29 C.F.R. § 1910.15

Shipyard employment

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Adoption and extension of established safety and health standards for shipyard employment. The standards prescribed by part 1915 (formerly parts 1501-1503) of this title and in effect on April 28, 1971 (as revised), are adopted as occupational safety or health standards under section 6(a) of the Act and shall apply, according to the provisions thereof, to every employment and place of employment of every employee engaged in ship repair, shipbreaking, and shipbuilding, or a related employment. Each employer shall protect the employment and places of employment of each of his employees engaged in ship repair, shipbreaking, and shipbuilding, or a related employment, by complying with the appropriate standards prescribed by this paragraph.

(b) Definitions. For purposes of this section:

(1) Ship repair means any repair of a vessel, including, but not restricted to, alterations, conversions, installations, cleaning, painting, and maintenance work;

(2) Shipbreaking means any breaking down of a vessel's structure for the purpose of scrapping the vessel, including the removal of gear, equipment, or any component of a vessel;

(3) Shipbuilding means the construction of a vessel, including the installation of machinery and equipment;

(4) Related employment means any employment performed as an incident to, or in conjunction with, ship repair, shipbreaking, and shipbuilding work, including, but not restricted to, inspection, testing, and employment as a watchman; and

(5) Vessel includes every description of watercraft or other artificial contrivance used, or capable of being used, as a means of transportation on water, including special purpose floating structures not primarily designed for, or used as a means of, transportation on water.

[58 FR 35308, June 30, 1993]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1979–2010 · leading case: Bishop v. Okidata, Inc., 864 F. Supp. 416 (D.N.J. 1994).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Bishop v. Okidata, Inc., 864 F. Supp. 416 (D.N.J. 1994). “§ 2101 (1) (exempting business enterprises with less than 100 employees from the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act); 29 C.F.R. § 1910.15 (exempting employers with no more than ten employees from certain reporting requirements promulgated by the Occupational…”

Plum Creek Lumber Co. v. Hutton, 608 F.2d 1283 (9th Cir. 1979). · cites it 2× “§ 655 (a)) is an unconstitutional delegation of the power to legislate to the Secretary of Labor. It further contends that § 6(a) violates its due process rights and certain provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act [APA].”

Smith v. CSX Transp., Inc., 703 S.E.2d 671 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “12 ; shipyards, in 29 CFR § 1910.15 ; longshoring and marine terminals, in 29 CFR § 1910.”

James T. CLARY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. OCEAN DRILLING & Expl. CO., Defendant-Appellee, 609 F.2d 1120 (5th Cir. 1980). “605; shipbreaking, 29 C.F.R. § 1910.15 ; ship repairing, 29 C.”

O'Brien v. City of New York, 822 F. Supp. 943 (E.D.N.Y 1993). “29 C.F.R. §§ 1910.15 (b)(1), 1915.4(1). Since O’Brien neither builds, repairs, nor breaks vessels, he is not precluded from bringing this action.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.