
Welcome to J. J. Keller COMPLIANCE NETWORK
Make regulatory compliance easier than ever at your company with expert guidance and resources custom-tailored to your exact needs.
Welcome to J. J. Keller COMPLIANCE NETWORK
Make regulatory compliance easier than ever at your company with expert guidance and resources custom-tailored to your exact needs.
Workplace safety (OSHA).
Transportation (DOT).
Environment (EPA).
Human resources (DOL).
Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news. Let’s take a look at what’s happened over the last month!
Two never-before-mentioned rulemakings reached the Office of Management and Budget for review on June 18. The two actions (one on respiratory protection and the other on the General Duty Clause) are only at the proposed rule stage, so stakeholders will have a chance to comment. At this time, it’s unclear whether the proposals are regulatory or de-regulatory. We’ll provide an update in a future monthly roundup as more information becomes available.
OSHA updated its Site-Specific Targeting program to reflect the use of Form 300A data for calendar years 2021 through 2023. This is OSHA’s primary planned inspection program for general industry establishments with 20 or more employees with the highest injury and illness rates. OSHA uses the data to target establishments for inspection.
Each year, backover incidents lead to serious injuries and fatalities in construction zones and workplaces. These incidents happen when drivers lose sight of people, objects, or vehicles behind them. To help prevent these incidents, OSHA launched #MirrorCheck, an initiative to raise awareness of safe work practices that can prevent backovers.
Effective June 27, Kentucky’s occupational safety and health standards are limited to those enforced by federal OSHA. The state will no longer adopt, promulgate, or enforce rules that are more stringent than federal OSHA. Kentucky operates an OSHA-approved State Plan covering most private sector workers and all state and local government workers.
As part of its Heat Illness Prevention campaign, OSHA has added two new resources for employers. One is a customizable guide for creating a toolbox talk on handling heat emergencies. The other explains the risks of heat illness for young workers.
And finally, turning to environmental news, EPA has again delayed the deadline for submitting data on 16 chemical substances required by the Toxic Substances Control Act Health and Safety Data Reporting rule. Manufacturers now have until May 22, 2026, to report on all of the covered chemical substances.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) updated air quality rules for fine particle pollution (PM2.5), reducing the annual standard from 12.0 to 9.0 micrograms per cubic meter. The rule change was announced on February 7, 2024 and was published as a final rule in the Federal Register on March 6, 2024. The change was based on research linking PM2.5 to health problems like heart disease and early death.
Within one year of the final rule (February 7, 2025), governors from each state were required to submit area designation recommendations (attainment, nonattainment, or unclassifiable) to EPA. By February of 2026 (at the latest) EPA is expected to issue final area designations based on State recommendations, air quality data, and other factors.
There is a caveat that on March 12, 2025, EPA announced that the agency will reconsider the rule that tightened the standard from 12.0 to 9.0 micrograms per cubic meter by reviewing implementation concerns and getting stakeholder feedback, but as of this writing, the tighter standard is still in place.
If your business is in one of the areas that will be newly listed as nonattainment for PM2.5, you will face new rules designed to improve air quality. Understanding these changes will help you stay compliant and keep operations running smoothly.
Check out this explanation of nonattainment on Compliance Network's Environmental Institute.
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:
These industries may see higher costs, stricter permits, and changes to operations to meet the new standards.
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.
Businesses expanding or changing operations that increase PM2.5 pollution may need new permits. These permits show compliance with tighter pollution limits.
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.
Expect closer tracking of your business’ pollution levels, including real-time monitoring and more frequent reports. Compliance checks may be stricter in nonattainment areas.
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.
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.
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.
At first glance, an empty container seems like a non-issue — no product, no problem. But in the eyes of regulators, “empty” is a carefully defined status that can determine whether a container is harmless or still subject to hazardous waste rules, labeling, and fire or environmental risk controls. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and OSHA have detailed definitions of what “empty” truly means. Misunderstanding these rules can lead to serious incidents, hefty fines, and unintentional noncompliance.
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.
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.
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.
When it comes to oil spill prevention, it’s a good thing to be in “tiers.” Why? It’s because Tier I or Tier II qualified facilities have simplified requirements for the Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires facilities subject to the SPCC rule (40 CFR Part 112) to develop and implement a plan that describes how they will use operating procedures, control measures, and countermeasures to prevent oil spills from reaching navigable waters or adjoining shorelines. Typically, SPCC Plans must be certified by a professional engineer (PE), but qualified facilities can self-certify the plans.
Let’s compare Tier I and Tier II qualified facilities.
A qualified facility:
The SPCC rule identifies two types of qualified facilities:
SPCC Tier Tip: EPA provides a fact sheet (Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan Qualified Facilities Applicability) to help facilities determine eligibility as a qualified facility and (if applicable) which tier applies.
Tier I and Tier II qualified facilities are subject to many of the same requirements for SPCC Plans, including basic requirements, certification, and updates to qualification changes.
All qualified facilities have to develop and implement a written SPCC Plan. Each plan is unique to the facility, but all plans must include:
The primary similarity is that Tier I and Tier II qualified facilities may self-certify their SPCC Plans and amendments to the plan.
SPCC Tier Tip: Some states may not allow self-certification. EPA recommends checking with the state engineer licensing board to determine whether SPCC Plans can be self-certified.
When the status of a facility changes, the owner or operator must prepare and implement an SPCC Plan according to the requirements that apply to its new designation within six months.
Tier I facilities may still be able to self-certify if they meet the Tier II criteria; if so, these facilities can comply with the Tier II rules. However, facilities that are no longer eligible as qualified facilities have to comply with the full SPCC Plan requirements, including obtaining PE certification of the plan.
The primary difference between Tier I and Tier II facilities is the extent of the SPCC Plan. Additionally, Tier II facilities may employ certain alternative spill control methods.
Tier I qualified facilities may use the template in Appendix G of Part 112 as their SPCC Plan. It’s a simplified plan that only contains the requirements applicable to Tier I facilities.
These facilities must also:
Tier II qualified facilities have to develop a full SPCC Plan that complies with 112.7 and the applicable requirements of Subparts B and C of Part 112. This includes developing facility diagrams.
Tier II qualified facilities (with certification) may implement certain alternative measures and methods that Tier I facilities can’t. Tier II facilities must obtain written certification from a PE to include:
Qualified facilities, whether Tier I or Tier II, benefit from the ability to self-certify their SPCC Plans. That’s something that can make owners and operators “tier” up with happiness.
Key to remember: Tier I and Tier II qualified facilities share many similarities under the SPCC rule, but knowing where the requirements differ is vital to maintaining compliance.
Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news. Let's take a look at what happened over the last month!
OSHA will host an informal public hearing on its proposed Heat Injury and Illness Prevention rule on June 16. Information about the proposed rule and instructions on how to watch the hearing can be found on OSHA’s website.
OSHA’s National Safety Stand-Down to Prevent Falls in Construction event, held the week of May 5, raised awareness of fall hazards in an effort to help prevent injuries and fatalities. Slips, trips, and falls were the leading cause of death in the construction industry in 2023, accounting for 421 fatalities.
