Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,189,992Inspections Most recent open 2026-07-18 Last loaded 2026-07-22

OSHA Inspection: CHRISTIAN SANCHEZ

Planned inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of CHRISTIAN SANCHEZ in 3941 PINTAIL DR & 3930 WOOD DUCK DR, SPRINGFIELD, IL 62711 (NAICS 238160). OSHA activity number 348782723.

Watch Christian Sanchez — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Christian Sanchez is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Establishment
CHRISTIAN SANCHEZ
Site address
3941 PINTAIL DR & 3930 WOOD DUCK DR
City
SPRINGFIELD
State
IL
ZIP
62711
Mailing
17 SANDALWOOD DRIVE, CHAMPAIGN, IL 61820
Inspection type
Planned (H)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Closing conference
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
238160
Employees
5
Ownership type
A

8 citations on file for this inspection.

1903.19 C03

Other-than-serious 1 instance 5 exposed
Issued
May 18, 2026
Abate by
Jun 26, 2026
Penalty
Initial $398 · Current $398
29 CFR 1903.19(c)(3): The employer did not submit certification that abatement is complete for each cited violation, in addition to the information required by paragraph (h) of this section, the date and method of abatement and a statement that affected employees and their representatives have been informed of the abatement:     The employer did not submit certification that abatement is complete, including the date and method of abatement, for each citation issued on March 6, 2026.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (O) $398

1926.20 B02

Serious Gravity 10 4 instances 5 exposed
Issued
Mar 6, 2026
Abate by
Apr 6, 2026
Penalty
Initial $4,965 · Current $4,965
29 CFR 1926.20(b)(2): The employer did not initiate and maintain programs which provided for frequent and regular inspections of the job site, materials and equipment to be made by a competent person(s):   On or about September 19, 2025, employees performing roofing operations were exposed to eye injuries and fall and overhead hazards and the employer did not ensure a competent person inspected the jobsite for unsafe activities and take necessary steps to eliminate and control the hazards:  a. Employees on the roof were exposed to fall hazards greater than 10 feet without fall protection.  b. Employees working on the ground beneath employees on the roof performing roofing activities were exposed to overhead hazards without head protection.  c. Employees on the roof were were exposed to eye injuries while using pneumatic nail guns without eye protection.   d. Employees using portable ladders were exposed to fall hazards because the ladders did not extend three feet over the roof edge.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $4965

1926.100 A

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 5 exposed
Issued
Mar 6, 2026
Abate by
Apr 6, 2026
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1926.100(a): Employees were not protected by protective helmets while working in areas where there was a possible danger of head injury from impact, or from falling or flying objects, or from electrical shock and burns:   On or about September 19, 2025, employees working on the ground below roofing operations were exposed to overhead hazards and the employer did not ensure hard hats were used.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $0

1926.102 A01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 5 exposed
Issued
Mar 6, 2026
Abate by
Apr 6, 2026
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1926.102(a)(1): The employer did not ensure that each affected employee used appropriate eye or face protection when exposed to eye or face hazards from flying particles:   On or about September 19, 2025, employees performing roofing operations was exposed to eye injuries while using pneumatic nail guns and the employer did not ensure safety glasses were used.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $0

1926.501 B10

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 9 exposed
Issued
Mar 6, 2026
Abate by
Apr 6, 2026
Penalty
Initial $4,965 · Current $4,965
29 CFR 1926.501(b)(10): Each employee engaged in roofing activities on low-slope roofs with unprotected sides and edges 6 feet or more above lower levels, was not protected from falling by guardrail systems, safety net systems, personal fall arrest systems, or a combination of warning line system and guardrail system, warning line system and safety net system, or warning line system and personal fall arrest system, or warning line system and safety monitoring system.  Or, on roofs 50-feet (15.25 m) or less in width, each employee was not protected by use of a monitoring system:   On or about September 19, 2025, employees performing roofing operations were exposed to fall hazards greater than 10 feet and the employer did not ensure fall protection was used.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $4965

1926.503 A01

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 9 exposed
Issued
Mar 6, 2026
Abate by
Apr 6, 2026
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1926.503(a)(1): The employer did not provide a training program for each employee potentially exposed to fall hazards to enable each employee to recognize the hazards of falling and the procedures to be followed in order to minimize these hazards:  On or about September 19, 2025, employees performing roofing operations were exposed to fall hazards greater than 10 feet and the employer did not ensure the employees were trained in the fall protection system to be used.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $0

1926.1053 B01

Serious Gravity 5 2 instances 5 exposed
Issued
Mar 6, 2026
Abate by
Apr 6, 2026
Penalty
Initial $3,547 · Current $3,547
29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(1): Where (a) portable ladder(s) was/were used for access to an upper level landing surface and the ladder's length did not allow the ladder side rails to extend at least 3 feet (0.9 m) above the upper landing surface being accessed, the ladder was not secured at its top to a rigid support that will not deflect, and/or a grasping device was not provided to assist employees in mounting and dismounting the ladder:   On or about September 19, 2025, employees using portable ladders to access the roof were exposed to fall hazards and the employer did not ensure the ladders' side rails extended at least three feet above the roof's eave:  a. The multi-position ladder used to access the South-facing side of 3941 Pintail Drive extended approximately 1.5 feet above the roof's edge.  b. The multi-position ladder used to access the North-facing side of 3941 Pintail Drive extended approximately 1 foot above the roof's edge.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $3547

1926.1060 A

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 5 exposed
Issued
Mar 6, 2026
Abate by
Apr 6, 2026
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1926.1060(a): The employer did not provide a training program for each employee using ladders and stairways, as necessary, which would enable each employee to recognize hazards related to ladders and stairways and train each employee in the procedures to be followed to minimize these hazards:   On or about September 19, 2025, employees using portable ladders to access the roof were exposed to fall hazards and the employer did not ensure employees were trained to safely set up and use the ladders provided to complete the work.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $0

View Christian Sanchez's full OSHA safety record →

This record is reproduced from the U.S. Department of Labor Open Data API (OSHA inspection dataset). The original IMIS detail view is available at OSHA's Establishment Search for activity number 348782723.

Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.