silica rule

U.S. Court of Appeals Rejects 'All of Industry's Challenges' to Silica Rule

Dec. 28, 2017
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District Columbia on Dec. 22 rejected challenges to OSHA's 2016 silica rule made by industry groups, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

OSHA’s silica rule has weathered its court challenge and remains in effect, with a three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia on Dec. 22 rejecting all five objections raised by  industry groups.

A spokesperson for the U.S. Chamber said the chamber still is reviewing the decision, "but we continue to believe that OSHA lacks substantial evidence to support its rule."

In the United States, more than 2 million workers currently are exposed to some level of silica. In 2016, OSHA published a final rule regulating workplace exposure to silica, Occupational Exposure to Respirable Crystalline Silica (29 CFR 1910, 1915 and 1926).

The court, in its decision, noted that petitions to review the silica rule came from both industry and unions. “A collection of industry petitioners believes OSHA impermissibly made the rule too stringent and several union petitioners believe OSHA improperly failed to make the rule stringent enough.”

The industry groups petitioned for review of five issues:

  1. Whether substantial evidence supports OSHA’s finding that limiting workers’ silica exposure to the level set by the rule reduces a significant risk of material health impairment.
  2. Whether substantial evidence supports OSHA’s finding that the rule is technologically feasible for the foundry, hydraulic fracturing and construction industries.
  3. Whether substantial evidence supports OSHA’s finding that the rule is economically feasible for the foundry, hydraulic fracturing and construction industries.
  4. Whether OSHA violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in promulgating the rule.
  5. Whether substantial evidence supports two ancillary provisions of the rule; one that allows workers who undergo medical examinations to keep the results confidential from their employers and one that prohibits employers from using dry cleaning methods unless doing so is infeasible.

“We reject all of industry’s challenges,” wrote judges Merrick Garland, Karen Henderson and David Tatel.

”The labor movement worked for decades to win these lifesaving measures, and we are proud to see these standards remain the law of the land,” said AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka. “I want to thank all of those who contributed to this great victory, including the Obama administration and the career staff at the Department of Labor. Now we must turn our efforts to making sure this standard is put into full effect, enforced and protected from further attacks so that workers are finally protected from deadly silica dust.”

The unions requested review of two parts of the rule:

  • The requirement that medical surveillance for construction workers be provided only if the employee has to wear a respirator for 30 days for one employer in a one-year period.
  • The absence of medical removal protections.

“We reject the unions’ challenge to the construction standard’s 30-day trigger for medical surveillance,” wrote the judges. They added, however: “We hold that OSHA was arbitrary and capricious in declining to require MRP for some period when a medical professional recommends permanent removal, when a medical professional recommends temporary removal to alleviate COPD symptoms, and when a medical professional recommends temporary removal pending a specialist’s determination.”

The judges concluded that OSHA “failed to adequately explain its decision to omit medical removal protections from the rule and remand [back to OSHA] for further consideration of the issue.”

“This is a huge win for millions of workers in construction, foundries, mining, shipbuilding and many other industries,” stated Jessica Martinez, co-executive director of the, National Council for Occupational Safety and Health. “Low-wage workers and those in the informal sector can now be assured of safer working conditions.”

About the Author

Sandy Smith

Sandy Smith is the former content director of EHS Today, and is currently the EHSQ content & community lead at Intelex Technologies Inc. She has written about occupational safety and health and environmental issues since 1990.

Sponsored Recommendations

10 Facts About the State of Workplace Safety in the U.S.

July 12, 2024
Workplace safety in the U.S. has improved over the past 50 years, but progress has recently stalled. This report from the AFL-CIO highlights key challenges.

Free Webinar: ISO 45001 – A Commitment to Occupational Health, Safety & Personal Wellness

May 30, 2024
Secure a safer and more productive workplace using proven Management Systems ISO 45001 and ISO 45003.

ISO 45003 – Psychological Health and Safety at Work

May 30, 2024
ISO 45003 offers a comprehensive framework to expand your existing occupational health and safety program, helping you mitigate psychosocial risks and promote overall employee...

Case Study: Improve TRIR from 4+ to 1 with EHS Solution and Safety Training

May 29, 2024
Safety training and EHS solutions improve TRIR for Complete Mechanical Services, leading to increased business. Moving incidents, training, and other EHS procedures into the digital...

Voice your opinion!

To join the conversation, and become an exclusive member of EHS Today, create an account today!