After concluding its investigation of a California chemical facility fire, the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board is calling for improved heater safeguards to prevent similar incidents. The fire was caused by an overheated refinery furnace. The Board also made several safety recommendations for chemical facilities.
Following a number of recent fall incidents, the Mine Safety and Health Administration issued a safety alert advising miners to use fall protection. The most recent incident occurred when a miner fell from the deck of a bulldozer.
Turning to environmental news, EPA further delayed the PFAS manufacturing report submission period. The date was moved from July 11, 2025, to April 13, 2026. This is a one-time reporting requirement for manufacturers of per- and polyfluoroalkyl, or PFAS, substances.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has again delayed the deadline for submitting data on 16 chemical substances required by the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Health and Safety Data Reporting rule. Manufacturers (including importers) now have until May 22, 2026, to report on all of the covered chemical substances.
What’s required?
The TSCA Section 8(d) Health and Safety Data Reporting rule (40 CFR Part 716) requires manufacturers (including importers) of 16 chemical substances to report data from:
The covered chemical substances include:
|
|
Note that EPA’s first extension in March 2025 moved the submission deadline for vinyl chloride to June 11, 2025, and for the remaining 15 chemical substances to September 9, 2025. This rule pushes the submission deadline for all chemical substances (including vinyl chloride) to May 22, 2026.
Who’s covered?
The rule applies to manufacturers in the North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes for chemical manufacturing (NAICS code 325) and petroleum refineries (NAICS code 324110) that:
The reporting requirement also applies to manufacturers of substances for commercial purposes that coincidentally produced a covered chemical substance during the manufacture, processing, use, or disposal of another substance or mixture (including byproducts and impurities).
How do you report?
Reporters submit the TSCA Section 8(d) data via the Chemical Information Submission System (or CISS) tool on the Chemical Safety and Pesticide Program (CSPP) system. The CSPP is accessed through EPA’s Central Data Exchange.
Key to remember: Manufacturers now have even more time to submit TSCA Section 8(d) health and safety data reports for 16 chemical substances.
There’s one question that all potential purchasers should ask before buying an industrial or commercial property: Could the business be held liable for hazardous substance contamination? The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), also called “Superfund,” allows the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to make both current and past facility owners and operators responsible for cleaning up sites contaminated by hazardous substances.
However, CERCLA offers liability protections to landowners and potential purchasers who didn’t cause or contribute to property contamination if they meet specific requirements, including conducting All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI).
Here’s how AAI can shield your organization from Superfund liability.
EPA defines AAI as “the process of evaluating a property’s environmental conditions and assessing potential liability for any contamination.” It encompasses the activities required by the AAI rule (40 CFR Part 312) to:
Potential property owners must comply with the AAI rule to claim protection from CERCLA liability. They may use one of three landowner defenses:
You must meet the AAI requirements if you plan to purchase a property for nonresidential use and may want to use CERCLA liability protections for hazardous substance releases or threatened releases after purchase.
The AAI rule requires an environmental professional to conduct most of the activities (312.21), but it also contains provisions that the potential owner must meet (312.22).
Who qualifies as an environmental professional?
An environmental professional has the needed background to identify conditions of a property that indicate releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances. According to 312.10, an environmental professional needs:
The AAI rule lists the actions needed to qualify for CERCLA liability protection using the landowner defenses. All AAI tasks must be completed before acquiring the property. Most tasks need to be completed within one year prior to purchasing a property. However, a handful of actions must happen within 180 days before purchase:
The environmental professional:
The potential landowner:
Report the results
The AAI results must be documented in a written report that’s signed by the environmental professional. It must include:
The regulations don’t provide specific requirements for the AAI format, and although the rules outline the actions you must take, it can be daunting to implement AAI without further guidance.
Consider using industry standards! EPA even references ASTM International Standards at 312.11 that you can use to comply.
Key to remember: Potential landowners can shield themselves from CERCLA liability for hazardous substance contamination by conducting All Appropriate Inquiries.
Thank you to all our members that have taken the time to provide the Compliance Network team with feedback on what they like and do not like about the site. We have taken this feedback to heart and have redesigned the homepage to better serve our members. Our goal is to make finding the information you need easier and faster.
Let’s take a tour!
Sitewide Search
We heard you. Search has been brought front and center to help you find the information you need quickly.
Activity Overview
The Activity Overview will provide quick access to items that matter to you.
Latest in your favorite Topics
This section will highlight any new content added to your selected topics of interest.
Network Polls and Discussion Activity
See what other professionals in your field are saying.
Premium Content
Exclusive content only available to Compliance Network members.
Trending
Catch up with what other professional like yourself are reading.
The new homepage will go live in June. Don’t hesitate to let us know what you think: compliancenetwork@jjkeller.com
A Title V operating permit is a legally enforceable document with the federal and state air emissions regulations that a facility must meet to operate. One requirement that applies to all Title V permit holders is the annual compliance certification. It answers whether a facility fulfills the permit’s terms and conditions (such as emissions limits, monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting).
Whether the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or a state or local regulatory agency issues the Title V permit, your facility must complete the annual compliance certification.
Discover what your facility needs to comply, certify, and repeat.
Facilities submit annual compliance certifications to the Title V permitting authority, which is usually a state or local regulatory agency (40 CFR 70.6). An EPA Regional Office serves as the permitting authority (71.6) for federally issued permits.
Title V tip: Check the state or local regulations for Title V compliance certification rules. They may require more frequent submissions and additional information.
At a minimum, the annual compliance certification covers two major areas for every permit term or condition:
Let’s take a closer look at each element.
Your facility’s compliance methods are the ways it tracks whether it’s meeting the Title V permit requirements or not. When a term or condition isn’t met (like exceeding an emission limit), it’s known as a deviation.
Compliance methods consist of monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting:
Three questions determine the compliance status of each permit requirement during the covered period:
Intermittent vs. continuous compliance
For each permit term or condition, your facility has intermittent compliance if it doesn’t meet the requirements at any time during the covered period. Your facility achieves continuous compliance only if it:
Possible exception to compliance
EPA defines a possible exception to compliance as “any periods during which compliance is required and in which an excursion or exceedance … occurred” (70.6(c)(5)(iii)(C)).
Simply put, a possible exception to compliance is a deviation that occurs when compliance is mandated. If compliance isn’t required or another permit requirement excuses it, the deviation isn’t a possible exception.
Your facility’s Title V permit provides instructions for how to submit the annual compliance certification, including the required forms and methods (via mail or electronic submission). You can also confirm requirements with your permitting authority. Generally, federally permitted facilities use the Annual Compliance Certification (EPA Form 5900-04).
Title V tip: Electronic submissions may be an option through the Compliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI) on EPA’s Central Data Exchange. Check with your permitting authority to determine whether you may submit the annual compliance certification electronically via CEDRI.
Annual compliance certification is vital to maintaining your Title V permit. Keep in mind: comply, certify, and repeat.
Key to remember: Facilities with a Title V operating permit must certify compliance with the requirements at least annually.
