I feel that the proposed regulations should be revised to recommendations only, for the following reasons:
Emergency Regulations with limited public review time and vague timelines are not the most appropriate or effective avenue to address worker safety during these current events. Detailed guidance and/or training would be more appropriate and effective.
Many businesses have already developed best management practices and implemented infectious disease response plans to ensure worker safety in accordance with VDOH, CDC and other federal guidelines. These regulations as proposed will introduce uncertainty and inconsistency and threaten to undermine the initiatives already in place.
Construction and service companies, which have employees spread across many “places of work” (jobsites) over which they often have no control (i.e. the Owner or a higher tier contractor physically controls the site), present unique scenarios that are not easily addressed by generic regulations written to cover businesses in general, such as these.
Indoor and outdoor construction is defined as medium risk. In the Construction Industry risk level varies by job task and location and often could fall into the low risk category.
The vague definitions within these proposed regulations introduce more uncertainty than guidance. Specifically:
Contact within 6 feet is repeatedly sited without reference to exposure type or exposure length which is not a true indication of risk. The definition of “May be Infected” could theoretically represent a large percentage of any workforce.
Prescreening and surveying is referenced without any guidance of what this should entail.
While mandating that the appropriate PPE is required in certain scenarios, these regulations provide no guidance on what that appropriate PPE is. Specifically, when and under what scenarios do they consider face coverings no longer sufficient and respirators required?
Incorporating HVAC systems maintenance and functionality into the regulations is concerning and little more than a liability trap. Employers who lease space often do not have control over the HVAC systems and for those that do, the process of proving their systems comply with the regulations will be time consuming and costly.
While contingency planning is encouraged as good business practice, it should not be mandated by State Regulations.
Perhaps this effort would be better served if VOSH were to provide online consultative services for helping employers develop COVID-19 infectious disease preparedness and response plans.
