria for a “valid reason” for an appeal?

Comments may be submitted online until September 2, 2025, at www.regulations.gov under docket number FMCSA-2023-0190.

Key to remember: The FMCSA is proposing improvements to the DataQs system, and now’s your chance to weigh in.

1. HM-268F – Keep using safe packaging, even after the permit expires

Under current regulations, if a company uses packaging authorized under a special permit (SP) and that permit expires or isn’t renewed, the packaging is technically unauthorized, even if it’s still perfectly safe and compliant with the original terms. PHMSA’s proposed rule would change that by allowing continued use of such packaging for the remainder of its usable life, if it still meets the conditions of the original SP. This means that if a manufacturer goes out of business or chooses not to renew a permit, the packaging already in circulation can still be used.

2. HM-268G – Easier renewals for special permits and approvals

Right now, companies must apply to renew a special permit or approval at least 60 days before it expires. That made sense back when everything was done by mail, but in today’s digital world, it’s an outdated requirement. PHMSA is proposing to modernize this process by allowing companies to apply for renewals at any time before the expiration date. This change reflects how electronic systems work today and gives businesses more flexibility to manage their compliance timelines.

3. HM-268L – Unloading drums and IBCs without removing them from vehicles

For years, companies have relied on special permits to unload certain hazardous liquids from drums and intermediate bulk containers (IBCs) without removing them from the vehicle. PHMSA now wants to make this practice a permanent part of the HMR. The proposed rule would adopt the provisions of two long-standing special permits, SP 11646 and SP 12412, into the regulations. It would allow unloading of specific Class 3, 6.1, 8, and 9 liquids directly from drums and IBCs while they remain on the vehicle, provided strict safety conditions are met.

4. HM-268M & HM-268N – Refrigerating machines with flammable gases

As part of the transition to more environmentally friendly refrigerants, many modern refrigerators and air conditioners now use low-global-warming gases that are also flammable. PHMSA is proposing two updates to accommodate this shift. The first, HM-268M, would allow small appliances like household refrigerators and window-mounted air conditioners to be shipped by land with up to 20 kilograms of flammable gas, without needing a special permit. The second, HM-268N, extends similar flexibility to large refrigerating machines, allowing up to 5,000 pounds of low-flammability gas under specific safety and labeling conditions.

5. HM-268O – Longer requalification periods for gas cylinders

Gas cylinders used for transporting flammable and non-flammable gases typically need to be requalified every five years. But thanks to advances in ultrasonic examination (UE) technology, PHMSA is proposing to extend that interval to ten years for certain cylinders. The rule would adopt special permit 14175, which allows for a 10-year requalification period using UE for DOT 3A and 3AA cylinders. This method is not only more accurate but also less invasive, as it doesn’t require draining the cylinder or removing valves.

Key to remember: This set of proposals focused on incorporating long-standing special permits into the HMR. Stay tuned for Part 3 of PHMSA’s rulemaking roundup.

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 is that little orange book for?

Many shippers and transporters of hazardous materials are familiar with the small orange Emergency Response Guidebook (ERG). Most associate the ERG with compliance with the Hazardous Materials Regulations (49 CFR), using it to provide emergency response information for a hazardous materials shipment. This may be surprising, but that is not why the ERG was created.

Original use for the ERG

The Emergency Response Guidebook was originally developed by the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT), Transport Canada, and the Secretariat of Transport and Communications of Mexico for use by police, firefighters, and other emergency personnel who are the first to arrive at the scene of a transportation incident involving hazardous materials/dangerous goods. The ERG helps first responders quickly identify the hazard(s) of the materials and protect themselves and the general public during the initial response phase of an incident.

The “initial response phase” is that period following the first responders’ arrival at the scene of an incident, during which the presence and/or identification of hazardous materials is confirmed, protective actions and area securement are initiated, and assistance of qualified personnel is requested.

The DOT prints and distributes copies of the ERG to emergency responders throughout the United States. The goal is to have an ERG available to every emergency responder in the United States. Responders are familiar with the ERG because the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations require that they be trained on the use of the ERG.

