
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!
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 considered 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 a 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 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 it. 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 in 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.
A joint Congressional resolution disapproved the 2024 Final Waste Emissions Charge (WEC) Rule on oil and gas facilities with high methane emissions. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that the regulation, which initially took effect on January 17, 2025, is now no longer in effect.
Who’s impacted?
The WEC rule applied to facilities in the Petroleum and Natural Gas Systems category that:
Facilities that were subject to the rule are no longer required to comply (i.e., submit WEC filings by September 2, 2025).
What’s next?
EPA stated it’s “currently evaluating options and obligations for implementing Clean Air Act Section 136(c–g) and will provide additional information to the regulated community at an appropriate time."
Section 136, added by the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, mandates that EPA implement a methane reduction incentive program for petroleum and natural gas systems, including imposing and collecting a WEC on methane emissions above waste emissions limits.
The disapproval occurred on March 14, 2025, just two days after the agency announced 31 deregulatory actions it plans to take.
Key to remember: EPA’s Waste Emissions Charge on petroleum and natural gas facilities for excess methane is no longer in effect.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced on March 12, 2025, that it’s taking 31 actions to advance President Trump’s Day One executive orders and the new “Powering the Great American Comeback” Initiative. The agency’s actions will likely impact environmental regulations across various industries.
Rules under review
EPA will reconsider an assortment of rulemakings, including:
The agency will also take other actions, such as:
About EPA’s new initiative
In February 2025, the agency announced the Powering the Great American Comeback Initiative, which outlines EPA’s priorities. The initiative consists of five pillars:
EPA’s 31 actions will primarily address the first three pillars.
Key to remember: EPA will reconsider major rulemakings that may impact a variety of industries.
Another riveting video is posted by the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board (CSB)! The animated video covers a massive explosion at a Texas machine shop. Two workers and a member of the public were killed. Over 450 neighboring homes/businesses were damaged.
The 14-minute video, “No Detection: Explosion …,” follows a June 2023 investigation report. When the 56-page report came out, CSB Chairperson Steve Owens said, “Our investigation found that [the company] did not have an effective program in place to assess potential hazards in its propylene process and did not have a mechanical integrity program or written operating procedures.”
The incident was compounded by emergency planning failures, says CSB. Owens argued, “This tragic incident was made even worse due to the lack of emergency response training for employees at the facility.”
CSB explains that a degraded and poorly crimped rubber welding hose disconnected from its fitting inside a coating booth. That prompted a release of propylene, a flammable vapor.
By the time workers arrived at the facility the early morning of January 24, 2020, an explosive concentration of propylene had formed inside the building. As workers entered and turned on the lights, the vapor ignited, triggering an explosion. It:
The board’s investigation later found that the company had:
OSHA cited the company 12 years earlier for failing to inspect gas system equipment for signs of deterioration or leaks. The 2008 OSHA visit was prompted by another explosion of propylene gas.
Following the later 2020 incident, OSHA issued citations for failing to:
CSB explains that the shop’s propylene amount was below the threshold for OSHA’s Process Safety Management (PSM) standard at 29 CFR 1910.119 or EPA’s Risk Management Plan (RMP) standard at 40 CFR 68. Still, the CSB investigation identified these safety issues:
Owens concludes that the deadly incident could have been mitigated if the company had implemented an effective PSM system for the hazards of its coating operation. Even if a leak occurred, Owens believes an emergency response plan could have prevented the tragic loss of life.
OSHA chemical emergency preparedness may include an emergency action plan and/or an emergency response plan.
To prevent chemical incidents, CSB urges you to:
Have questions about chemical safety or emergency planning? Pose them to our J. J. Keller® experts! Visit our Expert Help page today! |
The latest video comes after the board received a “Silver Play Button” award. The CSB’s video channel boasts 364K subscribers and nearly 100 safety videos. The channel has had over 65M combined views since 2007. What’s more, CSB claims that the chemical industry itself and engineering schools use the videos for chemical safety training.
A new CSB video covers the 2020 massive explosion at a Texas machine shop. The board urges you to implement PSM systems even if not required. CSB also presses you to ensure that workers are trained in emergency response plans.
During a recent discussion about the persistent challenges of maintaining air quality standards within heavy industrial operations, one colleague in the field shared about a large Midwestern industrial facility that faced allegations of significant Clean Air Act violations. Our casual lunch meeting turned into a case study on uncontrolled emissions of particulate matter (PM).
An investigation identified the facility’s clinker cooler and raw mill operations as primary sources of excess PM. Monitoring data revealed the facility consistently exceeded permitted emission limits, suggesting systemic deficiencies in pollution control systems. Further inspection pointed to potential inadequate maintenance and operation of existing baghouse filters, a critical technology for capturing airborne particles. The facility also appeared to struggle with fugitive dust emissions from material handling and storage areas, indicating a need for improved dust suppression measures.
The case clarifies the importance of rigorous, proactive environmental management within heavy industrial operations. To prevent similar violations, facilities should prioritize comprehensive monitoring and reporting. Continuous emission monitoring systems provide real-time data, enabling early detection of deviations from permitted limits. Regular inspections and preventative maintenance of pollution control equipment are essential. This includes ensuring baghouse filters operate within their design parameters and promptly replacing damaged or worn components.
Additionally, robust fugitive dust control plans are vital. They should address all potential sources of fugitive dust, encompassing material handling, storage, and transport. Implementing strategies such as water spraying, enclosure of conveyors, and optimized material stockpiling can significantly reduce emissions.
Beyond technology, a strong environmental compliance culture is crucial. It involves employee training on environmental regulations, operational procedures, and the importance of adhering to pollution control measures. Regular audits and internal assessments can help identify potential weaknesses and ensure ongoing compliance.
Industrial facilities can minimize their environmental impact and avoid costly enforcement actions by focusing on:
Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news. There’s a lot going on, so let’s get started!
Under a new Executive Order, federal agencies must eliminate 10 regulations for each new one they introduce. This applies to all new rules, regulations, or guidance issued by government agencies such as the Department of Labor, which includes OSHA, and the Environmental Protection Agency.
A new OSHA fact sheet outlines employee rights and protections when filing a whistleblower complaint. Employers may not retaliate against employees who exercise their rights under the Occupational Safety and Health Act.
OSHA will not cite employers for COVID-19 recordkeeping violations under its Healthcare Emergency Temporary Standard. These regulations are specific to healthcare settings. The provisions remain in effect, but until further notice, OSHA will not enforce them.
New guidance from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health recommends that employers use individual, quantitative fit-testing for hearing protection. This helps evaluate how well workers’ hearing protection reduces noise levels and ensures a proper fit.
And finally, turning to environmental news, states across the country continue to consider and implement regulations related to PFAS. These “forever chemicals” are long-lasting chemicals that may pose risks to human and environmental health. A recent study anticipates that more than half of the states in the U.S. are likely to consider PFAS-related policies this year.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
A group of substances called “forever chemicals” lasts long in the environment, but the submission period for its one-time reporting requirement doesn’t. And it starts in just a few months. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requires covered entities to report data about per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) they manufactured between 2011 and 2022.
Required by Section 8(a)(7) of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the report covers PFAS production volumes, disposal, exposures, and hazards. The submission period opens on July 11, 2025. Here are answers to five common questions about the TSCA Section 8(a)(7) report.
The TSCA Section 8(a)(7) reporting requirements apply to any person who manufactured (including imported) a PFAS or PFAS-containing article between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2022, for commercial purposes.
EPA defines terms for this reporting requirement at 40 CFR 705.3.
