Virginia Code

Va. Code Ann. § 59.1-408 (2026)

Prohibited activities

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section VA-LISlaw.lis.virginia.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Unless danger of contact with overhead high voltage lines has been guarded against as provided by § 59.1-410:

1. No person shall, individually or through an agent or employee, perform, or require any other person to perform, any work, as defined in § 59.1-407, that will cause any person or tools, machinery, ladders, antennas, equipment, covered equipment, supplies, materials, or apparatus to be placed within 10 feet (3.1 meters) of any overhead high voltage line.

2. A clearance greater than 10 feet (3.1 meters) may be required under the circumstances by the occupational safety and health regulations adopted by the Safety and Health Codes Board pursuant to Chapter 3 (§ 40.1-22 et seq.) of Title 40.1 and enforced by the Commissioner of Labor and Industry.

3. The prohibited activities as described in this section shall not apply to covered equipment as defined herein when lawfully driven or transported on public streets and highways in compliance with the height restriction imposed by § 46.2-1110, nor shall they apply to covered equipment, when used in agricultural or silvicultural activities, that is in compliance with the height restrictions imposed by § 46.2-1110 when driven or transported on land used for agricultural or silvicultural activities.

1989, c. 341; 1995, c. 298; 2003, c. 364.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 2004–2009 · leading case: C. Ray Davenport, Comm'r, Virginia Labor & Indus. v. G.D.C., Inc. (Va. Ct. App. 2004).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

C. Ray Davenport, Comm'r, Virginia Labor & Indus. v. G.D.C., Inc. (Va. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 4× “The Commissioner contends the trial court erred by (1) dismissing the two serious violations when the evidence had clearly established the violations, and (2) applying tort law analysis in determining whether GDC had violated Code §§ 59.1-408 and -410. Concluding the circuit…”

Rodriguez v. N. Virginia Elec. Coop., 79 Va. Cir. 266 (Loudoun Cir. Ct. 2009). “, the ten-foot rule of § 59.1-408. While the argument is interesting, I cannot concur because I cannot determine, as stated above, that the Act does, in fact, apply.”

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.