Another use for the ERG

To increase the likelihood that emergency response information will be available to first responders at the scene of a hazardous materials incident, the Hazardous Materials Regulations require that emergency response information accompany most shipments of hazardous materials. Emergency response information is not required for hazardous materials that do not require shipping papers or are classified as an Limited Quantity.

The emergency response information can be provided in a variety of ways:

• It can be entered on the hazmat shipping papers; or
• It can be provided in another document, other than the shipping paper, that includes the basic description (and technical name if appropriate) of the hazardous material. A Safety Data Sheet is an example of this type of document; or
• It can be provided in a separate document, other than the shipping paper, that cross-references the description of the hazardous material on the shipping paper with the emergency response information contained in the document. The ERG is an example of this type of document.

Carriers that transport hazardous materials must maintain the emergency response information the same as they do shipping papers. The emergency response information must be readily available to, and recognizable by, authorities in the event of an incident or inspection.

Although not the original intended use for the ERG, keeping an ERG with the hazmat shipping papers is an easy way to comply with the emergency response information requirements in the Hazardous Materials Regulations. Many carriers play it safe and carry an ERG in their vehicles to cover any hazmat load/situation that they may encounter.

Key to remember

The ERG was originally created to help first responders protect themselves and the public during a hazardous materials incident. The ERG can also be used to provide emergency response information that is required for most hazardous materials shipments.

The intent of the standard

OSHA’s powered industrial truck (PIT) standard (29 CFR 1910.178) is intended to ensure the safe use of fork trucks, tractors, platform lift trucks, motorized hand trucks, and other specialized industrial trucks powered by electric motors or internal combustion engines. The standard outlines requirements for operational permits and certification.

And, though not specified in the standard itself, PIT operators must be at least 18 years old per federal child labor regulations.

License and certification Q&A

The OSHA PIT standard clearly defines requirements for training and certification. However, some licensing and certification information isn’t as clear. Here are some clarifications:

Q: Who can train, evaluate, and certify PIT operators?

A: OSHA requires in 1910.178(l)(2)(iii) that, “All operator training and evaluation shall be conducted by persons who have the knowledge, training, and experience to train powered industrial truck operators and evaluate their competence.” The OSHA standard doesn’t further define this requirement or set any specific or additional certifications.

Q: Does OSHA require PIT operators to have a valid driver's license?

A: Federal OSHA has no requirement that a forklift operator has a valid motor vehicle driver's license. Some states are more stringent, so check your local and state requirements to confirm.

Q: Does OSHA have regulations that impact an employee’s ability to operate PITs if they’ve received a DUI or suspended license?

A: Because OSHA doesn't require a valid motor vehicle driver's license, the status of that license doesn’t impact PIT operator permitting. Individual states or the employer may have policies that dictate otherwise.

Q: Are PIT drivers required to have their license on them when they are working?

A: Federal OSHA doesn’t require PIT operators to have a license or permit. However, some states such as Michigan do require this. Typically, in states that require a permit or license, the license must be “readily available.” Companies have the option to require the permit or license be carried with the operator.

Q: Are operators required to be trained on each manufacture of PIT model?

A: A June 15, 1999, OSHA letter of interpretation (LOI) clarifies that operators are to be trained and evaluated in the safe operation for the type of truck they’ll be assigned. Operators wouldn’t need additional training for same truck types but would need additional training when truck- or workplace-related training topics are different.

Q: Do PIT operators need to be recertified if they move from one state to another with the same company?

A: In an LOI dated October 1, 1999, OSHA states, "As long as the employer has a reasonable basis to believe that the third-party trainer is qualified and has a program that meets the requirements of the standard, it can rely on that trainer to conduct the training and evaluation of employees and can certify that these employees have been trained. However, the employer may need to provide additional training on site-specific or truck-specific matters." This shouldn’t require retraining for the same type of forklift as already certified; however, workplace conditions or other factors of the new work location may require training for forklift operation in the other state(s).

