Committee hears bill to allow 5 a.m. commercial construction starts to reduce heat risks

Assembly Bill 478, sponsored in committee by Assemblymember Sandra Howdige, would allow commercial construction projects to begin work as early as 5 a.m. when such projects are more than 300 feet from an occupied residence, the sponsor told the Assembly Committee on Government Affairs during a public hearing that closed without a committee vote.

The amendment adopted by the sponsor and presented to the committee narrows the bill to two substantive sections—one applying to counties and one applying to cities—and adds a provision that construction projects located farther than 300 feet from an occupied residence may begin work not earlier than 5 a.m. during the hot months, the sponsor said. The sponsor told the committee the amendment replaces the original bill text.

The bill’s backers told the committee the change is needed to reduce the risk of heat exhaustion and heat stroke among outdoor construction workers. "Early morning shifts are widely recognized as one of the most important tools employers have to reduce risk," said Alexis Motorex of the Nevada chapter of the Associated General Contractors, noting that local ordinances that set later start times can force crews to work during the day’s hottest hours.

Nick Vasiliades of the Southern Nevada Building Trades Union said the measure is a worker-protection bill that applies across the industry, union and nonunion alike. "Construction workers do face different needs and different challenges because they are outside," he said, and a 5 a.m. start provides flexibility to avoid the hottest hours.

Sponsor Assemblymember Sandra Howdige described the problem as one of rising temperatures and increased worker risk. She cited federal and state data on heat-related occupational illness and Nevada OSHA complaint data to argue that earlier start times help mitigate the hazard. "This session I'm here with the Associated General Contractors and the Southern Nevada Building Trades Union because our previous work has left their members in commercial construction cut out of our protections," she said.

Several contractors and industry groups testified in support. Summer Pellatt, owner of Pellatt Construction and a former city planner, said she previously supported municipal work-hour restrictions to reduce noise but that those restrictions can have unintended safety consequences for workers. "Noise pollution related to construction activity is temporary, while heat presents serious health and safety issues for our workforce," she said.

Other supporters included the Nevada Subcontractors Association, the Builders Association of Northern Nevada, Granite Construction and individual contractors who said early start times allow crews to complete heavy tasks before the hottest part of the day.

A neutral witness, Warren Hardy of the Urban Consortium, said some jurisdictions already allow 5 a.m. starts and that local processes exist to address neighborhood concerns; he said his organization had no objection to the bill but wanted the committee to know cities and counties handle these issues regularly.

Committee members asked about whether the bill would limit emergency work during nighttime hours and whether it would restrict evening work. The sponsor and an industry witness clarified that the amendment does not change existing emergency exemptions and does not impose a statewide limit on when construction must stop in the evening; municipalities would continue to set any limits on evening hours.

No one testified in opposition during the hearing. The committee closed the hearing without taking a vote; the sponsor did not give final remarks before the hearing ended.

Why it matters: supporters said the amendment balances local noise concerns with worker safety by preserving local authority to regulate other aspects of construction while allowing earlier starts—particularly important in Nevada, where stakeholders said heat-related complaints to Nevada OSHA have increased in recent years. The bill would apply statewide to county and city ordinances as drafted in the amendment and was presented as targeted at commercial construction projects beyond a 300-foot residential setback.

Next steps: the committee closed the hearing on AB 478 and did not take a committee-level vote on the amended bill during the session transcripted here. If reported out of committee later, the measure would receive a floor statement and proceed through the Legislature’s next steps.

(Quotes used above are taken from testimony at the Assembly Committee on Government Affairs hearing on Assembly Bill 478.)