In today's rapidly evolving energy landscape, businesses are turning to back-up emergency generators to keep operations running smoothly. Several key factors are driving this growing trend:
Climate change has led to more intense weather like hurricanes, wildfires, and heatwaves. These events put pressure on power grids, causing outages that disrupt business operations. Generators help by providing backup power during unexpected failures.
Artificial intelligence (AI) and data centers need a lot of electricity. As these technologies grow, power grids struggle to keep up. Companies use generators to prevent power shortages and keep essential systems running.
Aging infrastructure and unsteady energy supply from renewable sources can make electrical supply unstable. Industries like manufacturing, healthcare, and finance need steady power to avoid costly interruptions. Generators act as a safety net when the grid fails.
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: NSR Permits.
(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), which can be found here. Additionally, the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) apply to reciprocating internal combustion engines (RICE). 40 CFR 63 Subpart ZZZZ can be found here.
These rules, depending on the specific type of generator engine, will be required even if a permit is not necessary.
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.
Several questions we receive from our customers use the terms “hazardous waste” and “hazardous materials” interchangeably. At a recent event, a few attendees admitted that they didn’t think there was a difference between the two. This is a common point of confusion and we want to ensure that our readers know the difference. Let’s dive into it!
The term hazardous material is defined by the Department of Transportation and refers to any substance or material that poses an unreasonable risk to health, safety, and property during transportation. Hazardous materials include hazardous substances, hazardous wastes, marine pollutants, and elevated-temperature materials. Essentially, if it’s dangerous and transported, it’s considered a hazardous material.
On the other hand, hazardous waste is defined by the Environmental Protection Agency. It refers to contaminated chemicals or by-products that no longer serve their purpose and need to be disposed of. Hazardous wastes are either listed or exhibit characteristics like ignitability, corrosivity, toxicity, or reactivity. It’s essentially waste that poses a danger to health or the environment and requires special handling and disposal.
To put it simply, hazardous material is a broad term that includes various dangerous substances during transportation, while hazardous waste specifically refers to dangerous by-products that need disposal. Understanding these terms is crucial for compliance with environmental and safety regulations.
If you ever find yourself unsure, remember that hazardous materials are about transportation risks, and hazardous wastes are about disposal risks.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued an interim final rule that further delays the submission period for the one-time reporting requirement for manufacturers of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). It pushes the starting submission period to April 2026.
Under Section 8(a)(7) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), EPA requires any business that manufactured (including imported) any PFAS or PFAS-containing article between 2011 and 2022 to submit the report.
What’s the new timeline?
The Section 8(a)(7) PFAS report’s opening submission period was moved from July 11, 2025, to April 13, 2026. Most manufacturers have six months to submit the report. Small manufacturers reporting only as importers of PFAS-containing articles have one year.
TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS report submission period | |
---|---|
Most manufacturers | April 13, 2026–October 13, 2026 |
Small manufacturers reporting solely as PFAS article importers | April 13, 2026–April 13, 2027 |
About the report
Manufacturers (including importers) covered by the TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS reporting rule (40 CFR Part 705) must provide information about:
It’s the second time EPA has postponed the reporting period. In September 2024, the agency moved the beginning submission period from November 2024 to July 2025. This latest interim rule pushes the starting period from July 2025 to April 2026.
Why the delay?
EPA needs more time to prepare the online reporting tool on the Central Data Exchange that businesses will use to submit the data. The agency will conduct tests to ensure that the application can accept submissions and that reporters don’t encounter technical issues.
Key to remember: EPA further delayed TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS reporting. The submission period now begins on April 13, 2026.
Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news. Let’s take a look at what’s happened over the last month!
On April 17, OSHA released 2024 injury and illness data. This includes information from more than 370,000 establishments that submitted Form 300A, as well as partial data from more than 732,000 Form 300 and Form 301 records. OSHA provides public access to the data in an effort to identify unsafe conditions and workplace hazards that may lead to occupational injuries and illnesses.
This year’s National Stand-Down to Prevent Struck-by Incidents took place the week of April 21. Struck-by incidents are the second leading cause of death among construction workers and the leading cause of nonfatal injuries in the construction industry. The stand-down emphasized the importance of training and prevention on worksites.
A safety alert from the Mine Safety and Health Administration urges the mining community to implement effective safety and health programs, with a focus on identifying and eliminating health and safety hazards. The alert was issued due to a high number of mining fatalities in the first quarter of 2025.
The Mine Safety and Health Administration temporarily paused its silica enforcement for coal mine operators until August 18, four months from its original compliance date of April 14. Under the agency’s silica rule, mine operators must update their respiratory protection programs. This may require them to obtain additional respirators and sampling devices. The agency says this four-month pause provides time for operators to come into compliance.
And finally, turning to environmental news, EPA updated the process for making data corrections to hazardous waste manifests. Waste handlers must correct errors on the manifest within 30 days of a request from EPA or a state agency. They also must submit corrections electronically.
And finally, EPA streamlined its pesticide registration process. The agency updated its MyPest app and made policy changes regarding how to submit two of its registration forms.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
You’ve likely never thought of “staying in touch” as a legal obligation, but that’s exactly what it is for facilities that generate small quantities of hazardous waste. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) mandates that small quantity generators (SQGs) give updates on their hazardous waste activities every four years. The next re-notification is right around the corner; it’s due by September 1, 2025.
Here's what SQGs need to know to stay in touch — and in compliance — with EPA.
The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) enables EPA to control hazardous waste from generation to disposal. The agency keeps tabs on SQGs through the re-notification regulation at 40 CFR 262.18(d). It requires SQGs to re-notify EPA or the state environmental agency of their generator status and activities every four years by submitting the:
Regulated SQGs must submit the Site ID Form. EPA and many states use the myRCRAid module on RCRA Information (RCRAInfo) for re-notifications.
Here’s how to submit the Site ID Form on myRCRAid:
Once you submit the Site ID Form, its status on myRCRAid will display “Pending.” EPA or the state regulator will approve or reject the re-notification submission.
Consider these tips when preparing your SQG re-notification:
Submitting the SQG re-notification properly keeps EPA updated and your facility compliant.
Key to remember: Small quantity generators of hazardous waste must re-notify EPA or the state agency by September 1, 2025.
The next time you’re at a service station, consider the fact that you’re standing above underground tanks holding the fuel that you’re pumping into your vehicle. This brings up an important question about any underground tank: Since you can’t see the tank, how do you know if it starts to leak? The answer is a release detection system.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires that all regulated underground storage tanks (USTs) have release detection systems and that owners and operators of USTs test the equipment annually to ensure it operates correctly.
Let’s look at three aspects of release detection equipment testing: how to conduct testing, what to test for, and what to record.
UST owners and operators may conduct release detection equipment testing according to:
Manufacturer’s instructions
Each piece of release detection equipment should have an associated manual or guide for owners to reference. The manual or guide will explain how to test the equipment.
Tip: Most equipment manufacturers provide online versions of their product manuals and guides, which you can likely find on the manufacturer’s website. If you can’t find guidance, contact the manufacturer directly.
