flexiblefullpage
billboard
interstitial1
catfish1
Currently Reading

Controversy rages over cost, benefits of proposed OSHA silica dust rule

Controversy rages over cost, benefits of proposed OSHA silica dust rule

Opponents say new regulations would cost too much and that agency should focus on enforcement of existing rules


By BD+C Staff | May 3, 2014

OSHA’s proposal to beef up regulations on workers’ exposure to silica dust is generating a lot of controversy. The agency says current rules are outdated, difficult to understand, and inconsistent across industries.

Introduced in August 2013, the proposal would lower allowable levels of crystalline silica in all workplaces, standardize how the dust is calculated, and require medical monitoring for employees exposed to high levels.

OSHA estimates that 688 deaths and 1,585 silica-related illnesses would be prevented every year under the new rules. Opponents charge that the stricter regulations cost too much for the potential benefits. Joseph Brennan, a Cleveland attorney quoted in Crain’s Cleveland Business, said that since 1968, the rate of lung diseases related to silica has dropped by 90%. He indicated that stronger enforcement of existing rules might be a better way for OSHA to handle the issue.

Fred Hubbard Sr., secretary treasurer for the Ohio-Kentucky Administrative District Council of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers, said OSHA seems to concentrate enforcement on only the biggest contractors. If a measure is going to impose a lot of costs onto work sites, it should be enforced across the board, he said. The union does support OSHA’s proposed stricter regulations, though.

OSHA has received about 2,000 comments on the proposal. The agency wrapped up public hearings on April 4. No timeline has been released, but OSHA’s final decision could be at least two years away.

(http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20140413/SUB1/304139997/osha-proposal-is-causing-a-bit-of-a-dustup)

Related Stories

Codes and Standards | Jan 28, 2021

Natl. Fire Protection Assn. releases new energy storage system fact sheet

Comes as Biden Administration prepares ambitious clean energy agenda.

Codes and Standards | Jan 27, 2021

AECOM sues insurance carrier for payment of COVID-19 property damage claims

Claims ‘all-risk policies’ should have included millions of dollars of losses due to virus.

Codes and Standards | Jan 26, 2021

Updated guide to repair and rehabilitate existing concrete structures published

Document assesses how to adhere to code requirements.

Codes and Standards | Jan 25, 2021

New guide for skylight selection, daylighting design released

Free Fenestration and Glazing Industry Alliance document now available.

Codes and Standards | Jan 20, 2021

Steel industry, labor urge Biden to retain steel tariffs

‘Essential to ensuring the viability of the domestic steel industry.’

Codes and Standards | Jan 19, 2021

2021 Solar Investment Tax Credit will remain at 26%

Incentive was scheduled to be reduced to 22%.

Codes and Standards | Jan 19, 2021

Thomas Jefferson University launches the Institute for Smart and Healthy Cities

Will address climate change, social equity, rapid urbanization, and health.

Codes and Standards | Jan 14, 2021

Petition urges FEMA to update flood maps, set tougher standards for floodplain construction

Environmental and planning groups note soaring claims, flood insurance debt.

Codes and Standards | Jan 13, 2021

Proposed change to IECC process irks efficiency advocates

New procedure would diminish influence of local code officials.

boombox1
boombox2
native1

More In Category




halfpage1

Most Popular Content

  1. 2021 Giants 400 Report
  2. Top 150 Architecture Firms for 2019
  3. 13 projects that represent the future of affordable housing
  4. Sagrada Familia completion date pushed back due to coronavirus
  5. Top 160 Architecture Firms 2021