OSHA Inspection: COPAS INC

Issued

Jan 22, 2021

Abate by

Feb 26, 2021

Penalty

Initial $3,218 · Current $1,609 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1926.20(b)(1): The employer did not initiate and maintain accident prevention programs as necessary to comply with this part:   On or about 10/16/2020, the employer did not initiate and maintain an accident prevention program to establish criteria for protecting employees from fall from heights and struck by hazards.

Issued

Jan 22, 2021

Abate by

Feb 26, 2021

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1926.20(b)(2): The employer did not initiate and maintain a safety program which provides for frequent and regular inspections of jobsites, materials, and equipment to be made by a competent person (i.e., a person who is capable of identifying existing and predictable hazards in the surroundings or working conditions which are unsanitary, hazardous, or dangerous to employees, and who has authorization to take prompt corrective measures to eliminate them):   On or about 10/16/2020, the employer did not maintain jobsite inspections that were performed by a person competent to ensure employees were not exposed to fall from heights and struck-by hazards during construction operations.

Issued

Jan 22, 2021

Abate by

Feb 26, 2021

Penalty

Initial $2,575 · Current $1,288 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1926.102(a)(1): 29 CFR  1926.102(a)(1):The employer shall ensure that each affected employee uses appropriate eye or face protection when exposed to eye or face hazards from flying particles, molten metal, liquid chemicals, acids or caustic liquids, chemical gases or vapors, or potentially injurious light radiation:  On or about 10/16/2020, the employer did not ensure that eye protective equipment was used when employees were exposed to eye injury while using pneumatic nail guns.

Issued

Jan 22, 2021

Abate by

Feb 19, 2021

Penalty

Initial $4,505 · Current $2,253 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1926.502(d)(6)(i): A snaphook not of the locking type was engaged (i) directly to webbing, rope or wire rope; (ii) to each other (iii) to a Dee-ring to which another snaphook or other connector is attached;(iv) to a horizontal lifeline; or (v) to any object which is incompatibly shaped or dimensioned in relation to the snaphook such that unintentional disengagement could occur by the connected object being able to depress the snaphook keeper and release itself:   On or about 10/16/2020, the employer did not ensure that a snaphook, used on a personal fall arrest system, was the only snaphook connected to the D-ring of an anchor point.  Three (3) snaphooks were connected to a single anchor point D-ring.

Issued

Jan 22, 2021

Abate by

Feb 19, 2021

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1926.502(d)(15): Anchorage used for attachment for personal fall arrest equipment was not capable of supporting at least 5,000 pounds (22.2 kN) per employee attached:   On or about 10/16/2020, the employer did not ensure fall protection anchor points were installed to support at least 5,000 pounds per employee.

Issued

Jan 22, 2021

Abate by

Feb 19, 2021

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1926.502(d)(16)(iii): Personal fall arrest systems, when stopping a fall, were not rigged such that an employee could not free fall more than 6 feet (1.8 m) nor contact any lower level:   On or about 10/16/2020, the employer did not ensure that fall protection systems were used in a manner to keep employees from free falling more than 6 foot while performing roofing activities.

Issued

Jan 22, 2021

Abate by

Feb 19, 2021

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1926.502(d)(17): The attachment point of the body harness was not located in the center of the wearer's back near shoulder level, or above the wearer's head:   On or about 10/16/2020, employer did not ensure that the connection point of an employee's harness was located in the center of the worker's back, near the shoulder level.

Issued

Jan 22, 2021

Abate by

Feb 26, 2021

Penalty

Initial $3,218 · Current $1,609 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1926.503(a)(1): The employer did not provide a training program for each employee who might be exposed to fall hazards:  On or about 10/16/2020, the employer did not provide training to employees who were engaged in residential roofing operations 6 feet (1.8 m) or more above lower levels.  The employees were conducting residential roofing operations and were exposed to the hazard of falling approximately eighteen (18) feet.

Issued

Jan 22, 2021

Abate by

Feb 19, 2021

Penalty

Initial $3,218 · Current $1,609 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(1): Portable ladders are used for access to an upper landing surface and the ladder side rails do not extend at least 3 feet (.9 m) above the upper landing surface to which the ladder is used to gain access:    On or about 10/16/2020, the employer did not ensure portable ladders were constructed and placed so three (3) feet or more was extended above the upper landing.  Workers performing residential construction were exposed to falling approximately eleven (11) feet while using an extension ladder to ascend/descend from the ground level to the jobsite roof.

Issued

Jan 22, 2021

Abate by

Feb 26, 2021

Penalty

Initial $9,011 · Current $4,506 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1926.501(b)(13): Each employee engaged in residential construction activities 6 feet (1.8 m)  or more above lower levels was not protected by guardrail systems, safety net systems, personal fall arrest systems, or an alternative fall protection measure under another provision of paragraph 1926.501 (b), nor did the employer demonstrate that it is infeasible or creates a greater hazard to use these systems and develop and implement a fall protection plan which meets the requirements of paragraph (k) of section 1926.502:    On or about 10/16/2020, the employer did not protect employees who were engaged in residential roofing operations 6 feet (1.8 m) or more above lower levels.  The employees were conducting residential roofing operations and were exposed to the hazard of falling approximately eleven (11) feet.  The employer (Copas of Missouri Inc.) was previously cited for a violation of this occupational safety and health standard, which was contained in OSHA inspection number 1390229, citation number 1, item number 2 and was affirmed as a final order on 07/12/2019, with respect to a workplace located at 5410 Baylor Dr., Fairview Heights, IL 62208.