One vital thing to note is that the TSCA Section 8(a)(7) reporting requirement allows for no exemptions. The rule even covers PFAS manufactured as a byproduct, impurity, or non-isolated intermediate. The only activity that doesn’t require reporting is importing municipal solid waste streams to dispose of or destroy the waste.
The information required depends on whether you use the standard or streamlined TSCA Section 8(a)(7) reporting form.
The standard form contains:
The streamlined form requires less information than the standard form. Two types of reporters qualify to use streamlined reporting:
Importers may choose to use the streamlined “PFAS in Imported Article” form. If you imported a PFAS-containing article and manufactured (including imported) the same PFAS (not in an article), you can either:
Manufacturers of qualifying R&D PFAS can use the “Research & Development PFAS” form. However, you cannot use the streamlined form if you manufactured a PFAS in small quantities for R&D and otherwise manufactured (including imported) the same PFAS.
For most manufacturers, the TSCA Section 8(a)(7) report submission period runs from July 11, 2025, to January 22, 2026. Small manufacturers who solely imported PFAS-containing articles have a longer submission period, from July 11, 2025, to July 11, 2026.
Reports must be submitted electronically through EPA’s Central Data Exchange (CDX). Go to the Chemical Information Submission System and choose the “TSCA Section 8(a)(7)” application.
Note that you must have a registered account on EPA’s CDX to submit the report, and the facility for which you’re submitting the report must also be registered on the platform.
TSCA Section 8(a)(7), as amended by the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2020, required EPA to develop a rule to gather data about PFAS from entities that manufacture or have manufactured PFAS and PFAS-containing articles. The agency finalized the rule in October 2023 for this one-time reporting requirement.
The TSCA Section 8(a)(7) PFAS reports will give EPA a more complete picture of PFAS manufactured in the U.S. The agency will use the data to further its understanding of the forever chemicals and inform future regulatory actions.
Key to remember: The submission period for the one-time PFAS reporting requirement opens July 11, 2025. It applies to anyone who manufactured (including imported) PFAS or PFAS-containing articles between 2011 and 2022.
Used oil disposal is a critical issue for safety managers and shop supervisors in industrial settings. Whether your facility generates used oil from machinery, vehicles, or hydraulic systems, you must understand the regulatory requirements to ensure compliance and avoid hefty fines.
Used oil is not always considered hazardous waste, but improper handling, storage, or disposal can lead to regulatory violations and environmental hazards. Understanding how used oil is classified, when it is considered hazardous, and how to manage it in compliance with 40 CFR Part 279 is essential.
Let’s uncover the regulatory framework for used oil disposal, including storage requirements, transportation rules, and best practices to ensure compliance at both the federal and state levels.
The EPA defines used oil as any petroleum-based or synthetic oil that has been used and is contaminated by physical or chemical impurities. Common sources of used oil in industrial operations include:
According to EPA regulations (40 CFR Part 279), used oil is presumed to be managed under the less stringent used oil management standards unless it meets hazardous waste criteria.
Used oil becomes hazardous waste if:
If used oil is classified as hazardous waste, it must be managed in accordance with the applicable solid and hazardous waste requirements.
The EPA requirements for used oil consist of three different aspects, as outlined below.
1. Storage Requirements
Use leak-proof tanks and containers made of durable, non-earthen materials (e.g., steel, plastic, or concrete). Label all used oil containers with the words "Used Oil" to prevent misidentification. Prevent leaks and spills by using secondary containment systems and regularly inspecting tanks. Never mix used oil with hazardous waste unless authorized.
2. Transportation and Disposal
Used oil generators may transport up to 55 gallons of used oil to a registered collection center without an EPA ID number. If contracting a used oil transporter, ensure they have an EPA Identification Number.
Used oil must be:
3. Spill Prevention and Cleanup
Facilities storing large amounts of used oil must have a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan. SPCC plans establish procedures, methods, and equipment requirements to prevent oil from reaching waterways, and to contain discharges of oil.
Any spills must be cleaned up immediately, and absorbent materials must be disposed of properly. Rags and shop towels contaminated with hazardous materials may be classified as hazardous waste.
While the EPA focuses on environmental compliance, OSHA (29 CFR Part 1910) regulates worker safety when handling used oil. Key OSHA requirements include:
1. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)
Workers handling used oil must wear gloves and protective clothing to prevent skin exposure. Safety goggles or face shields are also important to avoid eye contact.
2. Hazard communication (HazCom) program
Employers must label all used oil containers with appropriate hazard information and train employees on safe handling procedures and emergency response.
3. Fire and Explosion Safety
Always store used oil away from ignition sources to prevent fire hazards. Ensure storage areas are ventilated to avoid vapor buildup.
Many states have stricter used oil regulations than federal laws. For example:
To ensure compliance, check with your state’s environmental agency for state-specific used oil disposal rules and whether used oil is considered hazardous. Additional permits for transporting or processing used oil may be necessary.
Ensuring compliance with EPA, OSHA, and state laws is essential for safety managers and shop supervisors handling used oil. By following proper storage, transportation, and disposal practices, businesses can reduce environmental risks, improve workplace safety, and avoid costly fines.
Key to remember: By staying informed and proactive, your facility can maintain safe, sustainable, and compliant used oil management practices.
You might argue that warehouses have always posed challenges to fire service crews. However, today’s warehouses are pushing the boundaries on what firefighters can handle. Modern warehouses have far more square feet, sky-high storage racks, and compacted arrangements making it tougher for crews to reach a fire quickly. Commodities with lithium-ion batteries add another danger layer in a fire. Plus, robots can get in the way.
To sort this out, the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) released back-to-back reports and a podcast that give warehouse owners/operators and fire crews a lot to think about:
Over 1,500 warehouse fires happen annually on average, NFPA estimates. That means warehouse fires are not rare. The first time that fire crews lay eyes on your warehouse should not be when there’s a roaring fire there in the middle of the night.
Ideally, fire service members should be involved before a warehouse is built. That way, things like water supplies and crew access can be part of the drawing board. If your warehouse is already in operation, it’s still critical for fire services to check out your warehouse. They can get familiar with your warehouse configuration, its fire suppression systems, and its stored commodities.
While the two reports detail challenges and trends for warehouse fires, one overarching takeaway prevails — pre-planning between the warehouse owner/operator and the fire service is a must. The concept is covered in the podcast too. Pre-incident planning inevitably helps fire crews to efficiently control and suppress an actual fire. It also informs the owner/operator about fire crew capabilities for the site.
OSHA’s Emergency Action Plan standard calls for covered employers to implement a plan to protect employees during fire emergencies. This requirement is found at 29 CFR 1910.38, 1915.502, 1917.30, 1918.100, and 1926.35, depending on your industry. However, the pre-incident planning that NFPA is talking about is pre-planning WITH the fire department so that there are better outcomes for people and property, in the event of a fire.
The 125-page NFPA report, “Identifying Challenges to Fire Service Response in Storage Facilities,” emphasizes that warehouses are evolving to meet greater demand. The report:
One recommendation suggests that future study needs to focus on ways fire departments can improve communication with warehouse owners/operators about pre-planning. The idea is that more communication should happen not only for existing warehouses but before constructing them. It’s also vital when warehouses are about to experience a change. Similarly, fire departments and warehouse owners/operators need to work out how employees will be head counted during a fire incident.
Another NFPA report, “Warehouse Structure Fires,” chronicles thousands of warehouse fires that happened between 2018 to 2022. In some cases, the 8-page report reflects on fires going back to 1980. It offers 13 charts that cover the:
The report concludes that four components are essential to protecting warehouses from fire: proper sprinkler systems, automatic alarms, pre-fire inspections, and pre-planning.