Industry codes and standards
EPA’s regulations stipulate that UST owners and operators who follow industry codes and standards must choose ones developed by a nationally recognized association (like ASTM International or the Petroleum Equipment Institute (PEI)) or an independent testing laboratory.
For instance, the agency states at 280.40(a)(3) that UST owners and operators may use PEI/RP1200, Recommended Practices for the Testing and Verification of Spill, Overfill, Leak Detection and Secondary Containment Equipment at UST Facilities, to comply.
Implementing agency requirements
EPA’s rules for testing release detection equipment serve as the minimum standards. Most state regulatory agencies implement UST programs and may impose stricter or additional requirements. Plus, local regulations may apply.
Check state and local rules to ensure your UST complies with the right requirements.
At a minimum, UST owners and operators must test the following factors that apply to their release detection systems.
The regulation at 280.45(b)(1) mandates that UST owners and operators keep records of the annual release detection equipment testing results for at least three years.
For each annual testing record, list:
Petroleum and other hazardous substances that leak from USTs can endanger human and environmental health. A leaking UST’s primary threat is groundwater contamination. Groundwater supplies drinking water for almost half of Americans.
A release detection system enables a facility to respond sooner to accidental releases and, therefore, limit potential harmful impacts — only if the equipment used for the system operates properly.
Testing your UST’s release detection equipment is vital because it allows you to identify which components function accurately and which parts have problems that need correction. A well-functioning release detection system can help your facility:
Key to remember: EPA requires facilities to test the release detection equipment used on underground storage tanks each year to make sure it operates properly.
Pesticide registrations just became simpler, more modern, and more transparent! EPA recently updated an app and made policy changes regarding how to submit two forms. All these changes result in a streamlined pesticide registration process.
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:
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.
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:
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:
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:
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.
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.
Think recycling at work is just tossing paper in a blue bin? Think again. In 2025, workplace recycling is being redefined — from a basic office task to a strategic initiative that impacts your company’s bottom line, brand reputation, and environmental footprint.
From cardboard and plastics to e-waste and food scraps, today’s leading businesses are building smarter, circular systems that turn trash into opportunity — one department at a time.
Here are five reasons why recycling matters now more than ever.
Sustainability is no longer just a corporate social responsibility (CSR) talking point. It’s a core business differentiator. As a management or EHS leader, you’re often on the frontlines of implementing the visible changes that shape public perception. Recycling programs are a low-barrier, high-impact initiative that sends a clear message to customers, investors, and employees: We walk the talk.
Failing to prioritize environmental responsibility puts your company’s reputation at risk — especially in industries with public visibility or regulatory scrutiny. Forward-thinking competitors are already using circular economy models and zero-waste initiatives to win market share.
Champion a program that reflects your company’s values and positions you as a sustainability leader in your field.
Recycling is no longer a “nice-to-have.” Many jurisdictions now require commercial recycling, especially for packaging waste, e-waste, and food scraps. Increasingly, regulations also demand data transparency, such as tracking waste volumes, diversion rates, and sustainability goals.
Supervisors in environmental and safety roles are responsible for ensuring compliance and minimizing risk. Violations can result in hefty fines, bad press, or loss of contracts.
Stay ahead of compliance trends and implement a recycling program that satisfies current and future requirements while keeping auditreadiness top of mind.
Landfill disposal is becoming more expensive due to tipping fees and transportation costs. By diverting materials through recycling or reuse programs, companies can reduce both their environmental footprint and their operational spend.
In addition, smart material handling and waste segregation can lead to process improvements — less clutter, fewer hauling pickups, and even opportunities to monetize recyclable materials like scrap metal, cardboard, or used electronics.
Use data from your waste audits and vendor reporting to identify high-volume waste streams and optimize for both cost reduction and resource efficiency.
Today’s workforce, particularly younger employees, is drawn to employers who align with their values. A clean, green workplace that visibly supports recycling and sustainability reinforces a positive culture, boosts morale, and improves engagement — especially when employees feel like they’re contributing to something bigger.
Recycling initiatives are also an easy win for cross-departmental engagement. Whether through green teams, signage campaigns, or employee challenges, these programs offer hands-on ways to involve everyone.
Build internal buy-in by showing how your initiatives support company values, employee wellness, and sustainability goals through shared responsibility.
In 2025, companies are under increasing pressure from stakeholders to report measurable progress on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) initiatives. Waste reduction, recycling rates, and landfill diversion metrics are among the top data points requested in annual sustainability reports and RFPs.
Supervisors and EHS leaders are often the owners of the data. You're tasked with tracking, verifying, and reporting on these outcomes. Without a structured recycling program in place, those metrics are impossible to capture, and your ESG report falls flat.
Establish a system for measuring, improving, and communicating progress toward zero-waste or landfill diversion targets, and support leadership in meeting ESG benchmarks.
Key to remember: Embracing workplace recycling in 2025 isn’t just good for the planet — it’s a smart move that drives innovation, saves money, and positions your company as a leader in sustainability.
Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news. Let’s get started!
Ladders were the cause of over 22,000 workplace injuries and 161 deaths in 2020. Each March, the American Ladder Institute promotes ladder safety awareness with the goal of reducing ladder-related injuries and fatalities. Every Step Matters was the theme of this year’s National Ladder Safety Month.
Stand Up 4 Grain Safety Week kicked off on March 24. This annual event brings attention to preventable grain handling hazards and promotes safety in this high-hazard industry.
Federal agencies must review their regulations and report back to the White House by April 20. The priority is on “significant” rules, generally considered to be those with an annual effect on the economy of 100 million dollars or more. Once the regulations have been identified, the Office of Management and Budget and the Department of Government Efficiency will work with agency leaders to create a plan for rescinding or modifying the regulations and begin winding down their enforcement.
A highwall fatality at a surface mine prompted the Mine Safety and Health Administration to issue a safety alert. It outlines what miners should do to prevent similar incidents, including looking for hazards such as loose rocks and overhangs before beginning work.
The American Society of Safety Professionals revised its construction training standard. It outlines training requirements for new hires in construction and demolition operations, site procedures, regulatory compliance, and more.
And finally, turning to environmental news, EPA will reconsider a number of major rulemakings that may impact a variety of industries. This is in response to an executive order that federal agencies review their regulations. Among the rules under consideration include those related to clean power, oil and gas emission limits, greenhouse gas reporting, and risk management.
EPA’s Waste Emissions Charge on petroleum and natural gas facilities with high methane emissions is no longer in effect. The rule initially took effect in January and was then disapproved by Congress on March 14.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
Hazardous waste manifests are like travel logs. They track the entire journey of regulated hazardous waste, from the starting point (the generator’s facility) to the final destination (the off-site waste management facility). Like travel logs, a manifest is only as accurate as the information provided. Thankfully, you can correct manifest errors.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized the Third Rule under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), which took effect in January 2025. It made noteworthy changes to the manifest corrections process. Here’s what hazardous waste generators, transporters, and treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs) need to know.
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:
Note that the final rule amends post-manifest correction regulations for other entities, such as exporters, that are beyond the scope of this article.
EPA’s final rule maintains most of the post-receipt manifest data corrections process.
What’s the same?
Specifically:
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:
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).
