Seyfarth Synopsis: Cal/OSHA has commenced formal rulemaking to implement Senate Bill 606’s Egregious and Enterprise-wide violation classifications. Although SB 606 has been in effect for several years, the proposed regulations provide important details regarding when these classifications may apply and, critically, how penalties would be calculated. Under the proposal, an Egregious violation could result in a separate citation and penalty for each employee exposed, while an Enterprise-wide violation could result in penalties multiplied across covered worksites. Cal/OSHA estimates that approximately 14 businesses per year may receive citations fitting the proposed classifications, but the potential consequences for an individual employer, particularly one with numerous California locations, could be substantial. Written comments are due November 30, 2026, and a public hearing is scheduled for December 3, 2026.
California employers now have their clearest picture yet of how Cal/OSHA intends to implement two significant enforcement tools created by SB 606: Egregious and Enterprise-wide violations.
As we previously wrote when Governor Newsom signed SB 606 in 2021, the legislation created the Egregious and Enterprise-wide violation classifications and significantly expanded Cal/OSHA’s enforcement authority. In 2024, we reported that Cal/OSHA had begun the rulemaking process needed to incorporate those classifications into California’s existing citation and penalty framework.
Now, that process has moved forward. Cal/OSHA has released proposed regulatory language that provides important details about how it intends to determine when a violation is Egregious or Enterprise-wide and how it would calculate the resulting penalties.
When Could a Violation Be Egregious?
Under proposed Section 334, an Egregious violation must first qualify as Willful. A Willful violation generally involves an employer intentionally and knowingly violating a safety requirement, or being aware that a hazardous condition exists and making no reasonable effort to eliminate it.
A Willful violation could then be classified as Egregious if additional specified circumstances are present. Under the proposed rule, those circumstances include:
one or more final Repeat, Willful, or Egregious violations within the preceding five years;
- five or more final Serious violations within the preceding five years;
- ten or more final General or Regulatory violations within the preceding five years;
- intentional disregard of health and safety responsibilities;
- conduct demonstrating clear bad faith in carrying out occupational safety and health responsibilities; or
- the underlying Willful violation or prior violations causing a worker fatality, five or more occupational injuries or illnesses, or a catastrophe (three or more employees hospitalized); or an employer experience modifier above 125 percent.
In practical terms, this means an employer’s broader enforcement history and safety practices could become important in determining whether a Willful violation is elevated to Egregious.
Why Does the Egregious Classification Matter?
The biggest difference is how penalties could multiply.
For an Egregious violation, proposed Section 336 would require Cal/OSHA to issue a separate citation and separate proposed penalty for each employee exposed. The proposed regulation gives a simple example: if ten employees were exposed to an Egregious violation, Cal/OSHA would issue ten separate citations and assess ten separate penalties. This means a violation that otherwise would result in a $10,000 penalty could result in $100,000 in proposed penalties if ten employees were exposed and the Egregious classification applied.
What Is an Enterprise-Wide Violation?
Enterprise-wide violations present a particularly significant risk for employers operating multiple California locations. Under proposed Section 334, a rebuttable presumption of an Enterprise-wide violation could arise where an employer has employees at multiple worksites in California and either:
- a written policy or procedure applicable to more than one worksite violates an applicable safety or health requirement; or
- Cal/OSHA has evidence of a pattern or practice of the same violation or violations involving more than one worksite.
Both paths are important.
The first means an alleged issue in a company-wide written safety program or procedure could potentially extend beyond the location where Cal/OSHA initially identifies the problem.
The second creates a different risk. During an inspection, Cal/OSHA may obtain information suggesting that the same compliance issue exists at other worksites, for example through records or other evidence showing similar violations at more than one location. If that evidence establishes what Cal/OSHA believes to be a pattern or practice of the same violation or violations across multiple worksites, it could support the presumption of an Enterprise-wide violation.
The practical impact is that an employer could face an Enterprise-wide citation covering multiple worksites even though Cal/OSHA did not conduct a separate inspection at every covered location. And because the proposed penalty for an Enterprise-wide violation would be multiplied by the number of worksites covered by the citation, evidence that the same problem exists elsewhere can materially increase the scope and potential penalty exposure of the inspection.
Written Safety Programs Deserve Particular Attention
The written-program pathway is particularly significant for employers that use standardized safety programs across multiple California facilities.
Employers commonly use standardized Injury and Illness Prevention Programs (IIPPs), Workplace Violence Prevention Plans (WVPPs), and Heat Illness Prevention Plans (HIPPs) across California worksites. Cal/OSHA used citations involving these programs as proxies in estimating the impact of Enterprise-wide citations. Standardization promotes consistency, but it can also magnify risk: a deficiency in a written program used across multiple worksites could support an Enterprise-wide citation. Employers should therefore consider reviewing California safety programs that have been rolled out across multiple locations.
Cal/OSHA Estimates Limited Use, But Potentially Significant Consequences
How often will this actually happen?
In the economic analysis accompanying the proposal, Cal/OSHA estimates that approximately 14 businesses per year may receive citations fitting the proposed Egregious or Enterprise-wide classifications. Cal/OSHA also estimates approximately $1.18 million in additional annual penalties statewide, with most of the modeled increase attributable to Egregious violations.
Those estimates suggest that the classifications may not arise in the typical Cal/OSHA inspection. But employers should not mistake relatively infrequent use for insignificant risk. When the classifications do apply, the proposed rules allow penalties to multiply based on employees for Egregious violations and worksites for Enterprise-wide violations. For a large employer, those multipliers can make an individual enforcement matter significantly more consequential.
What Should California Employers Do Now?
The proposed regulations are not final, and the language may change through the rulemaking process. But employers do not need to wait for a final rule to consider the practical implications.
Multi-site employers in particular should consider reviewing written safety programs and procedures that apply across California operations, including IIPPs, Workplace Violence Prevention Plans, Heat Illness Prevention Plans, and other standardized policies. A key question is whether a problem identified in a written program at one site is also present in the version used elsewhere.
Employers should also consider how they identify and respond to recurring safety issues. Where similar findings arise at different California locations, addressing each matter in isolation may miss a broader issue that could become relevant to an Enterprise-wide analysis.
Finally, the proposed Egregious criteria make citation history increasingly important. Employers should understand their California enforcement history and consider whether prior final violations may become relevant if Cal/OSHA later alleges a Willful violation. This also underscores the importance of carefully evaluating citations when they are issued, and appealing and defending citations where defenses exist.
What Happens Next?
Written comments on the proposed regulations are due November 30, 2026. Cal/OSHA will hold a public hearing on December 3, 2026, from 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., with both in-person and remote participation available. The proposed language may be modified as the rulemaking proceeds.
Recent Comments