Finally, NFPA sat down with two fire protection professionals for 42 minutes to talk about “Big Storage, Bigger Questions.” The podcast sunk its teeth into some of the deeper concepts found in the new “Identifying Challenges” report, including:
Again, pre-planning was reiterated. The pros explained that warehouses have many variables, so getting crews into these facilities before any fire happens is important for better outcomes if a fire were to occur.
NFPA released two reports and a podcast related to the challenges of combating warehouse fires and the history of fires in U.S. warehouses. Pre-planning is an overarching theme in all three.
When you think of workers getting stuck by a contaminated needlestick, you think of healthcare. Right? Well, a recent NIOSH fact sheet argues that you also need to picture law enforcement officers. That’s because they’re at risk of these incidents when they search people, property, vehicles, or homes!
Syringes and needles are not the only sharps to worry about, however. Other sharps include lancets, scalpels, and auto-injectors. The thing is, contaminated needlesticks/sharps injuries can infect officers with viruses. These include hepatitis B virus (HBV), hepatitis C virus (HCV), HIV, and others.
Is it reasonably anticipated that your law enforcement officers will have contact with blood or other potentially infectious materials (OPIM) as part of their jobs? If so, they have what OSHA calls “occupational exposure.” That includes reasonably anticipated incidents involving contaminated needlesticks or other contaminated sharps as part of the duties of an officer, the subject of the latest fact sheet.
That's a trick question! The Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSH Act) only covers the private sector. There’s a gap in coverage for the public sector workers like law enforcement officers employed by a municipality or state agency. That means federal OSHA does not regulate the Bloodborne Pathogens (BBP) standard at 29 CFR 1910.1030 for these officers.
However, many states have filled that gap in one of two ways:
If your state has bloodborne pathogens laws and regulations, it’s important to meet them if you have officers (or any workers) with occupational exposure. Note that occupational exposure is not the same thing as an exposure incident. An exposure incident is actual contact with blood or OPIM. Whereas occupational exposure is reasonably anticipated contact as part of the job duties.
Regardless whether your officers are protected by bloodborne pathogens laws and regulations, NIOSH’s fact sheet (DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2025-101) provides tips and best practices specific to the risks to law enforcement. For example, NIOSH suggests that officers complete training on:
Some ways officers can keep safe include, but are not limited to:
When handling sharps, NIOSH recommends:
If an officer suffers an exposure incident involving a contaminated needlestick/sharp, the fact sheet urges the officer to:
Treatment should be sought from a healthcare provider immediately. That provider may offer medication or a vaccine to prevent infection.
The latest fact sheet comes on the heels of an 8-page guidance document from NIOSH — DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2022-154. Learn more about that in our J. J. Keller® Compliance Network article, “NIOSH report points at sharps injuries in law enforcement,” from September 7, 2022.
A recent NIOSH fact sheet argues that law enforcement officers who do searches are at risk of needlestick/sharps incidents! The agency offers tips about how to stay safe and how to handle and dispose of sharps safely. It also explains what to do if there’s an exposure incident.
Over the past few years, federal environmental regulations have targeted a specific group of chemicals: per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). However, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) isn’t the only entity taking action to control PFAS; state agencies are too.
So, how should businesses respond? Stay alert to the PFAS regulations at the state level.
PFAS, called “forever chemicals,” are long-lasting manufactured chemicals that may pose risks to human and environmental health. With thousands of PFAS chemicals, however, controlling their use to reduce the risks is no easy task.
Additionally, PFAS appear in nearly every sector. They’re used in a wide range of products (like food packaging, cleaning products, and textiles) and for commercial and industrial applications.
Multiple states already have PFAS rules on the books. Check out these examples:
Many states also have proposed PFAS rules under consideration.
If your facility uses PFAS, it’s essential to know whether the state has regulations that apply to your operations. Plus, knowing the state’s potential future PFAS rules coming down the pipeline can help you better prepare to comply.
Consider these general tips to support your facility’s efforts to track state PFAS actions:
Staying alert to state PFAS regulations can help your organization maintain compliance.
Key to remember: States across the country continue to consider and implement regulations related to PFAS. Staying alert to state PFAS actions is key for businesses to stay compliant.
Hi everyone! Welcome to the monthly news roundup video, where we’ll review the most impactful environmental health and safety news. There’s a lot going on, so let’s get started!
As happens at the start of most incoming presidential administrations, a freeze has been placed on all regulatory activity at the federal level, giving the new administration time to review agencies’ plans. The Office of Management and Budget, which must approve most rulemaking activities, has sent numerous pending rules back to the agencies for review. In addition, OSHA withdrew its infectious diseases proposed rule and its COVID-19 in healthcare rule prior to the inauguration.
OSHA’s penalties increased on January 15. The maximum penalty amounts for serious and other-than-serious violations increased to $16,550. For willful or repeated violations, the maximum penalty increased to $165,514 per violation.
OSHA updated its directive on injury and illness recordkeeping policies and procedures. While it’s intended for OSHA compliance officers, employers can use the information to help with recordkeeping compliance.
Fewer workers died on the job in 2023, as fatal work injuries decreased 3.7 percent from 2022. Transportation incidents remained the most frequent type of fatal event, accounting for over 36 percent of all occupational fatalities.
California’s Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board voted to adopt a permanent silica standard. If approved, it would extend and strengthen the state’s emergency temporary standard, which was put in place in December 2023.
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health updated its List of Hazardous Drugs in Healthcare Settings. This is a resource for employers and employees in identifying drugs that are hazardous to the health and safety of those who handle them.
Turning to environmental news, EPA released the biannual update of the nonconfidential TSCA inventory. The inventory helps facilities determine their regulatory requirements for the chemicals they use or plan to use.
And finally, EPA added new Management Method Codes to describe how hazardous waste will be managed after temporary storage and transfer. As of January 1st, hazardous waste handlers must use the codes on the Biennial Report Waste Generation and Management forms.
Thanks for tuning in to the monthly news roundup. We’ll see you next month!
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) controls the amount of pollutants that reach the waters of the United States through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program. The NPDES program covers two types of discharges from industrial sources:
Although they’re under the same federal permitting program, stormwater and wastewater discharges are distinct, and their permits are too. Know the basic differences between these types of industrial discharges to ensure your facility complies.
Rain and snow that flow over land or impervious surfaces (like building rooftops and parking lots) and don’t soak into the ground generate stormwater runoff. The runoff can gather pollutants generated by industrial activities at a facility and transport them into nearby waterbodies. Your facility must have a permit to discharge stormwater associated with industrial activities to waters of the United States (40 CFR 122.26).
The NPDES program regulates stormwater discharges from 11 categories of industrial activities, listed at 122.26(b)(14). Examples of covered activities include:
Note, however, that construction sites that disturb 5 or more acres (the tenth category) are permitted individually.
The permit contains stormwater control measures (including “best management practices”) to limit pollutants that enter stormwater runoff. Containment systems, employee training, and infiltration devices are all ways to control runoff.
Most states issue industrial stormwater discharge permits. EPA issues individual permits and the Multi-Sector General Permits (MSGPs) to facilities where the agency is the permitting authority. The MSGP is EPA’s general permit for industrial stormwater discharges.
Many industrial processes use or generate water that contains pollutants, referred to as industrial wastewater. There are two types of wastewater:
Your facility must have a permit to discharge industrial wastewater to surface waters (122.21(a)).
The NPDES program regulates direct wastewater discharges from industrial sources through rules based on the type of facility and activity. The regulations also have industry-specific requirements for:
Effluent limitations are the primary control method for industrial wastewater discharges. EPA establishes Effluent Limitations Guidelines (ELGs) for industrial categories and subcategories. These pollution-reduction performance standards are based on the best available technology that’s economically achievable by facilities in the industry. The ELGs are then incorporated into the permits through effluent limitations.
