Therrel-Kizer, Inc.
Flat-roof perimeter-guarding citation vacated
Apply this precedent to your situation
This is citable Commission precedent from 1977, and it may have been appealed since. Ezel checks how it stands today and answers your situation, with citations.
Plain-English summary
Therrel-Kizer was cited for failing to install perimeter guarding on a flat roof. The administrative law judge affirmed the citation under the open-sided-floor standard. The Commission applied its intervening decision holding that the cited standard did not apply to flat roofs. It therefore vacated both the citation and the assessed penalty.
Decision snapshot
- Cited standard(s): 29 C.F.R. § 1926.500(d)(1)
- Outcome: The flat-roof perimeter-guarding citation and assessed penalty were vacated.
- Key point: The open-sided-floor guarding standard did not apply to flat roofs under the Commission precedent controlling at the time.
Full text (OSHRC public release)
Docket No. 13767
THERREL-KIZER, INC.
�
OSHRC Docket No. 13767
Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission
April 20, 1977
�
[*1]
�
Before BARNAKO, Chairman; MORAN and CLEARY, Commissioners.
�
COUNSEL:
Baruch A. Fellner, Office of the Solicitor, USDOL
Bobbye D. Spears, Regional Solicitor, U.S. Department of Labor
Herbert Kizer, President, Therrel-Kizer, Inc., for the employer
OPINION:
DECISION
BY THE COMMISSION:
The decision of Administrative Law Judge James D. Burroughs in this case is before the Commission pursuant to section 12(j) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, 29 U.S.C. �
�
651 et seq.
Judge Burroughs affirmed a citation that alleged that respondent had violated 29 U.S.C. �
�
654(a)(2) by failing to install perimeter guarding on a flat roof in contravention of 29 CFR �
�
1926.500(d)(1).
In Central City Roofing, Co., BNA & OSHC 1286, 1976-77 CCH OSHD para. 20,761 (No. 8173, 1976), a divided Commission held that 29 CFR �
�
1926.500(d)(1) does not apply to flat roofs.
�
That decision is dispositive of this case.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the citation for failure to comply with 19 CFR �
�
1926.500(d)(1) and the penalty assessed therefor are vacated.
�
Get today's answer for your situation
You just read Commission precedent from 1977. Ezel checks whether it still stands, including any court review since, and answers your specific situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the authority it relies on.