CONVERSE, TX ·
OSHA Inspection: BAILEY CONTRACTING
Planned inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of BAILEY CONTRACTING in 9204 FM 78, CONVERSE, TX 78109 (NAICS 237110). OSHA activity number 338995400.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.
Where did this inspection happen?
- Establishment
- BAILEY CONTRACTING
- Site address
- 9204 FM 78
- City
- CONVERSE
- State
- TX
- ZIP
- 78109
- Mailing
- P.O. BOX 430, STOCKDALE, TX 78160
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Planned (H)
- Scope
- Partial (B)
- Discipline
- Safety
- Advance notice
- No
- Union status
- Non-union (B)
When did the case open and close?
- Opened
- Closing conference
- Case closed
- Last modified
- Data loaded
Establishment context
- NAICS code
- 237110
- Employees
- 13
- Ownership type
- Private (A)
Citations
3 citations on file for this inspection.
1926.651 J02
- Issued
- Jun 4, 2013
- Abate by
- Jun 12, 2013
- Penalty
- Initial $2,000 · Current $1,400 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.651(j)(2): Employees were not protected from excavated or other materials or equipment that could pose a hazard by falling or rolling into excavations. Protection by placing and keeping such materials or equipment at least 2 feet from the edge of excavations, or by the use of retaining devices that are sufficient to prevent materials or equipment from falling or rolling into excavations, or by a combination of both if necessary was not provided: On or about April 8, 2013, employees were exposed to struck-by and cave-in hazards while working inside an excavation assisting with installing a new pipe for the fire line to the building. The trench measured approximately 6 feet in depth, 5 feet 4 inches in width, and 30 feet in length. The spoils pile was approximately 1 foot from the edge of the trench.
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $1400
- · Z (S) $2000
1926.652 A01
- Issued
- Jun 4, 2013
- Abate by
- Jun 12, 2013
- Penalty
- Initial $2,800 · Current $1,960 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.652(a)(1): Each employee in an excavation was not protected from cave-ins by an adequate protective system designed in accordance with 29 CFR 1926.652(b) or (c): a) On or about April 8, 2013, employee was exposed to cave-in hazards while installing a new fireline for the building inside an inadequately protected trench that was approximately 6 feet in depth, 20 feet in length, and 5 feet 4 inches in width. The trench was inadequate because there was only 1 hydraulic shoring in place and only one set of finform. b) On or about April 8, 2013, employee was exposed to a cave-in hazard while installing a new fireline for the building inside an inadequately protected trench that was approximately 6 feet in depth, 20 feet in length, and 5 feet 4 inches in width. The trench was inadequate because the single hydraulic shoring was more than 4 feet from the bottom of the trench.
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $1960
- · Z (S) $2800
1926.652 C02 III
- Issued
- Jun 4, 2013
- Abate by
- Jun 12, 2013
- Penalty
- Initial $1,200 · Current $840 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.652(c)(2)(iii): Manufacturer's specifications, recommendations, and limitations, and manufacturer's approval to deviate from the specifications, recommendations, and limitations were not in written form at the jobsite during construction of the protective system: On or about April 8, 2013, an employee was exposed to cave-in hazards while installing a new fireline for the building inside an inadequately protected trench that was approximately 6 feet in depth, 30 feet in length, and 5 feet 4 inches in width. The trench shoring was inadequate because there was only 1 hydraulic shoring in place and only one set of finform. The trench shoring was also inadequate because the single hydraulic shoring was more than 4 feet from the bottom of the trench.
Recent events (2)
- · I (S) $840
- · Z (S) $1200
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 237110)
More inspections in TX
Source
This record is reproduced from the U.S. Department of Labor Open Data API (OSHA inspection dataset). OSHA publishes its own view of this case as inspection number 338995400.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.