Additionally, industrial facilities must meet water quality-based effluent limitations when the technology-based standards don’t achieve the required water quality standards. Both industrial stormwater and wastewater discharge permits may include technology- and water quality-based effluent limitations.
As with stormwater permits, most states issue industrial wastewater permits. Facilities in areas where EPA is the permitting authority must obtain either a general or individual NPDES permit.
Because a majority of the states run stormwater and wastewater permitting programs, it’s crucial to check the state regulations. State permits must contain limits as stringent as EPA’s federal permits, and some states may impose stricter limits and/or additional requirements.
EPA’s website lists the states authorized to issue NPDES permits with links to the state agencies that run the NPDES program.
Key to remember: Industrial stormwater and wastewater discharges, and the permits that regulate them, are different.
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.
Quick action using cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and automated external defibrillators(AEDs) can save the lives of the nearly 350,000 cardiac event victims each year outside of a hospital setting. But what does OSHA require for the workplace? What you didn’t know about OSHA regulations regarding AEDs may surprise you.
For every minute a patient is in cardiac arrest, their chances of survival decrease dramatically. When a patient doesn’t have a pulse and isn’t breathing, CPR should be performed until an AED is available. It’s important to note that CPR alone does not restart the heart. CPR is an oxygen circulation procedure. AEDs, on the other hand, are meant for lifesaving intervention.
CPR and early defibrillation are vital components of the emergency medical services (EMS) chain of survival that increases the odds of cardiac patient survival. However, according to the American Heart Association (AHA), even the best CPR can’t provide enough circulation of oxygen to the brain and heart for more than a few minutes. In fact, a patient whose brain is deprived of oxygen for 10 minutes or more seldom recovers.
Just like a reliable vehicle, the circulatory system is the human body’s blood transportation system, and the heart is the engine. Amazingly, the heart generates its own electrical impulses, pumping in a regular, rhythmic manner. As with any engine, the heart requires a certain amount of pressure to function and doesn’t work well when clogged with grease or debris. The most common causes of sudden cardiac arrest include a heart attack, electrocution, and asphyxiation — all of which could occur in the workplace. Common signs and symptoms include:
CPR provides the pressure for the body’s “engine” to oxygen circulating, while an AED provides the electrical impulses to keep the engine pumping.
OSHA 1910.151 requires first aid treatment be provided in the absence of an infirmary, clinic, or hospital in near proximity to the workplace used to treat injured employees. This may include assisting a victim of cardiac arrest using CPR or defibrillation.
OSHA requirements for CPR and defibrillation differ considerably. Standards requiring CPR include:
OSHA recommends basic adult CPR refresher training and retesting every year, and first aid training at least once every three years. CPR training include facilitated discussion along with ’hands-on’ skills training that uses mannequins and partner practice.
Though OSHA recognizes AEDs as important lifesaving technology that plays a role in treating cardiac arrest, the agency doesn’t currently require their use in the workplace. Instead, OSHA wants employers to assess their own requirements for AEDs as part of their first aid response.
AEDs are considered Class III medical devices which means the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has some oversight on their use. Almost all AEDs require the purchaser to obtain a prescription from a physician under FDA regulations. The prescription process is meant as a quality control mechanism to ensure AEDs are properly maintained, that all designated responders are properly trained, and assist employers with establishing an emergency response plan for their workplace AED program.
The AHA requires AED operators to also receive CPR training as an “integral part of providing lifesaving aid to people suffering sudden cardiac arrest.” Though easy to use, each AED is slightly different, so training helps users understand the unique traits and supplies for the individual units at their workplace. Additionally, AED users must be trained to understand the signs of a sudden cardiac arrest, when to activate the EMS system, and how to perform CPR.
AEDs are light, portable, easy to use, and inexpensive. They’re best placed near high-hazard areas such as confined spaces, near electrical energy, or in remote work areas. Response time to reach AEDs should be kept within 3–5-minutes.
Need more information on defibrillators in the workplace? See our ezExplanation on AEDs. |
Many states require or encourage CPR and AED training from nationally recognized organizations. Any AED training should include CPR training. OSHA doesn’t offer first aid or CPR training, nor certify trainers. Training by a nationally recognized organization, such as AHA, the American Red Cross, or National Safety Council is recommended.
While OSHA doesn’t currently require the use of AEDs in the workplace, they do expect employers to assess their own AED requirements as part of their first aid response. AED training is required by most states and should include CPR with a hands-on practical component.
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!
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced on March 12, 2025, that it’s taking 31 actions to advance President Trump’s Day One executive orders and the new “Powering the Great American Comeback” Initiative. The agency’s actions will likely impact environmental regulations across various industries.
Rules under review
EPA will reconsider an assortment of rulemakings, including:
The agency will also take other actions, such as:
About EPA’s new initiative
In February 2025, the agency announced the Powering the Great American Comeback Initiative, which outlines EPA’s priorities. The initiative consists of five pillars:
EPA’s 31 actions will primarily address the first three pillars.
Key to remember: EPA will reconsider major rulemakings that may impact a variety of industries.
The increase in unhealthy air pollution produced by wildfires has intensified the challenges associated with protecting workers from exposure to this health hazard. However, this exposure can be reduced with knowledge, safe work practices, and appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE). It’s important for employers to have a plan in place to protect workers by preventing or minimizing exposure to hazardous air quality.
Wildfire smoke is composed of harmful chemicals and tiny particles of partially burned material less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter, which present a significant health hazard for workers exposed to it. These particles can enter the lungs and even the bloodstream, and are linked to serious or even fatal health effects, such as:
There are currently three states with regulations that specifically address the air quality index (AQI) as it relates to wildfire smoke:
Absent any standard, all employers across the country have an obligation under the General Duty Clause to protect their workers from exposure to unhealthy levels of air pollutants due to wildfire smoke emissions.
Employers should take protective measures to reduce smoke exposure for outdoor workers including:
Air quality is a complex and evolving challenge. The EPA has established an AQI for five major air pollutants regulated by the Clean Air Act. Each of these pollutants has a national air quality standard set by EPA to protect public health:
Employers must create protective measures to reduce employee exposure to these major air pollutants. When AQI values are above 100, as listed on the EPA’s AirNow.gov website, air quality is unhealthy: first for certain sensitive groups of people, then for everyone as AQI values increase.
Employers should have a plan to prevent employee exposure to dangerous air quality levels.
You’ve evaluated your workplace injury risks, estimated emergency medical services (EMS) response times, and have determined you need trained first aid providers according to OSHA. But what’s considered a first aid provider — someone that’s first aid trained, or someone considered a first aid responder?
The OSHA First Aid standard (29 CFR 1910.151) requires trained first aid providers at all workplaces of any size if there is no “infirmary, clinic, or hospital in near proximity to the workplace which is used for the treatment of all injured employees.”
In addition to first aid requirements, several OSHA standards also require training in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) because sudden cardiac arrest from asphyxiation, electrocution, or exertion may occur. These standards include permit-required confined spaces; logging; diving; and electrical power generation, transmission, and distribution.
OSHA requires prompt first aid treatment for injured employees, either by providing for the availability of a trained first aid provider at the worksite, or by ensuring that emergency services are within reasonable proximity of the worksite. Whether the first aid provider is a first responder or is first aid trained is up to you and your risk assessment.
Employees considered first aid trained can provide initial treatment to an injured person until more qualified personnel arrive. First aid trained individuals can triage injuries, control the scene to keep others safe, and call for emergency services when needed. Not all first aid trained employees will feel comfortable performing CPR, using an automated external defibrillator (AED), or splinting a broken bone, however.
