29 CFR 1926.100 - Head protection

Cite as29 CFR 1926.100
    • This document is available in original version only for vLex customers

      View this document and try vLex for 7 days
    • TRY VLEX
19 practice notes
  • Donovan v. Adams Steel Erection, Inc., AFL-CIO
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
    • July 5, 1985
    ...with failing to ensure that its employees wore hard hats to protect against head injuries from impact and falling objects. See 29 C.F.R. Sec. 1926.100(a). The Commission concluded that the Secretary must prove more than mere "access" to a zone of danger, and vacated this citation as well. W......
  • Updating OSHA Standards Based on National Consensus Standards; Head Protection
    • United States
    • Federal Register June 22, 2012
    • June 22, 2012
    ...consensus standard. In addition, this direct final rule will remove the current references to ANSI Z89.1-1969 and ANSI Z89.2-1971 in 29 CFR 1926.100(b) and (c), and replace these outdated head protection references with the same three editions of ANSI Z89.1 referenced in the general industr......
  • Updating OSHA Standards Based on National Consensus Standards; Head Protection
    • United States
    • Federal Register June 22, 2012
    • June 22, 2012
    ...of the consensus standard. In addition, this NPRM would remove the current references to ANSI Z89.1-1969 and ANSI Z89.2-1971 in 29 CFR 1926.100(b) and (c), and replace these outdated head-protection references with the same three editions of ANSI Z89.1 referenced in the general industry and......
  • Davenport v. Summit Contractors, Inc., Record No. 1643-04-2.
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court of Virginia
    • May 3, 2005
    ...of the citations in this case involves one of the incorporated federal standards. One requires all employees to wear hard hats. See 29 C.F.R. § 1926.100(a). The other three require employers to provide handrails or other forms of fall protection for employees working on elevated work platfo......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
10 cases
  • Donovan v. Adams Steel Erection, Inc., AFL-CIO
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
    • July 5, 1985
    ...with failing to ensure that its employees wore hard hats to protect against head injuries from impact and falling objects. See 29 C.F.R. Sec. 1926.100(a). The Commission concluded that the Secretary must prove more than mere "access" to a zone of danger, and vacated this citation as well. W......
  • Davenport v. Summit Contractors, Inc., Record No. 1643-04-2.
    • United States
    • Virginia Supreme Court of Virginia
    • May 3, 2005
    ...of the citations in this case involves one of the incorporated federal standards. One requires all employees to wear hard hats. See 29 C.F.R. § 1926.100(a). The other three require employers to provide handrails or other forms of fall protection for employees working on elevated work platfo......
  • White v. US, Dept. of Interior, Civ. No. 83-1360.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 3th Circuit. United States District Court of Middle District of Pennsylvania
    • June 19, 1986
    ...safety measures to be taken in specific situations. Neither the personal protective equipment regulations, 29 C.F.R. § 1926.28 and 29 C.F.R. §§ 1926.100-107, nor the angle of repose regulations, 29 C.F.R. § 1926.651(e), are expressly aimed at mine shaft backfilling operations. In fact, both......
  • Roberts Pipeline Const., Inc. v. Secretary of Labor, No. 94-3726
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • May 2, 1996
    ...failure to ensure that the employees wore hard hats while working in an area where head injuries could result from falling debris, 29 C.F.R. § 1926.100(a) (1991); (3) failure to secure an acetylene tank in a vertical position when transported by a powered vehicle, 29 C.F.R. § 1926.350(a)(4)......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
2 firm's commentaries
  • Concussions Aren't Just A Risk For NFL Players: Hardhats Versus Safety Helmets.
    • United States
    • Mondaq United States
    • September 2, 2018
    ...Sites explained that helmet purchase costs could be an issue for small builders and subcontractors. For head protection, an OSHA rule (29 C.F.R. 1926.100) requires employers to provide head protection equipment that meets or exceeds the industry consensus standard ANSI Z89.1 issued 2009. Th......
  • Concussions Aren’t Just a Risk for NFL Players: Hardhats versus Safety Helmets.
    • United States
    • JD Supra United States
    • August 27, 2018
    ...Sites explained that helmet purchase costs could be an issue for small builders and subcontractors. For head protection, an OSHA rule (29 C.F.R. 1926.100) requires employers to provide head protection equipment that meets or exceeds the industry consensus standard ANSI Z89.1 issued 2009. Th......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT