Michigan Office of Administrative Hearings and Rules  
Administrative Rules Division (ARD)  
[email protected]  
REQUEST FOR RULEMAKING (RFR)  
1. Department:  
Labor and Economic Opportunity  
2. Bureau:  
MIOSHA  
3. Promulgation type:  
Full Process  
4. Title of proposed rule set:  
Part 25. Concrete Construction  
5. Rule numbers or rule set range of numbers:  
R 408.42501 - R 408.42535  
6. Estimated time frame:  
12 months  
Name of person filling out RFR:  
Thomas Shaver  
E-mail of person filling out RFR:  
ShaverT1@michigan.gov  
Phone number of person filling out RFR:  
517-241-3659  
Address of person filling out RFR:  
Stevens T. Mason Building  
530 West Allegan St. 2nd Floor  
Lansing, MI 48909  
7. Describe the general purpose of these rules, including any problems the changes are intended  
to address.  
Construction Safety Standard Part 25, Concrete Construction, sets forth requirements to protect  
employees from the hazards associated with concrete construction activities in the reinforcing,  
pouring, stressing, lifting, and floating of concrete.  
These rules are being amended to increase protections of employees from the hazards associated  
with concrete construction activities in the reinforcing, pouring, stressing, lifting, and floating of  
concrete.  
8. Please cite the specific promulgation authority for the rules (i.e. department director,  
commission, board, etc.).  
The director of the department has the specific promulgation authority for the rules.  
A. Please list all applicable statutory references (MCLs, Executive Orders, etc.).  
MCL 408.1014, 408.1019, and 408.1021, Executive Reorganization Order Nos. 1996-2, 2003-1,  
2008-4, 2011-4, 2019-3, MCL 445.2001, 445.2011, 445.2025, 445.2030, and 125.1998.  
B. Are the rules mandated by any applicable constitutional or statutory provision? If so, please  
explain.  
Michigan Occupational Safety and Health Act, 1974 PA 154 section 14(5), MCL 408.1014.  
MCL 24.239  
RFR-Page 2  
9. Please describe the extent to which the rules conflict with or duplicate similar rules,  
compliance requirements, or other standards adopted at the state, regional, or federal level.  
The rules do not conflict with or duplicate similar rules, compliance requirements, or other  
standards adopted at the state, regional, or federal level.  
10. Is the subject matter of the rules currently contained in any guideline, handbook, manual,  
instructional bulletin, form with instructions, or operational memoranda?  
MIOSHA is not aware of any guideline, handbook, manual, instructional bulletin, form with  
instructions, or operational memoranda that contains the subject matter of the rules.  
11. Are the rules listed on the department’s annual regulatory plan as rules to be processed  
for the current year?  
Yes, the rules were listed on the department’s annual regulatory plan as rules to be processed for  
the current year.  
12. Will the proposed rules be promulgated under Section 44 of the Administrative Procedures  
Act, 1969 PA 306, MCL 24.244, or under the full rulemaking process?  
Full Process  
13. Please describe the extent to which the rules exceed similar regulations, compliance  
requirements, or other standards adopted at the state, regional, or federal level.  
The rules will exceed similar regulations, compliance requirements, or other standards adopted at  
the state, regional, or federal level. The rules will add additional protections for construction  
workers in the vicinity of the covered work operations.  
14. Do the rules incorporate the recommendations received from the public regarding any  
complaints or comments regarding the rules? If yes, please explain.  
Yes, the rules incorporate recommendations received from the International Association of Bridge,  
Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers.  
15. If amending an existing rule set, please provide the date of the last evaluation of the rules  
and the degree, if any, to which technology, economic conditions, or other factors have changed  
the regulatory activity covered by the rules since the last evaluation.  
This rule set was last amended on August 10, 2016. Technology, economic conditions, and other  
factors have not significantly changed regulatory activity covered by the rules since the last  
evaluation.  
16. Are there any changes or developments since implementation that demonstrate there is no  
continued need for the rules, or any portion of the rules?  
There has not been any change or development since implementation that demonstrates that there  
is no continued need for the rules, or any portion of the rules.  
17. Is there an applicable decision record (as defined in MCL 24.203(6) and required by MCL  
24.239(2))? If so, please attach the decision record.  
No  
Based on the information provided in this RFR, MOAHR concludes that there are sufficient  
policy and legal bases for approving the RFR. The RFR satisfies the requirements of the  
Administrative Procedures Act of 1969, 1969 PA 306, MCL 24.201 to 24.328, and Executive  
Order No. 2019-6.  
MCL 24.239  
;