b'MIDWESTM I D W E S TROOFING CONTRACTORS ASSOCIATIONR O O F E R1000 Power &Light Bldg.,Kansos City; Missouri64105June,1975 PERIMETERGUARDINGCITATIONVACATED- IMPOSSIBILITYOFCOMPLIANCE InthecontinuingbattlewithOSHAconcerningperimeterguarding,a veryimportantvictoryhasjustbeenwonbyroofingcontractors.Thecase isSecretaryofLaborv.CornellRoofing&SheetMetalCo.,OSAHRCDocket No.8525.Thesoleissueinvolvedtherequirementforperimeterguardrails-OSHAStandardNo.1926.500(d)(l).JudgePaulDixonvacatedthecitation andproposedpenaltyof$500afterconcludingthatCornellRoofingCompany haddemonstratedthe"unfeasibility,impracticalityandimpossibilityof complying"withthestandard. ThedecisionisverysignificantbecauseoftherecordmadebyCornell RoofingduringthehearingandthethoroughreviewoftheevidenceanddiscussionoftheissuesinJudgeDixon\'sopinion.JudgeDixonfoundthefollowingevidencetobesignificant: 1.Guardrailsplacedontheroofwouldeitherhavetobe attachedtothebuildingorequippedwithcounterweights.In eithercase,theguardrailswouldhavetoberemovedtopermit workattheroofedge.Placementandremovaloftheguardrails wouldresultindamagetotheroofmembrane.Useofcounterweights ofsufficientweighttomeettherequirementsof1926.500(d)(l) wouldresultinmajoroverstressofthedeckandthepossible collapseofthebuilding. 2.Roofingcontractorscouldnoterectguardrailsonthe wallsofthebuildingbeingroofedratherthanplacingthemon theroofitselfbecausetheydonothavetheengineering expertisetoproperlyattachtheguardrailsystemtothewall andtheirroofingcontractsdonotpermitalterationsormodificationstothewallsofthebuildingbeingroofed.Further, attachmentofaguardrailsystemtothebuildingwallsmight resultinoverstressandpossiblecollapseofthewalls. 3.Thehazardoffallingfromtheroofexistswhenmen areworkingwithin3to4feetoftheroofedge,referredto asthe"zoneofperil"duringthehearing.Erectionofa perimeterguardrailsystemwouldincreasetheriskoffalling bymultiplyingthenumberoftimesarooferwouldneedtowork withinthezoneofperil.First,therooferwouldperform roofoperationswithinthezoneofperil.Hewouldthenneed tore-enterthezoneofperiltoerecttheperimeterguard system.Hewouldagainneedtore-enterthezoneofperilto removetheperimeterguardsystemand,finally,wouldhaveto re-enterthezoneofperiltorepairdamagetotheroofmembrane_ . causedbyerectionandremovaloftheperimeterguardrailsystem.'