Comment
Author: Admin | 2025-04-28
Interest in the NPRM, as evidenced by attendance at three public hearings organized by MSHA, which caused the agency to extend the public comment period. MSHA received 157 comments on the proposal and stated that they “carefully reviewed and considered the written comments on the proposed rule and the speakers’ testimonies from the hearings” during the process of developing the final rule.What Does MSHA’s 2024 Respirable Crystalline Silica Final Rule Change?The preceding discussion highlights that the final rule had been a long time coming, but it was finally published in the Federal Register on April 18, 2024. MSHA estimates that the provisions in their final rule will avoid 1,067 deaths and 3,746 silica-related illnesses.Here are some of the most significant changes brought by MSHA’s 2024 respirable crystalline silica final ruleEstablishes a Reduced, Uniform PEL and ALMSHA’s final rule reduces the PEL from 100 micrograms per cubic meter (µg/m3) to 50 µg/m3 as measured as an 8-hour TWA. MSHA has also established an action level (AL) at half the PEL, or 25 ug/m3. Mine operators must conduct periodic sampling when miner exposures are at or above the AL but below the PEL.Adoption of the reduced PEL and AL better aligns MSHA with OSHA, who as previously mentioned, established the same OELs for workers in general industry and construction via their 2016 final rules. Between 2016 and now, some companies have been in an awkward position, because (e.g.) they may have mining divisions covered by MSHA that extract raw materials including crystalline silica, and general industry facilities that process and distribute materials containing silica covered by OSHA, sometimes all on the same property. Technically, there was a gap in regulatory protections, in which a company could legally expose its mining sector workers to twice the concentration of silica as its general industry workers. In the 2016/2017 timeframe, VelocityEHS often gave presentations on the OSHA silica rules and advised attendees that if they had some workers subject to OSHA’s silica PEL and others to MSHA’s PEL, they should uniformly commit to keeping respirable silica exposures below the more protective OSHA PEL. Now that
Add Comment