The Act applies to work on a covered interstate instrumentality or production facility even though performed during periods of temporary non-use or idleness. \52\ The courts have held the Act applicable to performance of construction work upon a covered facility even though the use of the facility was temporarily interrupted or discontinued. \53\ It is equally clear that the repair or maintenance of a covered facility (including its machinery, tools, dies, and other equipment) though performed during the inactive or dead season, is subject to the Acts. \54\---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ Walton v. Southern Package Corp., 320 U.S. 540; Slover v. Wathen & Co., 140 F. (2d) 258 (C.A. 4); Bodden v. McCormick Shipping Corp., 188 F. (2d) 733; and Russell Co. v. McComb, 187 F. (2d) 524 (C.A. 5).
\53\ Pedersen v. J. F. Fitzgerald Construction Co., ante; Bennett v. V. P. Loftis, ante; Walling v. McCrady Const. Co., ante; and Bodden v. McCormick Shipping Corp., 188 F. (2d) 733.
\54\ Maneja v. Waialua Agricultural Co., 349 U.S. 254; Bowie v. Gonzalez, 117 F. (2d) 11; Weaver v. Pittsburgh Steamship Co., 153 F. (2d) 597, certiorari denied 328 U.S. 858; Walling v. Keensburg Steamship Co., 462 F. (2d) 405.---------------------------------------------------------------------------