First responders, though similar in their role, typically have a higher degree of training than first aid trained individuals. Generally speaking, first responders are those that beat the ambulance to the scene such as firefighters or police officers. These responders can perform rescue services or escalate emergency care as needed, such as performing cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) or controlling severe bleeding.
Who is more vital for handling an emergency at your facility? Both! First aid trained employees have process and facility training that first responders may not. For example, they may be more familiar with chemicals on site or process operations. Therefore, they can navigate facilities to reach injured employees quicker to begin initial treatment. First responders, on the other hand, will have a higher level of training for first aid treatment of more complicated injuries.
OSHA clarifies in a letter of interpretation (LOI) from March 23, 2007, that, “While the first aid standards do not prescribe a number of minutes, OSHA has long interpreted the term ’near proximity’ to mean that emergency care must be available within no more than 3-4 minutes from the workplace. Medical literature establishes that, for serious injuries such as those involving stopped breathing, cardiac arrest, or uncontrolled bleeding, first aid treatment must be provided within the first few minutes to avoid permanent medical impairment or death. Accordingly, in workplaces where serious accidents such as those involving falls, suffocation, electrocution, or amputation are possible, emergency medical services must be available within 3-4 minutes, if there is no employee on the site who is trained to render first aid.”
Regarding work areas, such as offices, where the possibility of such serious work-related injuries is less likely, a longer response time of up to 15 minutes may be reasonable. OSHA gives employers discretion in determining higher risk areas that may need sooner response times.
Employers choosing to rely on assistance from outside emergency responders as an alternative to providing trained responders must ascertain that emergency medical assistance will be promptly available when an injury occurs.
OSHA doesn’t offer first aid or CPR training, nor certify trainers. Training by a nationally recognized organization, such as the American Heart Association or the American Red Cross is recommended. Successful completion of any first aid training program should include instructor observation of acquired hands-on skills and written performance assessments.
OSHA 1910.151 requires employers to ensure prompt first aid treatment for injured employees, either by providing for the availability of a trained first aid provider at the worksite, or by ensuring that emergency services are within reasonable proximity of the worksite. Employers should consider the workplace, hazards, workforce, and location when determining whether to have first aid trained employees or first responders for medical aid.
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.
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!
Most driver trainers wear many hats. Compliance, personnel, and safety and are just some of the tasks that compete for your valuable time. The following are ten ways to help you manage one of your most precious commodities — time.
1. Set priorities. Make a list. Evaluate the importance of each task you perform. Is the task critical to you, your job, your company? Place the most critical tasks at the top of your list. Those tasks that are of less importance or are not time sensitive can be placed closer to the bottom of the list.
2. Delegate. Some of the tasks at the bottom of your list could be delegated to others. Key to successful delegation is making sure processes and procedures are explained and understood by all involved prior to delegating the task.
3. Outsource. Make use of services offered by reputable service providers whenever they can save you time and money.
4. Stay organized. Though easier said than done, being organized can increase productivity. Keep your desk free of unnecessary items. Have a calendar system in place to help keep your projects organized.
5. Stick to your schedule. Assign reasonable time limits to as many tasks as possible. This includes meetings, which should start and end on time.
6. Have a system for reading and responding to email. We live in a world of immediacy, and the temptation to read and respond to all incoming messages as received can derail your best intentions. Having a system that includes setting blocks of time and prioritizing emails assist in managing time.
First, determine which emails are critical or urgent and require your immediate attention. These are the emails that cannot wait for your response and are critical to your operation.
Then, set three blocks of time for reviewing and responding to emails that are not urgent. For example, at the start of the workday, midday, and at the end of the day.
Unless you need to do further investigation or consult with someone before responding, read and then respond. Putting off the simple response causes you to open and read the email twice.
7. Block out private time. Set aside time to work on projects. Close your door, forward calls to voice mail, don’t read or respond to noncritical emails.
8. Fill your “free time.” When there is a break in activity, use that time to take care of your low-priority or non-time-sensitive tasks.
9. Limit “water-cooler” time. Though good for maintaining positive working relationships, time at the “water cooler” or socializing should be limited.
10. Reduce stress. Take a break. A short walk, stretching, or deep breathing can help you relax.
Key to remember: Following these ten steps, can help busy trainers manage their time.
Lately we’re seeing a trend in questions about attendance requirements for hazmat loads on the road. Any marked or placarded motor vehicle containing hazmat that is on a public street, highway, or shoulder must always be attended by the driver. Carriers are trying to understand the limits of the requirement.
Defining “attended”
The regulations for this requirement are 397.5 and 397.7. A vehicle is “attended” when the person in charge is:
Exceptions
The vehicle need not be attended while its driver is performing duties that are incident and necessary to the driver’s duties as the operator of the vehicle.
Applying the rule in the real world
If a driver leaves the vehicle to go to the bathroom or get a soda in the truck stop and does not have the truck in sight, is that a violation?
No. Unless the placarded vehicle contains certain explosives (from divisions 1.1, 1.2, or 1.3), it does not need to be attended as long as it is not on or within 5 feet of a traveled portion of public street or highway.
Our drivers haul placarded amounts of hazmat. If they have to lay down in a motel for 10 hours off, are they allowed to leave the hazmat load unattended?
Yes. A marked or placarded motor vehicle containing hazmat must be attended by the driver when is on a public street, highway, or shoulder. This does not apply if hazmat from divisions 1.1, 1.2, or 1.3 are on the vehicle. Then the employer and the driver must comply with 397.5.
Is the driver allowed to record stops as off-duty time when the vehicle is laden with hazmat and the truck is parked in a truck stop parking lot?
Yes. Drivers may record meal and other routine stops made during a tour of duty as off-duty time. This does not apply when the vehicle is laden with explosives from hazard divisions 1.1, 1.2, or 1.3. When hazmat from divisions 1.1, 1.2, or 1.3 are on the vehicle, the employer and the driver must comply with 397.5.
Do video monitors satisfy the attendance requirements in 397.5?
Maybe. The attendance requirement is meant to ensure that:
The use of video monitors could satisfy the attendance requirements in 397.5 if:
Key to remember: Unsafe handling of hazmat can result in roadside inspection violations and crash reports citing unsafe hazmat handling as a cause or contributing factor. Stay safe, protect your cargo, and avoid citations by understanding the attendance requirements for hazmat loads.
The shortage of qualified drivers has worsened, according to industry experts and carriers. Rehiring good employees is a logical option for carriers to put drivers in seats of unused commercial motor vehicles (CMVs).
If former drivers reapply — whether two months or two years later — you must ensure they still meet your hiring criteria and the federal requirements.
Here are five “watch outs” when bringing back non-CDL and CDL drivers. The first two apply to all drivers, and numbers 3 through 5 apply to CDL-vehicle drivers only.
1. Know what constitutes a rehire.
A leave of absence, layoff, or a furlough is not a rehire if the driver remained on the driver roster and you expected them to return to driving. You will not need to create a new driver qualification (DQ) file, pre-employment drug test, or pre-employment Clearinghouse query.
However, when a driver is taken off a carrier’s roster and brought back to the company, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) considers the driver a new hire. If there is any break in employment, a new DQ file is needed.
For a rehire DQ file, you can use copies of the following documents from the old DQ file under certain conditions:
You must create all other DQ file documents per 391.51 and obtain SPH documents from employers since the driver left your company as required by 391.23.
2. Understand the facts about the driver’s prior departure.
To avoid rehiring a problem employee, ensure you have details about why the driver left the company. If there are not enough details, contact the prior driver supervisor to confirm the facts about the break in employment.
A “No rehire” designation with details in the driver’s record can help avoid a bad rehire. A solid performer may also be turned away if there was a hasty “No rehire” flag in the driver’s record. For example, a personality conflict with one supervisor may not be a good reason to list a driver as no-rehire. Get the facts and decide.