Operator Impairments

In addition to being properly trained and evaluated, OSHA expects employers to ensure physical capabilities. OSHA references the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standard B56.1-1969. Section 6 clarifies that, “Operators of powered industrial trucks shall be physically qualified. An examination should be made on an annual basis and include such things as field of vision, hearing, depth perception, and reaction timing."

Employers should consider OSHA PIT regulations and the General Duty Clause, ANSI standards, and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements when evaluating physical qualifications. In short, if a worker demonstrates the visual, auditory, and mental ability to safely operate PITs, he or she is permitted to operate them.

Keys to Remember

OSHA requires employers ensure the safe use of forklifts and other powered industrial vehicles. Employers must ensure operators have the knowledge, skills, and physical ability to safely operate PITs.

Service dog request

Alisha worked for a school district. Her military service left her with some disabilities, for which she had a service dog. On August 30, 2022, Alisha asked her employer to allow her service dog, Inde, to accompany her to work.

After meeting on September 16, the employer asked Alisha for additional information to determine what specific job functions were impacted by her disabilities and whether there were alternative accommodations. Alisha provided a letter signed by her Veterans Affairs (VA) treating provider, who confirmed that Inde was key to Alisha’s mental and physical health recovery.

The employer, however, said the letter wasn’t sufficient because the provider wasn’t a board-certified medical doctor. Alisha thus provided a letter from her treating psychiatrist, which again confirmed that Alisha needed Inde at work.

On November 11, the employer asked Alisha to undergo an independent medical exam, and she did. After that, the employer still balked, arguing whether a service dog was the only accommodation. Alisha then provided three letters, including correspondence from two other physicians, confirming limitations, and urging that the employer approve the request.

On January 6, a frustrated Alisha filed a claim that the employer failed to accommodate her disability.

Four days later, on January 10, Alisha underwent a VA-led examination that assessed her physical disabilities. Two doctors separately confirmed that Alisha needed Inde in all settings, including the workplace.

The employer said that the documents didn’t provide any information regarding potential alternative accommodations.

On February 1, Alisha filed a lawsuit against her employer. On February 17, the employer granted her accommodation request, but it was too late.

Delay was a failure to accommodate

The court agreed with Alisha that the employer’s six-month delay in granting her accommodation constituted a failure to accommodate her disability. It indicated that employer ADA obligations, including the interactive process, are triggered when an employee asks for an accommodation.

Employers that drag their feet could force employees to work under suboptimal conditions to endure an endless interactive process. They could simply document an employee’s failures and use the employee’s difficulties as an excuse to terminate them.

Don’t drag out the interactive process

Disability laws and applicable case laws don’t require employers to move with maximum speed to complete this process and preempt any possible concerns. But employers that delay in providing reasonable accommodation may show a lack of good faith in the interactive process.

The employer’s insistence that Alisha repeatedly give it information that confirmed her disabilities and need for accommodation could be seen as unreasonable.

Strife v. Aldine Independent School District, Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 24-20269, May 16, 2025.

Key to remember: While employers don’t have to go through the ADA’s interactive process at light speed, if they drag their feet, they can risk a violation and court case.

#1 Start here

First, OSHA requires that all operators must be trained prior to being allowed to operate forklifts. And the same thing goes for pallet trucks, order pickers, and stand-up units…. Any powered type of material handling equipment requires training.

But what does training entail? Well, the OSHA regulations are very specific. All operators must receive a combination of training. Training must consist of formal training, which is a lecture, discussion, interactive computer learning, video tape, written material, and so on.

They must also receive practical training, which means demonstrations performed by the trainer and practical exercises performed by the trainee.

And the third component is that operators must receive a performance evaluation. So, they must operate the equipment and be observed and evaluated before being considered trained per the OSHA standard.

Usually, you’ll introduce the concepts during the classroom portion of training, the more informational aspects, such as the OSHA requirements. Then you’ll use the practical part of training to familiarize trainees with controls, talk about load handling, and so on. With the practical part, it’s usually best to ramp up the training, meaning start with simple skills and then build on those.

