Enforcement of the Occupational Safety & Health Administration’s (OSHA) final rule to protect workers in construction from exposure to respirable crystalline silica goes into effect in September.
The rule was slated to come online earlier in the summer, but OSHA delayed its enforcement to conduct additional outreach and provide educational materials and guidance for employers.
Still, despite the delay, a number of aggregate producers and C&D recyclers – many of whom rely on portable plants that inherently produce dust – have lingering questions about the rule’s enforcement, its applicability to their businesses and how they can be in compliance with the new rule.
Mike Lewis, sales manager at BossTek, is among those who’s been on the receiving end of several silica-related questions this summer.
“There’s been a huge uptick in calls related to the silica standard,” says Lewis, whose company provides industrial dust solutions. “I feel like 50 percent of the calls lately all reference that silica rule.”
Compliance with OSHA’s rule means providing a work environment that reduces the permissible exposure limit (PEL) of crystalline silica to 50 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3) averaged over an eight-hour shift, with an action level of 25 µg/m3. A number of industries have argued over the last year and a half that the previous limit (100 µg/m3) was protective when reliably enforced and complied with, adding that silica-related disease has dropped dramatically over the course of four decades since a PEL was put in place.
Plus, it’s not like producers and recyclers, along with the vendors who support them, haven’t been proactive in this area. A number of manufacturers have been building dust suppression systems into equipment as standard, and the use of personal protection gear among workers is undoubtedly up.
But non-compliance with OSHA’s new standard comes with a price. The maximum fine for those who receive a serious citation is nearly double the previous amount. To avoid violations, construction employers are required to use engineering controls such as water or ventilation; provide respirators when engineering controls aren’t sufficient; limit work access to high-exposure areas; develop a written exposure control plan; offer medical exams to highly exposed workers – and more.
Operations that fall under the regulatory purview of the Mine Safety & Health Administration (MSHA) are not yet obligated to meet these standards, as MSHA has tabled implementation of a new silica rule for the moment. Still, silica remains on MSHA’s regulatory agenda, and as one attorney focused on occupational and mine safety and health recently revealed at an industry meeting, MSHA’s rule will likely parallel OSHA’s when developed.
So what are some takeaways from these developments? Take immediate steps to ensure you’re in compliance with the rule if OSHA is the regulatory body overseeing you. Likewise, MSHA-regulated operations should engage in conversations with partners who can provide silica controls to equipment.