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:
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:
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.
Are you storing and disposing of hazardous waste correctly or sitting on disaster? Hazardous waste storage is not just a regulatory headache – it is a time bomb for the environment and your company’s bottom line. A disaster in east London, England, is an ongoing issue for nearby residents that highlights the importance of hazardous waste management and why employers must take it seriously.
Originally intended for construction waste disposal, the site eventually turned into a dumping ground for hazardous industrial materials. Investigations found plastics, asbestos, industrial chemicals, and carcinogenic substances illegally dumped, creating an environmental and public health hazard. These materials fuel the fires, continuously releasing toxic smoke into the air. Residents have reported respiratory problems, skin irritation, and other health issues while authorities struggle to contain the situation. Even though this incident occurred in London, we can learn plenty of valuable lessons from the incident. Here’s how employers can take proactive measures to ensure compliance, protect workers, and prevent environmental harm:
A hazardous waste management plan should:
Train personnel on their roles and responsibilities when handling hazardous waste. Training should include:
The primary reason behind illegal waste dumping is financial. We all know it is not cheap to dispose of hazardous waste, but waste generators are responsible for their waste from “cradle to grave.”
One of the most effective ways to prevent hazardous waste incidents is to reduce reliance on them in the first place. By switching to safer alternatives, employers can lower their risk of exposure. Industries now offer eco-friendly coatings, adhesives, and cleaning agents that perform well without all the side effects. Safer alternatives also reduce compliance costs by lowering the burdens for hazardous waste disposal.
The disaster near London is a stark reminder of the consequences of negligent hazardous waste management. Businesses that cut corners on waste disposal risk legal penalties and contribute to long-term environmental and public health damage.
Keys to remember: Employers can protect their workforce, comply with regulations, and prevent environmental disasters by adopting proactive waste management strategies.
ENTER THE INSTITUTE
Be your company’s leading compliance authority with a robust library of articles, videos, and practical exercises designed to grow your knowledge of 120+ regulatory subjects.
At first glance, an empty container seems like a non-issue — no product, no problem. But in the eyes of regulators, “empty” is a carefully defined status that can determine whether a container is harmless or still subject to hazardous waste rules, labeling, and fire or environmental risk controls. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and OSHA have detailed definitions of what “empty” truly means. Misunderstanding these rules can lead to serious incidents, hefty fines, and unintentional noncompliance.
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.
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.
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.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) updated air quality rules for fine particle pollution (PM2.5), reducing the annual standard from 12.0 to 9.0 micrograms per cubic meter. The rule change was announced on February 7, 2024 and was published as a final rule in the Federal Register on March 6, 2024. The change was based on research linking PM2.5 to health problems like heart disease and early death.
Within one year of the final rule (February 7, 2025), governors from each state were required to submit area designation recommendations (attainment, nonattainment, or unclassifiable) to EPA. By February of 2026 (at the latest) EPA is expected to issue final area designations based on State recommendations, air quality data, and other factors.
There is a caveat that on March 12, 2025, EPA announced that the agency will reconsider the rule that tightened the standard from 12.0 to 9.0 micrograms per cubic meter by reviewing implementation concerns and getting stakeholder feedback, but as of this writing, the tighter standard is still in place.
If your business is in one of the areas that will be newly listed as nonattainment for PM2.5, you will face new rules designed to improve air quality. Understanding these changes will help you stay compliant and keep operations running smoothly.
Check out this explanation of nonattainment on Compliance Network's Environmental Institute.
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:
These industries may see higher costs, stricter permits, and changes to operations to meet the new standards.
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.
Businesses expanding or changing operations that increase PM2.5 pollution may need new permits. These permits show compliance with tighter pollution limits.
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.
Expect closer tracking of your business’ pollution levels, including real-time monitoring and more frequent reports. Compliance checks may be stricter in nonattainment areas.
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.
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.
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.
Hazardous waste manifests are like travel logs. They track the entire journey of regulated hazardous waste, from the starting point (the generator’s facility) to the final destination (the off-site waste management facility). Like travel logs, a manifest is only as accurate as the information provided. Thankfully, you can correct manifest errors.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finalized the Third Rule under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), which took effect in January 2025. It made noteworthy changes to the manifest corrections process. Here’s what hazardous waste generators, transporters, and treatment, storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs) need to know.
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:
Note that the final rule amends post-manifest correction regulations for other entities, such as exporters, that are beyond the scope of this article.
EPA’s final rule maintains most of the post-receipt manifest data corrections process.
What’s the same?
Specifically:
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:
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).
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:
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:
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 registrations just became simpler, more modern, and more transparent! EPA recently updated an app and made policy changes regarding how to submit two forms. All these changes result in a streamlined pesticide registration process.
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:
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.
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:
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:
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:
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.
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.
OSHA requires employers to provide all workers with immediately available and sanitary restroom or toilet facilities. But does this include truckers and delivery drivers that stop at your facilities? The sanitation standards (1910.141, 1926.51, and 1928.110) are meant to protect all workers from adverse health effects from unsanitary toilets facilities, or the unavailability of facilities when needed.
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.
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.
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.
Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news. Let’s take a look at what’s happened over the last month!
Two never-before-mentioned rulemakings reached the Office of Management and Budget for review on June 18. The two actions (one on respiratory protection and the other on the General Duty Clause) are only at the proposed rule stage, so stakeholders will have a chance to comment. At this time, it’s unclear whether the proposals are regulatory or de-regulatory. We’ll provide an update in a future monthly roundup as more information becomes available.
OSHA updated its Site-Specific Targeting program to reflect the use of Form 300A data for calendar years 2021 through 2023. This is OSHA’s primary planned inspection program for general industry establishments with 20 or more employees with the highest injury and illness rates. OSHA uses the data to target establishments for inspection.
Each year, backover incidents lead to serious injuries and fatalities in construction zones and workplaces. These incidents happen when drivers lose sight of people, objects, or vehicles behind them. To help prevent these incidents, OSHA launched #MirrorCheck, an initiative to raise awareness of safe work practices that can prevent backovers.
Effective June 27, Kentucky’s occupational safety and health standards are limited to those enforced by federal OSHA. The state will no longer adopt, promulgate, or enforce rules that are more stringent than federal OSHA. Kentucky operates an OSHA-approved State Plan covering most private sector workers and all state and local government workers.
As part of its Heat Illness Prevention campaign, OSHA has added two new resources for employers. One is a customizable guide for creating a toolbox talk on handling heat emergencies. The other explains the risks of heat illness for young workers.
And finally, turning to environmental news, EPA has again delayed the deadline for submitting data on 16 chemical substances required by the Toxic Substances Control Act Health and Safety Data Reporting rule. Manufacturers now have until May 22, 2026, to report on all of the covered chemical substances.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
Managing DOT drug and alcohol testing demands attention to detail. Items don’t have to be huge to derail your program if overlooked.
One task that can snowball into bigger issues is assembling a driver roster for your DOT testing. If done incorrectly, it can open the carrier up to several violations that will be discovered in the event of an audit.
