29 C.F.R. § 1926.58
COVID-19
The requirements applicable to construction work under this section are identical to those set forth at 29 CFR 1910.501 subpart U.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14
cases, 1987–2001 · leading case: United States Gypsum Co. v. Admiral Ins., 643 N.E.2d 1226 (Ill. App. Ct. 1994).
United States Gypsum Co. v. Admiral Ins., 643 N.E.2d 1226 (Ill. App. Ct. 1994). “1101 (1989); 29 C.F.R. § 1926.58 (1990).) According to Petersen, OSHA has established the permissible asbestos fiber level at .”
New Jersey State Chamber of Com. v. State of New Jersey, 653 F. Supp. 1453 (D.N.J. 1987). “29 C.F.R. § 1926.58 (f)(5-6). OSHA established an “action level” of 0.”
Comm'r of Labor v. Gary Steel Prods. Corp., 643 N.E.2d 407 (Ind. Ct. App. 1994). “Applying 29 C.F.R. § 1926.58 , et seq. in conjunction with IND.”
Dep't of Prof'l & Occupational Reg. v. Abateco Servs., Inc., 534 S.E.2d 352 (Va. Ct. App. 2000). “, 29 CFR 1926.58©; 1926.58(k)(4)(ii); 1926.”
Env't Encapsulating Corp. v. City of New York, 855 F.2d 48 (2d Cir. 1988). “See 29 C.F.R. § 1926.58 (1987). Paragraph k of the Revised Construction Standard requires employers to communicate to their employees the dangers of asbestos by means of signs, labels, and employee information and training.”
Bldg. & Constr. Trades Dep't v. Brock, 838 F.2d 1258 (D.C. Cir. 1988). “1001 (1987) (general industry standards) and 29 C.F.R. § 1926.58 (1987) (construction industry standards).”
Arkansas Oklahoma Gas Corp. v. Arkansas Pub. Serv. Comm'n, 770 S.W.2d 180 (Ark. Ct. App. 1989). “153 and 29 C.F.R. Section 1926.58. Those federal regulations establish specific standards, procedures, and guidelines to be followed with regard to handling of asbestos materials.”
Env't Encapsulating Corp. v. The City Of New York, 855 F.2d 48 (2d Cir. 1988). “Requirement for medical surveillance procedures; explanation of the purpose and limitations of medical examinations, to include a description of: posterior/anterior chest x-rays (14" x 17"), pulmonary function tests and a medical and work history; explanation of the medical…”
Associated Indus. of Massachusetts v. Snow, 898 F.2d 274 (1st Cir. 1990). “1001 , and the Revised Standard for the Construction Industry, 29 C.F.R. § 1926.58 (the Asbestos Standards), establish permissible asbestos exposure levels for workers and provide guidelines for employee training and work practices.”
Env't Encapsulating Corp. v. City of New York, 666 F. Supp. 535 (S.D.N.Y. 1987). “Plaintiffs contend that an OSHA “Revised Construction Standard,” 29 C.F.R. § 1926.58 , preempts the City’s certification program.”
Associated Indus. of Massachusetts v. Snow, 717 F. Supp. 951 (D. Mass. 1989). “29 C.F.R. § 1926.58 (k). That sort of health awareness scheme is not frustrated by the third-party training required by the DLI regulations.”
Dept of Prof. & Occupational Reg. v. Abateco (Va. Ct. App. 2001). “, 29 CFR 1926.58(f); 1926.58(k)(4)(ii); 1926.”
— 29 C.F.R. § 1926.58(b) — 1 case
Bldg. & Constr. Trades Dep't v. Brock, 838 F.2d 1258 (D.C. Cir. 1988). “1001 (1987) (general industry standards) and 29 C.F.R. § 1926.58 (1987) (construction industry standards).”
— 29 C.F.R. § 1926.58(f) — 3 cases
Dep't of Prof'l & Occupational Reg. v. Abateco Servs., Inc., 534 S.E.2d 352 (Va. Ct. App. 2000). “, 29 CFR 1926.58©; 1926.58(k)(4)(ii); 1926.”
Dept of Prof. & Occupational Reg. v. Abateco (Va. Ct. App. 2001). “, 29 CFR 1926.58(f); 1926.58(k)(4)(ii); 1926.”
Abateco Servs. v. Dept.of Prof. Occup. Reg., etc (Va. Ct. App. 2001).
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.