MORGANTON, NC — 2003-12-22 00:00:00

OSHA Inspection: FERGUSON COPELAND, LLC DBA FERGUSON COPELAND LTD

Planned inspection · Safety discipline

At a glance

On 2003-12-22 00:00:00, OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of FERGUSON COPELAND, LLC DBA FERGUSON COPELAND LTD in 100 REEP DRIVE, MORGANTON, NC 28680 (NAICS 337121). OSHA activity number 307318410.

What this inspection record means

OSHA opens inspections for many reasons — routine scheduling under a national or local emphasis program, an employee complaint or referral, or a follow-up after a reported injury. Opening or conducting an inspection is not itself an allegation or a finding that this employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.

Watch Ferguson Copeland, LLC DBA Ferguson Copeland LTD — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Ferguson Copeland, LLC DBA Ferguson Copeland LTD is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.

Where did this inspection happen?

Establishment: FERGUSON COPELAND, LLC DBA FERGUSON COPELAND LTD
Site address: 100 REEP DRIVE
City: MORGANTON
State: NC
ZIP: 28680
Mailing: PO BOX 10, MORGANTON, NC 28680

What kind of inspection was it?

Inspection type: Planned (H)
Scope: Complete (A)
Discipline: Safety
Advance notice: No
Union status: N

When did the case open and close?

Opened: 2003-12-22 00:00:00
Closing conference: 2003-12-29 00:00:00
Case closed: 2004-03-09 00:00:00
Last modified: 2004-07-21 00:00:00
Data loaded: 2011-10-14 16:38:47

Establishment context

NAICS code: 337121
SIC code (legacy): 2512
Employees: 160
Ownership type: A
Industry flags: Manufacturing safety.

Citations

16 citations on file for this inspection.

95012901

Serious 1 instance 1 exposed

Issued: Jan 7, 2004
Abate by: Feb 25, 2004
Penalty: Initial $263 · Current $184 Reduced

General-duty citation text

North Carolina General Statute 95-129(1) of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of North
Carolina:  The employer did not furnish to each of his employees
conditions of employment and a
place of employment which were free from recognized hazards that were
causing or likely to
cause death or serious physical harm to employees:
a)upholstery packing and department and decorolac department -- an initial,
frequent, and periodic inspections of all underhung overhead hoists were
not being
conducted.
REFERENCE:ANSI B30.11-1998, Chapter 11-2, Section 11-2.1, Inspection,
Paragraphs 11-2.1(a), 11-2.1.2(a), and 11-2.1.3(a)
NOTE:Among other methods of abatement, one feasible and acceptable method
to
correct this hazard is to conduct frequent and periodic inspection as
required by the above listed reference.

Recent events (2)

2004-01-20 00:00:00 — I (S) $184.10
2004-01-07 00:00:00 — Z (S) $263.00

95012901

Serious 1 instance 1 exposed

Issued: Jan 7, 2004
Abate by: Feb 25, 2004
Penalty: Initial $263 · Current $184 Reduced

General-duty citation text

North Carolina General Statute 95-129(1) of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of North
Carolina:  The employer did not furnish to each of his employees
conditions of employment and a
place of employment which were free from recognized hazards that were
causing or likely to
cause death or serious physical harm to employees:
a)upholstery packing and department and decorolac department -- a load
test of all
underhung overhead hoists was conducted.
REFERENCE:ANSI B30.11-1998, Chapter 11-2, Section 11-2.2, Inspection,
Paragraph 11-2..2.2(a).  New, reinstalled, altered, repaired, and
modified equipment should be load tested prior to initial use.
NOTE:Among other methods of abatement, one feasible and acceptable method
to
correct this hazard is to conduct a load test of all overhead hoists as
required by the above listed reference.

Recent events (2)

2004-01-20 00:00:00 — I (S) $184.10
2004-01-07 00:00:00 — Z (S) $263.00

95012901

Serious 1 instance 1 exposed

Issued: Jan 7, 2004
Abate by: Feb 25, 2004
Penalty: Initial $263 · Current $184 Reduced

General-duty citation text

North Carolina General Statute 95-129(1) of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of North
Carolina:  The employer did not furnish to each of his employees
conditions of employment and a
place of employment which were free from recognized hazards that were
causing or likely to
cause death or serious physical harm to employees:
a)upholstery packing and department and decorolac department -- a test of
all
underhung overhead hoists upper limit switches were not being conducted
prior to
each shifts use.
REFERENCE:ANSI B30.11-1998, Chapter 11-2, Section 11-2.2, Inspection,
Paragraph 11-2..2.1(b)(4).  Hoist upper limit travel device shall be
tested with an empty hook; the actuating mechanism of the upper-limit
device shall be located or adjusted so that it will trip the device
in sufficient time to prevent contact of the load block or load with
any part of the carrier or bridge.
NOTE:Among other methods of abatement, one feasible and acceptable method
to
correct this hazard is to conduct upper-limit switch testing prior to each
shifts use.ts