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:
Then there are administrative mistakes, including instances when:
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:
When drivers who are subject to DOT FMCSA testing are inadvertently omitted from the driver list, it can result in:
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.
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 150 air-mile exemptions, which are in the regulations at 395.1(e)(1) and (2), allow a driver to use a time record in place of a log, provided that certain conditions are met. While this is possibly the most widely used hours-of-service exemption, it may be the most commonly misused exemption, as well.
To be able to use this logging exemption in 395.1(e)(1), the driver must:
The company must retain the time record and have it available for inspection for six months.
Need more info? View our ezExplanation on the 150 air-mile exception. |
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).
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.
Here are some of the common myths and misunderstandings about the 150 air-mile exemption:
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.
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.
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!
The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) plans to make several important changes to its DataQs system and they’re asking the public for help.
DataQs is the online system that motor carriers, drivers, and others can use to request a review of crash or roadside inspection data that the requester believes is inaccurate or incomplete, called a “request for data review” (RDR).
In 2023, the FMCSA sought input on creating a formal appeals process for DataQs, something that today is not clearly defined. The agency recently announced changes to that proposed process and put out a call for more public input.
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.
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:
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.
The FMCSA is asking for input on five key questions related to their proposal:
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.
Welcome back to our three-part series on PHMSA’s July 2025 proposed rulemakings. In Part 1, we looked at how PHMSA is cutting red tape for shippers, farmers, and tradespeople. Now in Part 2, we’re looking into another set of proposals, this time focused on special permits.
Let’s take a look these proposals.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Every year the International Air Transport Association (IATA) updates its Dangerous Goods Regulations (DGR) to ensure the safe and secure handling of dangerous goods that are shipped or transported by air. While changes to the 2024 IATA DGR (65th edition) are not as plentiful as they were in previous years, they are no less important.
Mandatory compliance with the 2024 IATA DGR begins on January 1, 2024, and will be valid until the 2025 IATA DGR comes into effect. Let’s look at the key updates, listed by Section, for the 65th edition of the IATA DGR:
Need additional information for IATA? Check out this ezExplanation.
The following packing instructions have been updated:
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:
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.
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.
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.
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:
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.
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.
Are your forklift operators certified? Do they need a state driver’s license? Are they physically able to operate forklifts? All are commonly asked questions — so, let’s make sure you're compliant.
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.
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).
Interested in information on how material handler training can help forklift operators? See our Compliance Network article "To improve forklift safety, train material handlers." |
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.
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.
Having been what he equates to the nation’s “chief people officer” as the president of the United States, President Joe Biden thanked a room packed with human resources professionals for their work. Biden stressed that a core aspect of leadership is valuing human connection.
“It’s about getting personal, it’s about connecting,” he said on July 2 at the Society for Human Resources Management (SHRM) annual conference. “It means having empathy.”
Sharing credit, giving recognition, and getting to know the people who work for you, Biden said are keystones of leadership as he shared lessons learned from colleagues, constituents, and family members.
His father stressed that a job is about dignity and respect, Biden recalled. “Everything my dad did conveyed to me that everybody deserves to be treated with dignity,” Biden said.
Emphasizing that leaders also need to understand the importance of family, he noted that he expected staff members to attend to critical family matters. The smaller moments are important as well, he said, recalling the time he commuted home two hours by train to watch his then 8-year-old daughter blow out the candles on her birthday cake.
“I knew it was important to show up,” he said. “It mattered to me. I mattered to my family.”
When he was reeling from the loss of his wife and daughter shortly after he was first elected to Congress, colleagues and family members were there to support him. He noted that when employees do not have a strong support system in place, the job of making sure an employee gets needed help falls on human resources professionals.
“They’re coming to you,” he said.
Recalling that he received his first nomination as a Senate candidate because no one else wanted to run, and he was expected to lose, he advised HR professionals to be brave.
“What’s so important to you that you’d rather lose than not do it?” he said. “Be brave when bravery is called for. That’s the kind of leadership we need now.”
The best leadership advice he ever received came from his father, Biden noted: “Be a man of your word.”
Key to remember: Leadership means treating others with respect and dignity, as well as keeping in mind the importance of family, President Joe Biden advises human resources professionals.
Back in October 2018, Laffon had a medical emergency and needed some time off under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA).
Her leave lasted until November 15. Ten days after she returned to work, on November 26, her employer terminated her.
She sued, arguing that the employer retaliated against her because of her FMLA leave.
The catch? She didn't bring the suit until almost three years later.
No link between leave and termination
In court, the employer argued that there was no causal link between Laffon taking FMLA leave and her termination. Although the court documents aren't robust, they do reveal that the employer indicated that Laffon's allegations didn't show that her taking FMLA leave was a factor in the decision to terminate her. The documents showed only that the termination chronologically followed her leave.
The court agreed with the employer. It also agreed that Laffon failed to allege a willful violation of the FMLA, which would allow her to benefit from the FMLA's three-year statute of limitations.
Laffon appealed the case to the Ninth Circuit.
Statute of limitations
Under the FMLA, employees have two years from the date of the last event constituting the alleged violation for which they can bring a claim.
Those two years are extended to three years if the employer's actions were "willful." This means that an employee must show that the employer either knew or showed reckless disregard for whether its conduct violated the FMLA.
Ruling overturned
Fast forward to August 2023, when the Ninth Circuit reversed the lower court's decision. It indicated that, based on Laffon's amended complaint and liberally construing the law, her allegations establish that her leave was causally connected to her termination and that the employer's action (her termination) was willful.
Glymph v. CT Corporation Systems, No. 22-35735, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, August 22, 2023.
Key to remember: Terminating an employee soon after returning from FMLA leave is risky, unless there is a clear, well-documented, non-leave-related reason. Case documents did not show such a clear reason, which can also increase the risk of a willful finding. Employees have time to file claims, even years.
A new year often begins a new round of employee performance reviews. Since the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) allows eligible employees to take up to 12 (or 26) weeks of leave, many events can occur during an employee’s leave, including the employee’s pre-scheduled performance review. Such reviews might take place on an annual or other scheduled basis. How you treat the timing of those reviews should include some thought.
If, for example, Jo Employee takes 12 weeks of FMLA leave, during which her annual performance review is scheduled, here are some questions to ponder:
Delaying a review
An annual performance review generally takes into consideration a full years’ worth of work. Some employers think it’s best to delay the performance review by the same amount of time an employee took FMLA leave to capture an entire years’ work. This practice, however, might risk running afoul of one of the cornerstones of the FMLA: Returning the employee to his or her position, including the equivalent pay, benefits, and working conditions.
The issues can be particularly concerning if the performance review affects wage increases or other compensation.
What the regulations say
The FMLA regulations indicate that an equivalent position includes equivalent pay, which includes any unconditional pay increases that may have occurred during the FMLA leave period. Equivalent pay also includes bonuses or payments, whether discretionary or non-discretionary. FMLA leave cannot undermine the employee’s right to such pay.
Furthermore, “… employers cannot use the taking of FMLA leave as a negative factor in employment actions, such as hiring, promotions, or disciplinary actions; nor can FMLA leave be counted under no fault attendance policies.” [29 CFR 825.220(c)]
Avoiding a negative factor
Therefore, you would need to look at whether delaying an employee’s performance review could be seen as having a negative factor for the employee.