3. Run a full query when rehiring CDL-vehicle drivers, with no exceptions.
Conduct a pre-employment full query in the Clearinghouse if there was any break in employment. There is no exception. Make sure the driver is not prohibited from driving due to a reported drug and alcohol testing violation while at another job.
4. Consider the time needed to comply with the pre-employment testing exception.
A CDL-vehicle driver must have a pre-employment drug test unless you meet the exception requirements in 382.301(b) and (c). Be aware that the exception could be more work and take longer than sending the driver for the test and getting the result.
Pre-employment drug testing exception overview:
If less than 30 days have elapsed since participating in an FMCSA drug and alcohol testing program, you need documentation from yours and any other DOT program that show:
Documentation required in 382.301(c)(1) from the other carriers must be in hand before dispatching the driver.
5. Don’t forget these CDL-driver compliance items.
Two rehire checklist items that are easy to overlook during the hiring process:
Keys to remember:
When rehiring drivers you need to confirm the potential rehire’s prior performance and reason for leaving, along with meeting all other qualification requirements. Don’t skip any steps in the hiring process just to get the driver on the road sooner.
One question that comes up when reviewing roadside inspection reports is, “What is the meaning of the letters that follow a violation of 392.2 on a roadside inspection report?”
A violation of 392.2 is a violation of a local or state law, regulation, or ordinance. These must be obeyed due to 392.2, which reads, “Every commercial motor vehicle must be operated in accordance with the laws, ordinances, and regulations of the jurisdiction in which it is being operated.”
The confusion is that there are no paragraphs in 392.2, so there technically should be no letters following that section. However, to inform the driver, carrier, and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) what particular state or local law or regulation was involved, FMCSA has developed a system of suffix codes. The letters following “392.2” – the “suffix” — show which state or local law or regulation was involved.
When one of these codes is used, the officer should include a description of the specific violation in the “violation details” area on the actual inspection report. FYI: Summary roadside inspection reports (such as the ones visible in CSA’s SMS) do not show these details.
For more information, see our ezExplanation on Roadside Inspections. |
Not all of these state and local law or regulation violations are used by the FMCSA for scoring purposes. The Compliance, Safety, Accountability (CSA) Safety Measurement System (SMS) does not use the 392.2 violations that cannot be tied to crash causation. Here are a couple of examples: 392.2UCR Failure to pay UCR fee and 392.2W Size and weight are not used.
Below are the top 10392.2violations written during 2021. All of these violations are safety-related, and therefore used in the CSA SMS for scoring. The BASIC within the SMS the violation is scored in is shown following the violation description.
In general, FMCSA does not write traffic codes. They rely on local and state agencies to do that. When state or local traffic codes are violated, it appears on a roadside inspection report as a violation of 392.2, with a suffix indicating which traffic code was involved.
A question we’ve been seeing a lot lately has to do with the split specimen process and the motor carrier’s responsibilities if one of their drivers requests that a split specimen be tested.
Drivers who are informed that they’ve failed a DOT drug test have the right to request that the secondary specimen be tested if they believe that the test result is inaccurate. Due process is an important aspect of our legal system, but waiting for a split specimen to be tested can cause some confusion for motor carriers. Here are some common questions we hear about the split specimen process.
When a driver gives a urine sample for the purposes of DOT drug testing, the collector will split the specimen into two separate containers. The container labeled as the primary specimen will be tested by the lab; the container labeled as the secondary specimen is only tested if the driver requests that it be tested after the primary specimen is verified as positive, adulterated, or substituted.
When the medical review officer (MRO) contacts the driver about a verified positive, adulterated, or substituted test, the MRO will inform the driver of the driver’s right to have the split specimen tested. The driver then has 72 hours from the time of notification to request via the MRO that the split specimen be tested.
Because the driver’s primary specimen was verified positive, adulterated, or substituted, the motor carrier should have already pulled the driver from performing safety-sensitive functions. The driver cannot resume driving while the split specimen is being tested. Whether the driver is reassigned to a non-driving position or is suspended depends on the motor carrier’s drug and alcohol policy.
The regulations specify that the carrier cannot delay lab testing in order to collect payment from the driver. The secondary specimen should be submitted for testing as soon as the driver requests it, and motor carrier will be billed through the carrier’s lab account. In some cases, the motor carrier can seek reimbursement from the driver for full or partial costs of the split-specimen test.
The MRO will report the positive, adulterated, or substituted drug test result to the Drug and Alcohol Clearinghouse within two business days of verifying the result for the primary specimen. Once the MRO receives the lab results for the secondary sample, one of three things happens:
Key to remember: Dividing a urine specimen into two samples allows for a driver to request that the secondary sample be tested if the first specimen indicates drug use. This is an important part of the driver’s right to due process.
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.
If you’ve been under pressure or have been experiencing tension, make it a priority to try these stress relief strategies that allow your mind to rest and reset:
Key to remember: There are many ways to de-stress. Choose the ones that appeal to you and try them during May to strengthen your mental health.
The U.S. Bureau of Labor statistics reported in July 2024 that there are 8.2 million job openings in the U.S., but only 7.2 million unemployed workers.
With that in mind, employers might choose to hang onto employees even if they’re under performing. But what about when complaints are rolling in from different angles? Take, for example, a lackluster supervisor who’s annoying employees and disappointing customers.
An employer could be hesitant to let the supervisor go, especially if there’s no documentation backing up claims of misconduct. The employer must weigh their options to decide if putting the supervisor on a performance improvement plan (PIP) or moving right to termination is the ideal choice.
At-will employment
For starters, in most states employers may terminate an employee at-will, meaning they can fire employees for pretty much any reason as long as it doesn’t discriminate against someone in a protected class based on sex, age, race, religion, etc. Employers also cannot terminate in retaliation for an employee making a claim of harassment, discrimination, or safety concerns.
Aside from these limits, employers can terminate employees for good cause, bad cause, or no cause at all.
PIP or terminate
Deciding whether to put an employee on a PIP or terminate must be decided on a case-by-case basis.
A PIP is usually for job performance issues (hence, performance improvement plan). This could mean anything from not making enough sales to being inept at the job’s essential functions. If job performance doesn’t improve under the PIP, termination may be the end result depending on company policies and practices.
Even if an employee has job performance issues, the employer can terminate without going through the PIP process first, unless the usual process is to implement a PIP with employees who have had similar problems. In that case, not doing a PIP could be seen as discrimination against an employee, especially if the person falls into a protected class.
Workplace misconduct, however, is another situation altogether. This could be anything from a one-off poor joke to pervasive harassment. Snapping at customers or coworkers (or worse), for example, is a conduct issue. An employer could issue a warning or move right to termination if the behavior is clearly illegal or a serious threat to workplace safety.
Read more: ezExplanation on discharging employees |
Termination tips
If an employer decides to terminate, they should treat the employee as respectfully as possible during the termination process. Also, an employer should carefully and clearly communicate the job-related reasons for the termination to avoid any hint of discrimination. Lastly, an employer should document the reasons and reiterate the steps taken leading up to the termination and keep those records handy in case the employee files a wrongful termination lawsuit.
Key to remember: Employers sometimes struggle when making termination decisions. Having a process in place and documenting steps along the way can help if a case lands in court.
One of the most common questions involving the federal Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) that we see is: “Can ________ fill out the medical certification?”
This question stumps a lot of HR people and can be a little confusing.
It might be easier to start with who CAN’T fill out an FMLA certification. That includes your coworker, best friend, neighbor, or pet.