Recent events (2)

2004-01-20 00:00:00 — I (S) $184.10
2004-01-07 00:00:00 — Z (S) $263.00

95012901

Serious 1 instance 1 exposed

Issued: Jan 7, 2004
Abate by: Feb 25, 2004
Penalty: Initial $263 · Current $184 Reduced

General-duty citation text

North Carolina General Statute 95-129(1) of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of North
Carolina:  The employer did not furnish to each of his employees
conditions of employment and a
place of employment which were free from recognized hazards that were
causing or likely to
cause death or serious physical harm to employees:
a)upholstery packing department ! the rated load of a monorail hoist
system was not
marked on each side of the monorail.
REFERENCE:ANSI B30.11-1980, Chapter 11-1, Section 11-1.1, Markings,
Paragraph 11-1.1.2 Rated Load Markings - Monorails. The rated
load shall be marked on each side of the monorail to indicate the
maximum load allowed.
NOTE:Among other methods of abatement, one feasible and acceptable method
to
correct this hazard is label the hoist monorail as required by the above
listed reference.

Recent events (2)

2004-01-20 00:00:00 — I (S) $184.10
2004-01-07 00:00:00 — Z (S) $263.00

95012901

Serious 1 instance 1 exposed

Issued: Jan 7, 2004
Abate by: Feb 25, 2004
Penalty: Initial $263 · Current $184 Reduced

General-duty citation text

North Carolina General Statute 95-129(1) of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of North
Carolina:  The employer did not furnish to each of his employees
conditions of employment and a
place of employment which were free from recognized hazards that were
causing or likely to
cause death or serious physical harm to employees:
a)upholstery packing department ! the rated load of an under-the-hook
lifting was
not marked on the device.
REFERENCE:ANSI B30.20-1985, Chapter 20-1, Section 20-1.2, Markings and
Construction, Paragraph 20-1.2.1(a), Rated Load Markings. The
rated load of the lifting device shall be marked on the main
structure where it is visible.  NOTE: Also see paragraph 20-1.2.1(b).
NOTE:Among other methods of abatement, one feasible and acceptable method
to
correct this hazard is label the lifting device as required by the above
listed
reference.

Recent events (2)

2004-01-20 00:00:00 — I (S) $184.10
2004-01-07 00:00:00 — Z (S) $263.00

95012901

Serious 1 instance 1 exposed

Issued: Jan 7, 2004
Abate by: Feb 25, 2004
Penalty: Initial $263 · Current $184 Reduced

General-duty citation text

North Carolina General Statute 95-129(1) of the Occupational Safety and
Health Act of North
Carolina:  The employer did not furnish to each of his employees
conditions of employment and a
place of employment which were free from recognized hazards that were
causing or likely to
cause death or serious physical harm to employees:
a)upholstery packing department !a load test was not conducted on
under-the-hook
lifting devices prior to placing them into operation:
REFERENCE:ANSI B30.20-1985, Chapter 20-1, Section 20-1.4, Testing,
Paragraph 20-1.4.1, Operational Tests. Prior to initial use, all new,
altered, modified, or repaired lifting devices shall be tested to
ensure compliance with this standard.  NOTE: Also see paragraphs
20-1.4.1(a) and (b).
NOTE:Among other methods of abatement, one feasible and acceptable method
to
correct this hazard is to load test the lifting device(s) as required by
the
above listed reference.

Recent events (2)

2004-01-20 00:00:00 — I (S) $184.10
2004-01-07 00:00:00 — Z (S) $263.00

1910.215 A04

Serious 1 instance 1 exposed

Issued: Jan 7, 2004
Abate by: Jan 27, 2004
Penalty: Initial $438 · Current $307 Reduced

Recent events (2)

2004-01-20 00:00:00 — I (S) $306.60
2004-01-07 00:00:00 — Z (S) $438.00

1910.215 B09

Serious 1 instance 1 exposed

Issued: Jan 7, 2004
Abate by: Jan 27, 2004

1910.215 D01

Serious 1 instance 1 exposed

Issued: Jan 7, 2004
Abate by: Jan 27, 2004

1910.304 F04

Serious 1 instance 1 exposed

Issued: Jan 7, 2004
Abate by: Jan 12, 2004
Penalty: Initial $613 · Current $429 Reduced

Recent events (2)

2004-01-20 00:00:00 — I (S) $429.10
2004-01-07 00:00:00 — Z (S) $613.00