#2 Train on these topics

Aside from requirements for how to do the training, OSHA gives us a detailed list of topics to cover during the training.

The main categories are truck-related and workplace-related topics. And remember that OSHA does require you to include information on OSHA’s forklift standard as part of the training program. This requirement can be easy to overlook, but a good way to approach it is in the classroom portion of the program.

Keep in mind that if a topic doesn’t apply to your trucks or workplace, you don’t have to train on it. For example, if you don’t have any ramps or hazardous (classified) locations in your facility, your forklift operators don’t need training on these topics.

Truck-related topics include the following:

• Operation instruction, warnings
• Differences between forklift and automobile
• Controls, instrumentation
• Engine, motor operation
• Steering
• Visibility, restrictions
• Fork, attachment operation
• Capacity
• Stability
• Inspection, maintenance
• Refueling, recharging
• Operating limitations
• Operator’s manual instructions, precautions

Workplace-related topics are examples like these:

• Surfaces
• Load composition
• Load handling
• Pedestrians
• Narrow, restricted areas
• Hazardous (classified) locations
• Ramps
• Poor ventilation
• Other hazards

#3 Determine success

The trainees must successfully complete the formal and practical instruction, but how you determine success is up to you. For the classroom portion, you could give a written or oral test or otherwise evaluate the trainees’ knowledge. For the practical training, the trainee must be able to safely perform all the operations used on the job.

#4 End here

An evaluation of the operator’s performance in the workplace must be conducted at the time of initial training. And an evaluation is required to determine the effectiveness of any refresher training.

Also, you must conduct an evaluation at least every three years. This means that at least once every three years every operator must be observed while they operate in the workplace under actual workplace conditions. During the evaluation, the operator must also be able to answer pertinent questions to demonstrate they have the knowledge to operate the forklift safely.

A key point to note here, this evaluation must be more than just a written or verbal test. The employer must observe the operator in action performing all typical tasks related to running the forklift. And, going back to where we started, the evaluation must be conducted by someone who has the knowledge, training, and experience to evaluate the truck operator’s competence.

Document the evaluation — this means placing a record in your training file that includes the name of the operator, the date of the training, the date of the evaluation, and the identity of the person(s) performing the training or evaluation.

Action item

This may be a good time for you to review your options for training forklift operators to ensure they’re meeting these guidelines. And, it’s always a great idea to have all your training procedures in written format for consistency.

Key to remember

Training forklift operators is an OSHA requirement. Follow this step-by-step guide and you can do it in-house.

Laws rarely change

Most bills introduced in Congress never become laws. On the other hand, Congress almost never successfully repeals a law (like the Affordable Care Act). The battle over how to implement and enforce federal laws often takes place at the agency and regulatory level.

Effectively, regulations are interpretations describing how the agency will enforce federal statutes, but those regulations carry the force of law. When a regulation gets repealed or revised, a business might have a lower standard to meet, but it still has obligations. As noted, the repeal usually ends up restoring an older regulation, perhaps one that was last in effect ten years ago or more, and employers probably don’t remember exactly what those provisions required.

The point is that a repeal is still a change to a regulation. Employers will need to identify their revised obligations and implement plans for complying with the changed requirements.

What are the issues?

• Weather conditions.
• Load capacity.

What did Jack do right?

• Checked the load chart to confirm rated load capacity.
• Told Philip that the lift would be unsafe and refused to do it.

What did Philip do wrong?

• Didn’t understand the importance of the load chart, even though he’s the foreman for the job.
• Failed to select the proper crane to perform the lift.
• Tried to pressure Jack into making the lift.

What do you think should happen next?

• If the lift is to be made, they need to get a crane that can handle it safely.
• Philip should receive training on overhead crane handling requirements and crane load charts.
• Jack should be commended for not making the lift.

Key to remember

Per OSHA, crane operators have the authority to stop operation whenever there is a safety concern. At 29 CFR 1926.1418 it states, “… the operator must have the authority to stop and refuse to handle loads until a qualified person has determined that safety has been assured.”