If, for example, Jo Employee took 12 weeks of leave from April through June, during which she would otherwise have obtained a pay increase in May, but you delayed this increase until September (so you could use a full 12 months of work), you may have violated the equivalent pay provision. If delaying a review creates a new review schedule going forward, the negative impacts could continue.
If, however, a pay increase is conditioned upon seniority, length of service, or work performed, you would grant it in accordance with your policy or practice as applied to other employees on an equivalent leave status for a reason that does not qualify as FMLA leave.
In other words, don’t treat an employee on FMLA leave differently than you would an employee on other forms of leave.
Key to remember: It might be less risky to keep the performance review on schedule and prorate wage increases to account for FMLA leave.
Employers sometimes get tripped up on how to calculate the 1,250 hours worked eligibility criterion when employees need leave under the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA).
Does working overtime count toward the 1,250?
Recently, someone asked if overtime hours counted toward the 1,250 hours worked requirement (it does).
All hours actually worked apply to the 1,250, whether overtime or regular time, even if the overtime is not mandatory.
The 1,250 hours is calculated in relation to when the leave will begin, not when the employee puts an employer on notice of the need for leave.
Whether an employee is allowed to work overtime, however, is generally up to company policy. As far as pay goes, remember, if the employee is nonexempt (“hourly”) and works any overtime (mandatory or voluntary) the employee must be paid time and one-half for all hours worked over 40 within the workweek.
More about FMLA leave requirements
To be eligible to take FMLA leave, employees must:
Whether an employee has worked the minimum 1,250 hours is calculated based on determining compensable hours or work under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
Calculating the 1,250 hours worked
When it comes to figuring out if an employee has worked at least 1,250 hours, it can get tricky. As was mentioned above, all hours worked, regular and overtime, must be counted.
Hours not worked should not be counted. The “not worked hours” include such time off as vacation time, sick leave, paid or unpaid holidays, or any other time in which an employee isn’t actually working — which can include disability, bereavement, FMLA and other forms of leave.
Once an employee meets the three eligibility criteria, including the 1,250 hours worked, for a particular leave reason, the employee remains eligible for the duration of the 12-month leave year period.
If the employee needs leave for another, different reason, eligibility would be recalculated.
Key to remember: All hours worked must be included in the 1,250 hours criterion when determining whether an employee is eligible for FMLA leave. Hours that aren’t worked (like vacation) are not included.
When an employee asks for a workplace change because of a medical condition, the employer’s obligations to find a possible solution are triggered, and they must act promptly.
Since employees usually ask their supervisors for such changes, supervisors must be able to recognize these as requests for reasonable accommodations under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
During an interactive process with the employee, employers may ask for documentation about the need for an accommodation.
But what happens if an employer asks for reasonable documentation, then asks for more, and then more? This could delay the accommodation by months, hindering the employee from being able to do the job and putting the employer at risk of violating the ADA.
The next thing the employer knows, it’s in court defending its actions. Recently, this happened to an employer.
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.
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.
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.
Training forklift operators is an OSHA requirement per 1910.178(l). Do you want to do it in house? If you said yes, follow this step-by-step guide.
It all starts with a competent trainer. OSHA’s view is that all operator training and evaluation must be conducted by persons who have the “knowledge, training, and experience” to train operators and evaluate their competence. The standard doesn’t go into any more detail. It’s up to the employer to ensure trainers meet these general qualifications, but OSHA has no requirements for trainers to take certain classes, hold any sort of certifications, or be re-certified as trainers at specified intervals.
Need more information on OSHA’s Forklift Standard? See our ezExplanation on Powered Industrial Trucks. |
The only aspect that OSHA has clarified is that the trainer does need to have experience operating the equipment and attachments. However, the standard doesn’t require that the trainers operate a forklift regularly (that is, outside of their operator training duties) as part of their job function or responsibility.
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.
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:
Workplace-related topics are examples like these:
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.
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.
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.
Training forklift operators is an OSHA requirement. Follow this step-by-step guide and you can do it in-house.
Ergonomics and industrial hygiene (IH) are two important, but separate, fields that focus on ensuring the health, safety, and well-being of workers. Although they both help to create safe and healthy work environments, the terms should not be used interchangeably. It is important to recognize their unique areas of concentration in order to create comprehensive occupational health and safety programs.
Defining IH and ergonomics
OSHA defines IH as “that science and art devoted to the anticipation, recognition, evaluation, and control of those environmental factors or stresses arising in or from the workplace, which may cause sickness, impaired health and well-being, or significant discomfort among workers or among the citizens of the community.” IH focuses on identifying and controlling workplace hazards that may affect the health and well-being of workers.
Ergonomics is defined by the Centers for Disease Control as “the scientific study of people at work in order to prevent soft tissue injuries and musculoskeletal disorders caused by sudden or sustained exposure to force, vibration, repetitive motion, and awkward posture.” Ergonomics primarily deals with optimizing the design of workspaces and equipment to fit the capabilities and limitations of individuals.
Similarities between IH and ergonomics
Industrial hygiene and ergonomics both focus on ensuring the health, safety, and well-being of workers. Some similarities between the two include:
Differences between IH and ergonomics
While industrial hygiene and ergonomics share similarities, there are some key differences between the two fields.
Industrial hygiene is primarily concerned with identifying and managing potential hazards in the workplace that could negatively impact the health and well-being of workers. This includes assessing and monitoring exposure to physical, chemical, ergonomic, or biological agents. Industrial hygienists accomplish this through various methods, such as air sampling, noise monitoring, and ergonomic evaluations to assess and control these hazards.
Ergonomics is designed to enhance efficiency, comfort, and safety by reducing the risk of musculoskeletal disorders and other ergonomic-related issues. Ergonomists analyze the physical demands of tasks, assess workstations and equipment, and make recommendations to improve body mechanics, minimize physical strain, and reduce the risk of injuries.
Standards associated with ergonomic hazards
Federal OSHA does not currently have a specific ergonomics standard. Instead, OSHA cites ergonomic issues under the General Duty Clause, which requires employers to provide a safe and healthy workplace free from recognized serious hazards, including ergonomic hazards.
Effective January 1, 2024, five states will have implemented specific ergonomic regulations. They include:
In a sense, ergonomics is part of IH much the way that respiratory protection is part of IH. Industrial hygiene is a broader field that focuses on the identification and recognition of hazards (including ergonomic hazards). Ergonomics is certainly a part of IH, but the science of ergonomics is a narrower field that focuses on evaluating specific types of hazards and developing solutions to the problems identified.
Key to remember: Ergonomics focuses on designing and arranging workspaces to optimize human performance and well-being, while industrial hygiene focuses on identifying and controlling workplace hazards to protect workers’ health and safety.
With the Trump administration taking a de-regulatory approach and repealing many standards adopted in the last 10 to 15 years, it’s worth keeping in mind that those repeals do not eliminate obligations on employers and businesses. When a federal agency repeals a recent revision to a regulation, the agency just reinstates an older version of the rule. When the previous version again goes into effect, employers need to determine their obligations under that version of the rule.
