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

OSHA Inspection: SAUL MARQUEZ-RODRIGUEZ

Planned inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of SAUL MARQUEZ-RODRIGUEZ in 5411 RUNNYMEDE COURT, ARLINGTON, TX 76016 (NAICS 238130). OSHA activity number 336026984.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Saul Marquez-Rodriguez — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Saul Marquez-Rodriguez is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
5411 RUNNYMEDE COURT
City
ARLINGTON
State
TX
ZIP
76016
Mailing
2204 BAYBERRY DR., MESQUITE, TX 75149
Inspection type
Planned (H)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
238130
Employees
5
Ownership type
A

5 citations on file for this inspection.

1926.25 A

Deleted Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Jan 24, 2013
Abate by
Feb 20, 2013
Penalty
Initial $1,200 · Current $0 Reduced
29 CFR 1926.25(a): During the course of construction, alteration, or repairs, form or scrap lumber with protruding nails was not kept clear from work areas:    (a)  On or about 8/28/12, at the front of the house, scrap lumber and other debris were not kept clear from the work areas, exposing employees to slips, trips, and fall hazards.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $1200

1926.451 A06

Deleted Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jan 24, 2013
Abate by
Feb 20, 2013
Penalty
Initial $2,000 · Current $0 Reduced
29 CFR 1926.451(a)(6):  Scaffolds were not designed by a qualified person:     (a)  On or about 8/28/12, at the front of the residence, the scaffold that was being used to perform cornice work had not been designed by a qualified person.  The employee using this scaffold was exposed to fall hazards of more than 10 feet to the ground below.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $2000

1926.451 B02

Deleted Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jan 24, 2013
Abate by
Feb 20, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1926.451(b)(2):  Scaffold platforms and walkways were not at least 18 inches wide:    (a)  On or about 8/28/12, at the front of the residence, an employee was standing on a plank that was not 18 inches wide while performing cornice work.  The employee was exposed to falls of more than 10 feet to the ground below.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1926.451 E01

Deleted Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jan 24, 2013
Abate by
Feb 20, 2013
Penalty
Initial $2,000 · Current $0 Reduced
29 CFR 1926.451(e)(1):  When scaffold platforms were more than 2 feet (0.6 m) above or below a point of access, portable ladders, hook-on ladders, attachable ladders, stair towers (scaffold stairways/towers), stairway-type ladders (such as ladder stands), ramps, walkways, integral prefabricated scaffold access, or direct access from other scaffold, structure, personnel hoist, or similar surface was not used:    (a)  On or about 8/28/12, at the front of the residence, a scaffold ladder was not provided for accessing the scaffold.  The employee climbed through a window to access the scaffold and was exposed to fall hazards of more than 10 feet to the ground below.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $2000

1926.451 G01 VII

Deleted Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jan 24, 2013
Abate by
Feb 20, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1926.451(g)(1)(vii):  Each employee on a scaffold, not otherwise specified in paragraphs (g)(1)(i) through (g)(1)(vi) of this section, more than 10 feet (3.1 m) above lower level was not protected from falls by the use of personal fall arrest systems or guardrail systems meeting the requirements of paragraph (g)(4) of this section:    (a)  On or about 8/28/12, at the front of the residence, the employee was working from the scaffold platform and was not protected from falling by the use of guardrails or other fall protection systems.  The employee was exposed to falls of more than 10 feet to the ground below.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

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 336026984.

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