Steel Markets
OSHA’s Proposed Silica Exposure Rule Meets Opposition
Written by Sandy Williams
September 17, 2013
A group of construction industry trade associations have formed the Construction Industry Safety Coalition in response to a proposed OSHA rule on crystalline silica exposure.
In an August 23 website posting, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration recommended a reduction of the permissible exposure limit for breathable silica.
“Exposure to silica can be deadly, and limiting that exposure is essential,” said Dr. David Michaels, OSHA’s assistant secretary of labor. “Every year, exposed workers not only lose their ability to work, but also to breathe. This proposal is expected to prevent thousands of deaths from silicosis-an incurable and progressive disease-as well as lung cancer, other respiratory diseases and kidney disease. We’re looking forward to public comment on the proposal.”
Crystalline silica is a mineral component of the earth’s crust, most commonly occurring as quartz, and is found in industrial materials like sand, stone, rock, concrete, brick, block, and mortar. A fine breathable dust occurs when the materials are cut, sawed, ground, drilled or crushed. Sometimes known as “deadly dust,” exposure is common for workers in the construction industries, pottery manufacturing, and foundries and in fracking operations in the oil and gas industry.
According to the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, breathing silica dust is “associated with the development of silicosis, lung cancer, pulmonary tuberculosis, and airways diseases. These exposures may also be related to the development of autoimmune disorders, chronic renal disease, and other adverse health effects.” OSHA says revising 40-year-old exposure limits will save nearly 7000 lives and prevent 1600 new cases of silicosis per year.
The Coalition fears the proposed rule will place unnecessary expense and burden on the construction industry. The Associated Builders and Contractors estimates the cost of complying with new regulations could run as high as $1 billion to $2 billion per year.
“OSHA’s proposed rule is a good starting point,” said Tom Skaggs, Chairman of MCAA’s Safety and Health Committee, and Vice President – Safety for the Murphy Company in St. Louis, MO. He added, “Several provisions in the proposed rule appear unnecessary for worker protection, and most likely will not be feasible for many construction firms. It is my hope that, by working with OSHA on the solution, MCAA and the coalition will be able to develop a practical rule for worker protection.”
OSHA emphasized that the proposal is not a final rule and encourages commentary and participation in public hearings to develop a ruling that “ensures healthy working conditions for employees and is feasible for employers.”
Sandy Williams
Read more from Sandy WilliamsLatest in Steel Markets
CRU: Sheet import demand softens as domestic price gains have slowed
US domestic sheet price gains have begun to slow as previously pulled-forward demand has led to a decline in orders.
CMC looks beyond Arizona micro-mill woes to long-term viability of construction mart
Despite the economic and geopolitical upheaval of the last five years, CMC President and CEO Peter Matt points out that the construction market has been an essential element of the way forward.
US importers face stricter rules under revamped S232 tariffs
“CBP expects full compliance from the trade community for accurate reporting and payment of the additional duties. CBP will take enforcement action on non-compliance," the agency said in a March 7 bulletin.
Steel exports rebound in January
US steel exports recovered to a five-month high in January after having fallen to a two-year low in December. This growth follows four consecutive months of declining exports.
Construction spending drops marginally in January
Construction spending edged down slightly in January, slipping for the first time in four months. The US Census Bureau estimated spending at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of $2,196 billion in January, down 0.2% from December’s downward revised rate. The January figure is 3.3% higher than a year ago. January’s result, despite the slight erosion, […]