In July of 2025, Federal OSHA proposed a broad list of deregulatory moves, several of which target the construction industry. The list includes changes to respirator fit-testing and chemical exposure requirements, illumination rules and the General Duty Clause, among others. According to OSHA, the goal is to streamline repetitive standards and provide compliance flexibility to employers.
Before finalizing these changes, OSHA has been soliciting feedback from its Advisory Committee on Construction Safety and Health (ACCSH). The only problem? ACCSH members aren’t in favor of many of these changes.
Over two days this spring, ACCSH — whose nine member panel includes employee and employer reps, state safety and health agency reps and select members of the public — largely rejected OSHA’s first round of proposals.
ACCSH members voted 9-0 to reject OSHA’s plans to eliminate the construction industry’s illumination standard. The panel also voted 5-4 against OSHA’s plan to eliminate medical evaluation requirements for certain respirators.
Fortunately, LIUNA members have a voice on ACCSH in the form of George Samuelsen, a proud member of Local 172 and the Training Director at the Local 172 Safety, Education and Training (SET) Center in South Jersey.
“OSHA’s view on illumination seemed to be that every employer knows about the requirement, so it doesn’t need to be written down,” said Samuelsen. “I’d rather be telling employers how to keep workers safe than having them unsure what to do.”
Samuelsen is an ACCSH employee representative and was nominated by Brian Crain, an OSHA representative in New Jersey.
“We have a great relationship with OSHA in New Jersey,” said Samuelsen. “Brian participates in our training center’s intro to OSHA class for the apprentices. He shares how OSHA is here to protect workers and make sure they have a safe environment.”
Speaking more about the ACCSH panel, Samuelsen shared how the panel was divided on some proposals, such as the one to remove medical evaluation for some respirators.
“I didn’t agree with this idea that because only two percent of workers can’t wear a respirator, we should scrap the medical evaluation,” said Samuelsen. “If there’s going to be a problem, you want to find that before a worker is on the jobsite and you’re putting their safety at risk.”
OSHA is also proposing the elimination of chemical-specific respirator requirements for at least 13 chemicals — including many known to cause cancer — preferring to handle these under the broader respiratory standard. ACCSH was split on its recommendations here, agreeing with OSHA on some while pushing back on others.
On August 19th, OSHA will host public hearings to gather additional feedback before finalizing any rule changes. It’s the Fund’s hope that OSHA heeds the warnings shared by ACCSH and other groups that regulations should not be removed if doing so jeopardizes the safety and health of workers.
After all, that’s why OSHA relies on ACCSH to make recommendations related to construction safety and health. Now, we need OSHA to listen to their own advice.
[Nick Fox]
