ISFA Proposes Training, Licensing for Calif. Fabricators
SACRAMENTO, Calif. – An industry-based program to combat silicosis among engineered-stone fabricators received a mixed reception here before a state workplace-standards board last week.
The proposal by the International Surface Fabricators Association (ISFA) to certify shop safety and control slab distribution found favor among industry representatives when presented Jan. 15 to the California Occupational Safety and Health Standards Board.
However, advocates for affected workers and medical spokespersons sided with a petition given to the board last month by the Western Occupational & Environmental Medical Association (WOEMA) calling for a ban on fabrication of crystalline-silica-based engineered stone in the state.
The ISFA proposal would implement a four-phase program implemented in three years, said Laurie Weber, the organization’s CEO.
“It’s a phased roll-out process where we can control and measure the results fast,” she explained.
The first phase, with a deadline of July 31 this year, would involve working with industry representatives, fabricators, regulators, health officials and others to develop certifications – including safety training – for fabrication shops, suppliers and distributors.
The second phase would roll out the safety training and certification program, in Los Angeles, Orange and San Diego counties, and include a digital infrastructure and third-party auditing. The pilot program would also include an executive director and safety/health/regulatory-compliance coordinator; both would be bilingual. The deadline for all this is Oct. 31 this year.
The third phase, with a March 2027 deadline, expands audits statewide and finalizes auditing and reporting standards, along with corrective actions. A public database of certified fabricators would also be set up.
The final phase would bring out the program statewide by April 2027, including ongoing recertification of shops. A public database reporting program certification would be available by Jan. 1, 2028.
Weber characterized the plan as a workable option to WOEMA’s call to ban surfaces using crystalline-silica composition and called for cooperation from all sectors to implement the ISFA program.
“We believe that bans happen when systems fail, and we’re here to help fix the system,” Weber told the board. “We want an opportunity to sit at the table and talk about how to solve this together, so we have one collaborative regulation.”
“We’re always looking for collaborative ways to solve problems,” she added. “It’s really important to do that together.”
The ISFA proposal received support from representatives of the Agglomerated Stone Manufacturers Association (AStA) and the Natural Stone Institute (NSI).
“Our organization (AStA) supports a program such as that proposed by IFSA to ensure only compliant fabrication shops are allowed to do this kind of work in the state of California,” said Kirk Kimmelshue from the Sacramento-based Fernández Jensen Kimmelshue Government Affairs lobbying group. “Given the incidence of silicosis are clustered in California, this was a logical place to start, with the objective of working to implement a nationwide program to certify or license compliant fabrication shops.”
“When California’s SB 20 was passed last year, it failed to include a government-led licensure provisions which would have kept silica-bearing materials out of the hands of unqualified or unregulated employers,” said Mark Meriaux, NSI accreditation & technical manager. “We believe that an industry-led effort is definitely worthy of consideration, and we look forward to collaborating with our friends at ISFA.”
Rebecca Shult, general counsel for the LeSueur, Minn.-based engineered-stone manufacturer Cambria, noted that the company’s in-house fabrication shops show a spotless record on employee health.
“We’ve had more than 1000 workers with over 10 million hours fabricating over 650,000 of our own slabs without a single reported case of silicosis or occupational disease,” she said. “Quartz slab products can be cut safely.”
However, Dr. Robert Blink, a past president of WOEMA, said the group of workplace-health professionals sees that even the restrictions placed on crystalline-silica-based products by the board last January are insufficient, and a ban is needed.
“Why did we go back and do this after having agreed to the restrictions that were put in place for the permanent standard just enacted a year ago?,” Blink said. “Because we’ve gotten additional information since that time that the material is much more toxic than we initially believed, and because evaluation of workplaces has shown that even with appropriate protections in place, the exposures are still way too hot.”
Blink also questioned the 15-month phase-in of the ISFA proposal, estimating that 62 more workers would develop silicosis.
“So the clock is ticking as we discuss,” he added, “as we try this and that, why are we protecting this cosmetic material for which there is a particularly appropriate and excellent substitute, which is amorphous silica?”
James Nevin, a partner with Brayton Purcell LLP, says his law firm’s “approximately 500” fabrication-worker clients support the WOEMA ban and oppose the ISFA proposal.
“There are not a few bad actors that need to be licensed, that just need to be enforced” he said. “The problem is not just the high 95% silica content( of slabs), but also the nano size and the toxic metals and resins that are added.”
Questions and comments from board members on the ISFA proposal focus process, including financing, third-party auditing, and the participation from fabrication workers directly handling the material.
Board Chair Joseph M. Alioto Jr. acknowledged that issue will be a difficult one to resolve.
“We have folks who have been devastated in the families by this disease,” Alioto told Weber, “and the people that you represent, they have businesses that they literally see an existential threat if they lose the ability to sell this product.
“The lawsuits that are pending have elevated tensions so greatly here,” he added. ” We’re not we’re not a jury. We’re not going to decide who’s right and who’s wrong. And the purpose of what we’re trying to do is set all of that aside.
“I think you nailed it on the head about the need for collaboration to figure out a solution to this.”