View Rule

MSHA proposes to amend the Agency’s existing respirable crystalline silica standards and respiratory protection provisions established by the 2024 final rule titled Lowering Miners’ Exposure to Respirable Crystalline Silica and Improving Respiratory Protection.  The proposed rule would include clarification and updates to requirements in 30 CFR part 60 for exposure monitoring, methods of compliance, respiratory protection, and medical surveillance without reducing protections afforded to miners.  The proposal would also include conforming amendments in 30 CFR parts 56, 57, 60, and 72.

Statement of Need:

MSHA is preparing a notice of proposed rulemaking, titled Respirable Crystalline Silica and Respiratory Protection, to propose changes targeted towards resolving issues raised in litigation. MSHA’s 2024 final rule titled Lowering Miners’ Exposure to Respirable Crystalline Silica and Improving Respiratory Protection (2024 Silica Final Rule) is currently being challenged in the 8 ^th Circuit Court of Appeals, which issued a stay of enforcement pending resolution.  Some petitioners ( e.g., National Stone, Sand, and Gravel Association and National Mining Association) have requested Agency clarification on aspects of the rule and indicated that the sampling and medical surveillance requirements impose excessive burdens without a corresponding increase in protection for miners. 

The proposed rule clarifies and modifies provisions of the respirable crystalline silica and respiratory protection standards that were established in the 2024 Silica Final Rule.  The proposed rule includes clarifications and updates to requirements for exposure monitoring, methods of compliance, respiratory protection, and medical surveillance without reducing protections afforded to miners. The proposals improve clarity of key provisions for the regulated community and support the Administration’s goal of reducing unnecessary regulatory burdens without compromising miner health and safety.  MSHA anticipates the rulemaking would be cost-neutral or have cost-savings for the regulated community.

Summary of the Legal Basis:

The statutory authority for this proposed rule is provided by the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977, as amended (Mine Act) under sections 101(a), 103(h), and 508. 30 U.S.C. 811(a), 813(h), and 957.

Section 101(a) of the Mine Act gives the Secretary the authority to develop, promulgate, and revise mandatory health standards to address toxic materials or harmful physical agents. Under Section 101(a), a standard must protect lives and prevent injuries in mines and be improved over any standard that it replaces or revises. 30 U.S.C. 811(a).

Section 103(h) of the Mine Act gives the Secretary the authority to promulgate standards involving recordkeeping and reporting. 30 U.S.C. 813(h). Additionally, section 103(h) requires that every mine operator establish and maintain records, make reports, and provide this information as required by the Secretary. Id.

Section 508 of the Mine Act gives the Secretary the authority to issue regulations to carry out any provision of the Mine Act. 30 U.S.C. 957.

Alternatives:

MSHA will consider the existing standards as the alternative to the proposed changes.

Anticipated Costs and Benefits:

This proposed rule includes changes to provisions for exposure monitoring, medical surveillance, and respiratory protection.  MSHA expects the overall impact of this proposed rule to be cost-neutral or have net cost-savings for the regulated community. 

Risks:

The 2024 Silica Final Rule took effect on June 17, 2024. Compliance deadlines were set for April 14, 2025, for coal mine operators and April 8, 2026, for metal and nonmetal mine operators. However, on April 11, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit issued an order staying the 2024 Silica Final Rule’s compliance deadlines until the Court completes a substantive review of the petition. As a result, MSHA has temporarily paused enforcement of the requirements in the 2024 Silica Final Rule for mine operators.

Additionally, proposed revisions face risk of legal challenge from other stakeholders (e.g., miner advocacy groups and worker unions). In light of this likely additional litigation, any proposed revisions must be in careful compliance with the Mine Act, particularly section 101(a)(9).   This section of the Mine Act prohibits MSHA from issuing rules that reduce the protection afforded to miners by existing mandatory health or safety standards.  Miner welfare advocates and organized labor groups are likely to oppose perceived rollback of protections.