Skip to content

Approaching: Nov 20, 2026 — HCS 2024 Deadline. Get ready →

29 CFR 1926.502 · Arizona · FY2025

Fall Protection Systems Criteria in Arizona: FY2025 OSHA citations

14 citation items under 29 CFR 1926.502 at inspected sites in Arizona, from 12 inspections.

From Oct 1, 2024 to Sep 30, 2025, the Department of Labor's OSHA enforcement data record 14 citation items under 29 CFR 1926.502 at inspected sites in Arizona, in 12 inspections. Among the 78 sections of 29 CFR parts 1904, 1910 and 1926 cited in Arizona that year (768 citation items in all), this one ranks 18th by items. These counts describe inspected establishments, not the whole industry.

Paragraphs of 29 CFR 1926.502 cited in Arizona

ParagraphItemsShare of the 14
1926.502(b)(2)321%
1926.502(b)(13)321%
1926.502(d)(15)(ii)214%
1926.502(b)(1)214%
1926.502(b)(9)214%

7 different paragraphs were cited in all; the table lists the 5 with the most items.

Federal text of 29 CFR 1926.502(b)(2), as the eCFR reads on Oct 15, 2026
“(2) Midrails, screens, mesh, intermediate vertical members, or equivalent intermediate structural members shall be installed between the top edge of the guardrail system and the walking/working surface when there is no wall or parapet wall at least 21 inches (53 cm) high. (i) Midrails, when used, shall be installed at a height midway between the top edge of the guardrail system and the walking/working level. (ii) Screens and mesh, when used, shall extend from the top rail to the walking/working level and along the entire opening between top rail supports. (iii) Intermediate members (such as balusters), when used between posts, shall be not …”

The paragraph continues in the standard. Read 29 CFR 1926.502

Federal text of 29 CFR 1926.502(b)(13), as the eCFR reads on Oct 15, 2026
“(13) When guardrail systems are used around holes which are used as points of access (such as ladderways), they shall be provided with a gate, or be so offset that a person cannot walk directly into the hole.”
Federal text of 29 CFR 1926.502(d)(15)(ii), as the eCFR reads on Oct 15, 2026
“(ii) under the supervision of a qualified person.”

How the Arizona citations were classified

Of the 14 citation items: 11 serious, 0 willful, 0 repeat and 3 other-than-serious (79% serious).

Who was inspected in Arizona

92% of the 12 inspections with a recorded headcount were at sites with 1 to 10 employees. The headcount is the inspected site's, not the employer's total.

Employees at the inspected site
1 to 1011
26 to 1001
NAICS sector, by items
Construction12
Wholesale Trade1
Other Services (except Public Administration)1
NAICS industry group, by items
Foundation, Structure, and Building Exterior Contractors7
Residential Building Construction2
Machinery, Equipment, and Supplies Merchant Wholesalers1

When the items were issued

By quarter of FY2025: Oct to Dec 2024: 5; Jan to Mar 2025: 4; Apr to Jun 2025: 1; Jul to Sep 2025: 4.

Who enforced in Arizona

Arizona has an OSHA-approved State Plan that ordinarily covers private-sector employers and state and local government workers. All 14 of the items were recorded by the State Plan's office. A State Plan may have standards of its own. The paragraphs on this page are the federal 29 CFR numbers recorded in OSHA's data, and this page does not say which Arizona rule applies to a given workplace. OSHA's page on the Arizona State Plan, with its coverage.

Arizona against the other states

Arizona ranks 23rd of the 49 states and territories with items under 29 CFR 1926.502 in this data. The most items: Maryland 190; Illinois 155; Massachusetts 69; Oregon 69; Virginia 65. In all, the data record 1,229 citation items under 29 CFR 1926.502; the 14 in Arizona are 1.1% of them. Penalty maximums: OSHA penalties in Arizona.

Next steps for a Arizona employer

Counts by HazComFast from the Department of Labor's OSHA enforcement data, extracted Oct 13, 2026; deleted items left out, 29 CFR numbers only. They are not figures OSHA publishes for the state, and the live database can change them. Same data source and method as our HazCom enforcement study. Not legal advice.