Jokes aside, often (but not always) a doctor fills out the FMLA certification, and since March 30 is “Doctors’ Day,” this is a great time to discuss this topic.
Employers aren’t required to use certifications, but if they do, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has five different certification forms to use for various FMLA leave situations.
The forms are as follows:
Let’s focus on the first two, as these are the most common ones HR administrators use.
The FMLA regulations describe the person who has the authority to fill out a certification as a “health care provider.” The good news is, the regulations include a lengthy list of medical professionals who fit this role.
Under the FMLA, a health care provider includes:
To be qualified to fill out FMLA forms, medical professionals must be authorized to practice in the state and perform within the scope of their practice. This means that the provider must be authorized to diagnose and treat physical or mental health conditions.
If an employee or an employee's family member is visiting another country, or a family member resides in another country, and a serious health condition develops, the employer must accept a medical certification from a health care provider who practices in that country. This includes second and third opinions.
If a medical certification from a foreign health care provider is not in English, the employee may be required to provide a written translation of the certification.
Key to remember: The FMLA regulations spell out which medical professionals can fill out certification forms.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled in late March that a produce company did not violate federal labor law by telling a pro-union truck driver not to cover up a surveillance camera in the cab of his truck.
The unanimous three-judge panel said that because the company had a policy requiring drivers to keep the cameras on "at all times," it did not infringe on the driver's rights when the driver, who parked for a lunch break and covered the truck’s inward facing camera, received a text from a supervisor saying, “you can’t cover the camera it’s against company rules.”
The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) had claimed that the employer violated the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) with that text.
"The Board’s explanation is nonsense," Circuit Judge A. Raymond Randolph wrote. "There is nothing ambiguous about 'at all times.'"
The NLRB had said that the supervisor’s text illegally created the impression that the driver was being watched because of the driver’s support for a union organizing campaign and involvement in another NLRB case against the company.
An NLRB law makes it illegal for an employer to create an “impression of surveillance” that discourages employees from discussing or engaging in union activities.
But the D.C. Circuit said the driver was aware of the company's constant surveillance of truck cabs for safety reasons and that it was unlikely he would engage in organizing while on the job.
Strong policies are a best practice
The judges in this case used the employer’s policies to determine that it had not violated the NLRA. What employers should take away from this case, therefore, is that if they use video cameras to observe employees — whether employees are working in the office, remotely from home, or in a vehicle — they should develop and communicate clear polices regarding the expectation of privacy on the job.
In addition, employers should train supervisors on the enforcement of such policies. This is especially important when it comes to employee rights to organize.
In this case, for example, stronger actions by the supervisor directed at a driver who was involved in organizing efforts, could have created an impression of surveillance coercing the employee in the exercise of his rights. Manager training may be useful in avoiding and/or defending against such claims, as well as other claims relating to discrimination, invasion of privacy, harassment, etc.
Similar cases on the horizon?
Other cases like this might be forthcoming, since in October 2022, the NLRB's general counsel issued a memo stating concern about employers increasingly using monitoring systems like cameras. The memo noted plans to “urge the Board, to the greatest extent possible, to apply the Act to protect employees from intrusive or abusive electronic monitoring and automated management practices that would have a tendency to interfere with Section 7 rights.” In response to the memo, the NLRB adopted the position that an employer's use of technology to monitor productivity can violate the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), whether or not the technology was being used specifically to monitor union activity.
Key to remember: A federal appeals court ruled that a supervisor’s reminder to an employee that covering a driver-facing dash cam was against company policy was not a violation of the NLRA. This case should serve as a reminder to employers that clear communication, strong policies, and supervisor training must accompany any employee surveillance.
Stern Produce Company, Inc. v. NLRB, No. 23-1100 (D.C. Cir. 2024)
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.
Did you know that OSHA’s standard on permit-required confined spaces (PRCS) says entry occurs as soon as any part of the entrant’s body breaks the plane of the opening into the permit space?
Many workers and employers mistakenly think that placing part of the body or hands into a confined space isn’t entry. Knowing the difference between when entry occurs and not will help employers determine if a permit is required.
As clarified in an OSHA Letter of Interpretation (LOI) dated October 18, 1995, “When any part of the body of an entrant breaks the plane of the opening of a PRCS large enough to allow full entry, entry is considered to have occurred and a permit is required, regardless of whether there is an intent to fully enter the space.”
This definition of “entry” might seem to be too strict. Still, OSHA’s letter clarifies that there are situations where a partial entry would be hazardous: “Examples of situations where entry by only part of the body into a PRCS can expose an entrant to the possibility of injury or illness are as follows:
As another example, if the space contains a flammable or oxygen-enriched atmosphere, and if the activities during a partial entry could produce a spark or other ignition source, then a fire in the space could flash out of the opening and cause serious injuries to the employee.
This doesn’t necessarily mean you’d be fined if a permit wasn’t followed when someone reached a tank. OSHA’s guidance continues: “However, if entry by only part of the body does not expose the entrant to the possibility of injury or illness, then the violation may be considered a ‘de minimis’ violation.”
A de minimis violation is one in which a standard is violated, but the violation has no direct or immediate relationship to employee safety or health. These violations are documented but no citations are issued.
OSHA says examples of situations where entry by only part of the body into a PRCS would not expose an entrant to the possibility of injury or illness are as follows:
Also, consider a situation such as a worker reaching through a small grate to take a sample from a permitted space. The LOI further states, “If a part of the body were placed in an opening through which the worker could not pass into the permit-required confined space, no PRCS entry will have occurred.”
Keep in mind, however, that the employee would still need protection from any hazards involved in the task, but a permit would not be needed.
When any part of the body of an entrant breaks the plane of the opening of a PRCS large enough to allow full entry, entry is considered to have occurred, and a permit is required.
They show up eager to work, but are they walking into danger? As businesses ramp up for the busy summer season, seasonal and temporary workers become essential to keeping operations running smoothly. Beneath the surface of the energy and fast onboarding lies serious risk. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, seasonal and temporary workers are about three times more likely to suffer an occupational injury or fatality compared to permanent employees.
So, why are seasonal and temporary workers more vulnerable? These workers face unique safety challenges that often put them at greater risk than their permanent counterparts. According to a report from the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 40% of temporary workers suffer an injury within their first month on the job – a clear sign that the first days are the most dangerous. These workers are often unfamiliar with the worksite layout, equipment, and specific safety protocols. They may not receive the same training as full-time employees, especially when rushing onboarding to meet seasonal demand. Language barriers, inconsistent supervision, and pressure to “get up to speed” can also contribute to unsafe conditions. Without robust safety communication and support, seasonal employees must navigate challenges independently, which can jeopardize their well-being.
Even if seasonal workers are only with your company for a few weeks or months, they deserve the same protection and support as full-time employees. A robust approach to safety ensures lower injury rates, higher morale, increased productivity, and a reputation as a safe and responsible employer.
Keys to remember: Temporary does not mean disposable. Every worker is part of a team, and their safety is your responsibility.
All employees involved in lockout/tagout require training. The authorized employees (those doing the maintenance work) have the most responsibility and require the most training. However, affected employees (those who operate machines being serviced) also need some training. In addition, some other employees (those working in an area where lockout or tagout is used) may require training so they don’t inadvertently interfere with the lockout/tagout process.
Retraining is required when there’s a change in the job, equipment, or process. Those changes could impact all categories of employees (authorized, affected, and other).
Retraining is also required when a periodic inspection reveals a problem. The periodic inspection is an annual review of the energy control procedure to ensure that it is adequate and is actually being followed.
Mechanics may work on dozens of machines, and each machine may have unique lockout/tagout procedures. But do the mechanics actually read and follow the procedures for each machine? Or do they just “know what to do” based on experience? Could other maintenance staff follow the procedures as written?
