1910.28(b)(1): Unprotected sides and edges 4 feet or higher
Workers on a walking-working surface with an unprotected side or edge 4 feet or more above a lower level must be protected by guardrails, a safety net, or a personal fall protection system such as fall arrest, travel restraint or positioning. A fall protection plan may be used instead only on residential roofs when the employer proves those systems are not feasible or create a greater hazard; the rule presumes they are feasible. There is also a limited exception for the working side of loading rack, loading dock and teeming platforms when fall protection is not feasible.
Key takeaways
- 1910.28(b)(1) is part of OSHA's general industry standards (29 CFR Part 1910, Subpart D).
- OSHA cited it 1,938 times in the last 3 years, in 1,935 inspections, with $9,024,594 in current penalties.
- 37 deaths are linked to inspections that cited this rule.
- Most citations: OR (166), MI (138), IL (108).
- Related part: 1910.28(b) Protection from fall hazards (3,551 citations).
- Free 5-minute toolbox talk for your crew below.
In this article
What this rule covers
29 CFR 1910.28(b)(1) ("Unprotected sides and edges") is one requirement inside 1910.28 Duty to have fall protection and falling object protection, an OSHA general industry standard (Part 1910, Subpart D). It includes 9 sub-paragraphs. The official text below is copied word for word from the Electronic Code of Federal Regulations (eCFR). The numbers, injury cases and training on this page show how OSHA enforces it on real job sites.
Official text
(1) Unprotected sides and edges. 1,938 citations
(i) Except as provided elsewhere in this section, the employer must ensure that each employee on a walking-working surface with an unprotected side or edge that is 4 feet (1.2 m) or more above a lower level is protected from falling by one or more of the following: Open (b)(1)(i) 1,933 citations
(A) Guardrail systems; Open (b)(1)(i)(a) 61 citations
(B) Safety net systems; or
(C) Personal fall protection systems, such as personal fall arrest, travel restraint, or positioning systems. Open (b)(1)(i)(c) 28 citations
(ii) When the employer can demonstrate that it is not feasible or creates a greater hazard to use guardrail, safety net, or personal fall protection systems on residential roofs, the employer must develop and implement a fall protection plan that meets the requirements of 29 CFR 1926.502(k) and training that meets the requirements of 29 CFR 1926.503(a) and (c). 3 citations
There is a presumption that it is feasible and will not create a greater hazard to use at least one of the above-listed fall protection systems specified in paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section. Accordingly, the employer has the burden of establishing that it is not feasible or creates a greater hazard to provide the fall protection systems specified in paragraph (b)(1)(i) and that it is necessary to implement a fall protection plan that complies with § 1926.502(k) in the particular work operation, in lieu of implementing any of those systems.
(iii) When the employer can demonstrate that the use of fall protection systems is not feasible on the working side of a platform used at a loading rack, loading dock, or teeming platform, the work may be done without a fall protection system, provided: 1 citations
(A) The work operation for which fall protection is infeasible is in process;
(B) Access to the platform is limited to authorized employees; and,
(C) The authorized employees are trained in accordance with § 1910.30. 1 citations
Source: eCFR, text current as of 2026-10-15. Read all of 1910.28.
Injuries linked to this rule
37 deaths are linked to inspections where OSHA cited 1910.28(b)(1).
At 7:00 p.m. on February 24, 2025, Employee #1 entered a grain bin while operating an auger and became caught in the sweep auger. The employee was fatally injured.
Full case list with employer, penalty, filters and download is part of OSHA Data (Purple Belt).
Unlock with Purple BeltWhere and how often it was cited
| Year | Citations |
|---|---|
| 2023 | 109 |
| 2024 | 699 |
| 2025 | 700 |
| 2026 | 430 |
Top states: OR (166), MI (138), IL (108), MN (97), TX (89)
Largest penalties
| Employer | Location | Penalty for this rule |
|---|---|---|
| MDLG, INC. | PHENIX CITY, AL | $313,423 |
| AMERICAN FUMIGATION SERVICES LLC | HONOLULU, HI | $163,859 |
| RESOURCE RECYCLING, INC. | LIMA, OH | $132,411 |
| WARD COVE DOCK GROUP, LLC | KETCHIKAN, AK | $111,797 |
| THE JAMES SKINNER LLC | OMAHA, NE | $105,000 |
Free toolbox talk
A 5-minute crew talk on 1910.28(b)(1), plus alerts when this rule changes. Free.
OSHA interpretation letters
None exist. OSHA has not published a letter of interpretation for 1910.28(b)(1).
Related parts of this rule
- 1910.28(b) Protection from fall hazards 3,551 citations
- 1910.28(b)(1)(i) 1,933 citations
- 1910.28(b)(3) Holes 667 citations
- 1910.28(b)(11) Stairways 407 citations
- 1910.28(b)(11)(ii) 351 citations
- 1910.28(b)(3)(ii) 288 citations
- 1910.28(b)(3)(i) 238 citations
- 1910.28(b)(13) Work on low-slope roofs 132 citations
- 1910.28(b)(6) Dangerous equipment 123 citations
- 1910.28(b)(3)(iv) 108 citations
- 1910.28(b)(6)(i) 106 citations
- 1910.28(b)(15) Walking-working surfaces not otherwise addressed 68 citations
Get your crew competent
Trainers on Black Belt Safety: Marc Harvey, Dana Reyes
Trainers and suppliers: feature your business on this rule for $25/month.
Frequently asked questions
Who has to prove fall protection is not feasible?
The employer. The rule presumes at least one of the listed systems is feasible and does not create a greater hazard.
Do loading docks need guardrails on the working side?
There is a limited exception for the working side of loading rack, loading dock and teeming platforms when the employer can show fall protection is not feasible, subject to the conditions in the rule.
About this page
Sources
- 29 CFR 1910.28 (eCFR), text current as of 2026-10-15
- U.S. Department of Labor enforcement data: OSHA inspections, citations and accident records, copied nightly; data as of 2026-10-20
3-year window. Federal OSHA only; state-plan rules are not counted. Plain-language text is a summary, not legal advice; the official text controls. Black Belt Safety is not part of OSHA or the Department of Labor.