flexiblefullpage
billboard
interstitial1
catfish1
Currently Reading

OSHA’s estimated cost of silica rule said to underestimate impact by $4.5 billion annually

Codes and Standards

OSHA’s estimated cost of silica rule said to underestimate impact by $4.5 billion annually

The coalition says that OSHA’s flawed cost estimates point to flaws in the rule, and has urged the federal agency to reconsider its approach. 


By Peter Fabris, Contributing Editor | April 22, 2015
OSHA’s estimated cost of silica rule said to underestimate impact by $4.5 billion annually

The Construction Industry Safety Coalition will cost the industry $5 billion per year. Image: Morgue File/PenMac

A new report by the Construction Industry Safety Coalition (CISC) found that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) proposed silica standards for U.S. construction industry will cost the industry $5 billion per year. That’s about $4.5 billion per year more than OSHA’s estimate.

The coalition says that OSHA’s flawed cost estimates point to flaws in the rule, and has urged the federal agency to reconsider its approach. The proposed rule aims to greatly reduce the permissible exposure limit (PEL) of crystalline silica for the construction industry.

The agency pegged the cost to the construction industry at about $511 million a year. “The OSHA analysis included major errors and omissions that account for the large discrepancies with the CISC report,” according to a statement from the industry group.

The CISC report estimates that about 80% of the cost ($3.9 billion/year) will be direct compliance expenditures by the industry such as additional equipment, labor and record-keeping costs.

The remaining 20% will come from increased prices that the industry will have to pay for construction materials and building products such as concrete block, glass, and roofing shingles. OSHA’s estimates failed to take into account these additional costs, CISC says. The added cost would be passed down to customers, the industry group says.

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