Make sure that authorized employees actually follow the procedures. If they are unsure about any part of a procedure, or if they skip a step that doesn’t make sense, then the procedure should be updated.
If additional training is needed, it may be best to conduct the training at the machine and ask the mechanics to indicate where the procedure is unclear. If the questions are more than the training group can handle, you may need to call in an expert (electrician, engineer, etc.).
As necessary, revise the procedure until it’s understandable. You want the procedures to be accurate and easy to use. If veteran mechanics think the procedure is hard to follow (or if they have ideas on how to improve the written steps), you want to correct those issues before contractors or new employees need to rely on the procedure.
Complete and accurate procedures not only keep your company in compliance, but help keep your employees safe.
Slips, trips, and falls were the leading cause of death in the construction industry in 2023, accounting for 421 fatalities, nearly 40 percent of all fatalities in the industry. OSHA’s National Safety Stand-Down to Prevent Falls in Construction event, scheduled for May 5-9, raises awareness of fall hazards to help prevent fall injuries and fatalities.
A safety stand-down is a voluntary event that encourages employers to talk to employees about safety and participate in activities such as:
This nationwide event is part of the National Campaign to Prevent Falls in Construction organized by OSHA, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), the National Safety Council (NSC), and the Center for Construction Research and Training (CPWR). Stand-down resources, including fact sheets, publications, and videos about construction risks and fall protection, can be found at osha.gov.
Ever since OSHA published its Trade Release on December 11, 2023, people have been scratching their heads about the “new” PPE requirement.
But here’s the thing. There isn’t a new requirement for “helmets” instead of hard hats.
So where’s the confusion? And what is actually required?
OSHA released a Safety and Health Bulletin (SHIB 11-22-2023) on November 22, 2023, detailing the key differences and benefits of using modern safety helmets over traditional hard hats.
And just a few weeks later, in the December 11, 2023 Trade Release, the Agency announced it would now require its inspectors to wear Type II head protection, which is also commonly referred to as safety helmets.
The November 22, 2023 SHIB discussed two main benefits of choosing modern safety helmets over traditional hard hats -- the construction of materials and the use of chinstraps.
Construction of Materials: | The SHIB first explained that one of the benefits of safety helmets lies in their construction materials. While hard hats are made from hard plastics, safety helmets incorporate a combination of materials, including lightweight composites, fiberglass, and advanced thermoplastics. Such materials can help enhance the impact resistance of the helmets but also include the added benefit of reducing the overall weight of the helmet. This reduces neck strain and improves comfort during extended use. |
Use of Chinstraps: | The SHIB also discussed the potential benefits of chinstraps used in conjunction with Type II safety helmets. The general idea here is that chinstraps can be helpful in maintaining the position of the safety helmet and protecting the worker’s head in the event of a slip, trip, or fall. According to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, head injuries accounted for nearly 6% of non-fatal occupational injuries involving days away from work. About 20% of those were caused by slips, trips, and falls. |
And while OSHA has recognized the benefits of Type II safety helmets, and is actively taking steps to protect its own employees, it’s important to understand that there is not a new requirement for employers to make the switch to safety helmets.
That being said, a growing number of employers have recognized the benefits of added head protection and are choosing to use Type II helmets for their workers. In addition, some clients are starting to contractually require their construction contractors to make the switch as well.
Hard hats will have a Type I or Type II rating on the manufacturer’s sticker. These markings are based on ANSI Z89.1’s impact ratings.
Type I hard hats protect from objects or impacts from the top center area of the hard hat and are often used in work areas with no lateral head impact hazards.
Type II hard hats, on the other hand, offers protection from both top and lateral impacts and objects and is often found on construction job sites or complex general industry settings where workers face multiple head contact exposures.
Hard hats are classified based on their level of voltage protection. See the chart below.
Class G – (General) low voltage protection. Class E – (Electrical) high voltage protection. Class C – (Conductive) no voltage protection. |
Employers should conduct a job hazard analysis and/or a PPE assessment to determine which style hard hat is best for their workers. In general, OSHA recommends the use of Type II safety helmets at the following locations:
1. Construction Sites: For construction sites, especially those with high risks of falling objects and debris, impacts from equipment, or slips, trips, and falls, safety helmets have enhanced impact resistance and additional features that offer superior protection compared to the components and construction of traditional hard hats.
2. Oil and Gas Industry: In these sectors where workers face multiple hazards, including potential exposure to chemicals and severe impacts, safety helmets with additional features can provide comprehensive protection.
3. Working from Heights: For tasks or jobs that involve working from heights, safety helmets offer protection of the entire head and include features that prevent the safety helmet from falling off.
4. Electrical Work: For tasks involving electrical work or proximity to electrical hazards, safety helmets with non-conductive materials (Class G and Class E) provide protection to prevent electrical shocks. However, some traditional hard hats also offer electrical protection.
5. High-Temperature Environments: In high temperatures or where there is exposure to molten materials, safety helmets with advanced heat-resistant properties can provide additional protection to workers.
Key to remember: While there isn’t a new requirement for safety helmets, employers should review their workplace hazards to determine which style of hard hat will best protect their employees.
One motor vehicle parts manufacturer could wind up with the highest OSHA penalty in the last 10 years. That figure could also be within the top 20 stiffest penalties in the agency’s history! The recent initial mega-penalty amount is in part thanks to a longstanding OSHA “instance-by-instance” citation policy.
That policy multiplies penalties by the number of “instances” of the alleged violation. An instance may be per machine, employee, location, entry, etc. Let’s say the maximum penalty for one violation is $165,514. That can quickly climb to $1,655,140 if the violation impacts 10 employees, for example. Read more about the policy in our article, “OSHA carves out time for THREE more inspection memos.”
Last July, two Nevada OSHA follow-up inspections on the same day found 70 alleged violations at the parts manufacturing site. All but six of them were considered serious, repeat, or willful violations. A health inspection amounted to $4,137,482 in initial penalties. The safety inspection came in at $176,593. Alleged per-instance violations included:
The “extra” instances amounted to over $3.6 million in penalties. Remaining “one-off” citations and penalties went to various standards. Those included injury and illness recordkeeping and reporting, general PPE, machine guarding, and electrical standards.
The manufacturer has contested all the citations in the two cases. We won’t know the final penalty amounts until the cases are settled or closed.
The auto parts maker is not alone. Employers cited $40,000 or more in a single inspection since January 1, 2015, are posted on OSHA’s website. After freezing the data for a few months, the agency just updated the list. Now that list of high-penalty inspections has surpassed the 15,000 mark.
We calculate there were about 125 high-penalty cases per month on average through April 2025. That’s a span of 10 years and four months. The average is about 1,500 high-penalty cases per year.
OSHA’s total penalty amounts can and have pushed into the tens of millions of dollars for a single inspection. However, the highest initial penalty figures for a single inspection since 2015 include:
The majority (78 percent) of inspections on the list are under $100,000 in initial penalties. To learn more, search OSHA’s “Enforcement Cases with Initial Penalties of $40,000 or Above” tool by:
“Initial penalty” amounts are not necessarily the final or current penalty amounts. Not all cases are final. Some cases might have even ended up with a final total penalty under $40,000. Also, some employers are listed in the tool more than once. It just depends on how many penalty cases at or over $40,000 they had.
A disclaimer on the tool explains that it is updated weekly. There’s also a short posting delay to ensure the parties are notified.
A recent Nevada OSHA case illustrates OSHA’s use of its instance-by-instance citation policy. The initial total penalty amount in the case is the highest we’ve seen in 10 years. OSHA tracks all cases with initial penalty amounts over $40,000 and posts them on its website.