Federal agencies adopt regulations to implement federal laws such as the Clean Air Act or the Occupational Safety and Health Act, both of which became law in 1970. Those laws aren’t getting repealed, and the regulations implementing them have been changing for 50 years.
When a federal agency repeals a regulation, it still needs implement and enforce the underlying statute. The agency typically repeals an expansion of requirements, but then re-implements an older version of the rule. For example, if the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) repeals a standard that increases passenger vehicle fuel economy, that doesn’t eliminate fuel economy standards. Vehicle manufacturers would still need to meet some lower standards that were in effect before the increase.
While new regulations create changes for employers, repeals of regulations also create changes that employers must evaluate. Employers likely need to consider:
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.
In response to Executive Orders, OSHA published 25 proposed rules and one final rule in the Federal Register on July 1. Stakeholders have until September 2 to comment on the proposed rules, and in some instances, OSHA seeks input on specific questions pertaining to the rule.
The agency’s lone final rule, effective July 1, removes the requirement for the Assistant Secretary of OSHA to consult with the Advisory Committee on Construction Safety and Health (ACCSH) when formulating rules to promulgate, modify, or revoke standards applicable to construction work. It also revokes 1912.3, the general regulations governing ACCSH.
Additionally, OSHA is withdrawing its proposal to amend the OSHA 300 Log by adding a column that employers would use to record work-related musculoskeletal disorders. This does not change any employer’s obligation to complete and retain occupational injury and illness records under OSHA’s regulations.
Proposed action | Affected regulation |
Remove some medical evaluation requirements for the use of medical evaluations for filtering facepiece respirators and loose-fitting powered air-purifying respirators. | • Respiratory protection, 1910.134 |
Revise some substance-specific respirator requirements to allow different types of respirators to be used. | • 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane, 1910.1044 • 1,3-Butadiene, 1910.1051 • Asbestos, 1910.1001, 1915.1001, 1926.1101 • Benzene, 1910.1028 • Cadmium, 1910.1027, 1926.1127 • Coke oven emissions, 1910.1029 • Cotton dust, 1910.1043 • Ethylene oxide, 1910.1047 • Inorganic arsenic, 1910.1018 • Lead, 1910.1025, 1926.62 • Methylene chloride, 1910.1052 • Methylenedianiline, 1910.1050, 1926.60 |
Remove duplicative language related to respiratory protection. | • Acrylonitrile, 1910.1045 • Formaldehyde, 1910.1048 • Vinyl chloride, 1910.1017 |
Revise respirator requirements; clarify policies and procedures for implementing a respiratory protection program. | • 13 Carcinogens, 1910.1003 |
Remove entire regulation. | • Construction illumination, 1926.26, 1926.56 • House falls in marine terminals, 1917.41 • Occupational exposure to COVID-19 in healthcare settings, 1910 Subpart U • COVID-19, 1915.1501, 1917.31, 1918 Subpart K, 1926.58, 1928.21(a)(8) • Open fire in marine terminals, 1917.21 • Safety color code for marking physical hazards, 1910.144, 1910.262(c)(8), 1910.265(c)(11), 1915.90 • Recission of coordinated enforcement regulations, 29 CFR Part 42 |
Add a regulatory section clarifying OSHA’s interpretation of the General Duty Clause to exclude from enforcement known hazards that are inherent and inseparable from the core nature of a professional activity or performance, such as animal handling, motor sports, and combat simulation training. | • 1975.7, Application of the General Duty Clause to inherently risky professional activities |
Final action | Affected regulations |
Revoke 1911.10, which requires the Assistant Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health (Assistant Secretary), who heads OSHA, to consult with the Advisory Committee on Construction Safety and Health (ACCSH) in the formulation of rules to promulgate, modify, or revoke standards applicable to construction work, and 1912.3, the general regulations governing ACCSH. Revise corresponding sections in 1911 and 1912. | • 1911.10, Construction standards • 1911.15, Nature of hearing • 1912.3, Advisory committee on construction safety and health • 1912.8, Committee charters • 1912.9, Representation on section 7(b) committees |
Jack was a stickler for details, and on this day, he was even more particular than usual. He was to hoist a large air conditioning unit to the top of a new office building using a telescopic crane with a load limit of 40 tons. The air conditioning unit was only 12 tons. Philip, the foreman for the job, wanted the lift done immediately. “Jack, can you hurry up and get that up on the roof?”
“I checked the load chart and there’s a problem. If I use this crane, the load could cause the crane to tip or the telescopic boom to fail.”
“Why is that? The crane is rated for 40 tons.”
“That’s true, but the telescopic boom is going to be extended the full length and the load chart says it’s too much weight hanging up and out there. Plus, the wind is at 15 mph and that’s going to put even more strain on the boom.”
“It’s going to get even windier later. We need to get that up now!” Philip put the pressure on Jack.
“This isn’t safe, and it goes against OSHA’s regulations. I’m responsible for the lift. I’m not going to do it!” Jack replied, standing his ground.
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.”
It is a common sight in many workplaces to see employees using compressed air to clean parts, equipment, and even clothing. What many workers and some employers do not realize is that compressed air can be deadly. That is why OSHA has a regulation prohibiting the use of compressed air for cleaning unless the dead-end pressure is reduced to below 30 psi, and then only with effective chip guarding and PPE.
The regulation Federal OSHA’s requirement for cleaning with compressed air is in 1910.242(b):
“Effective chip guarding” means any method or equipment which will prevent a chip or particle (of whatever size) from being blown into the eyes or unbroken skin of the operator or other workers.
Effective chip guarding may be separate from the air nozzle as in the case where screens or barriers are used. The use of protective cone air nozzles are acceptable in general for protection of the operator, but barriers, baffles or screens may be required to protect other workers if they are exposed to flying chips or particles.
The regulation requires the psi at the nozzle to be less than 30 when using compressed air for cleaning.
However, OSHA has said in interpretive guidance that the use of compressed air for cleaning purposes at pressures at or greater than 30 psi is permissible if the outlet or source is fitted with a relief device or air ports that drop the pressure to less than 30 psi if the flow is dead-ended.
While the regulation does not specifically address the issue, in a letter of interpretation OSHA said that employers should not allow employees to use compressed air for cleaning themselves or their clothing in general industry situations. The eyes and other body parts, such as the respiratory system, may be damaged as the result of inadequate personal protective equipment, lack of chip guards, and/or uncontrolled release of compressed air.
There are numerous dangers of improperly using compressed air:
Workers must be trained that even extremely low pressures, such as 5 or 10 psi, can still cause severe damage if pointed toward the body, particularly the mouth, eyes, ears, or open areas in the skin.
Employers should train employees on the dangers of compressed air, and ensure the equipment is equipped with the necessary safety features and is properly maintained.
Supervisors should watch for improper use, particularly horseplay, and initiate corrective action. In addition, for many applications, a broom or shop vacuum may be just as effective at cleaning, and much safer. Compressed air may seem harmless, but if strict safeguards and practices are not utilized it can be deadly.