comprised of mostly small businesses with few barriers to entry and a lower understanding of WHS obligations . In fact , permitting work with lower silica engineered stone may encourage even greater noncompliance with WHS laws as there may be an incorrect perception that these products are ‘ safer ’.
There is no evidence that lower silica engineered stone poses less risk to worker health and safety than higher silica engineered stone . There is no toxicological evidence for a ‘ safe ’ threshold of crystalline silica content , or that the other components of lower silica engineered stone products ( e . g . amorphous silica from recycled glass and feldspar ) do not pose additional risks to worker health . Manufacturers have not yet established ( through independent scientific evidence ) that these products are without risks to the health and safety of persons , as required by the model WHS laws .
Given the increased rates of silicosis diagnosis in engineered stone workers , and a lack of any evidence that a lower silica content engineered stone is safe to work with , it is not possible to support the continued use of any engineered stone products . Further , it is imperative that government and industry continue to consider and assess safety risks of new engineered stone-like products as they come to market .
DECISION REGULATION IMPACT STATEMENT Prohibition on the use of engineered stone Page 57 of 107