PORT ARANSAS, TX ·
OSHA Inspection: NATHANIEL KUCHENBECKER
Planned inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of NATHANIEL KUCHENBECKER in 162 LA CONCHA #18, PORT ARANSAS, TX 78373 (NAICS 236115). OSHA activity number 340095017.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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
- NATHANIEL KUCHENBECKER
- Site address
- 162 LA CONCHA #18
- City
- PORT ARANSAS
- State
- TX
- ZIP
- 78373
- Mailing
- 5451 HWY 35 NORTH, LOT #15, ROCKPORT, TX 78382
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
- 236115
- Employees
- 4
- Ownership type
- Private (A)
Citations
5 citations on file for this inspection.
1926.451 B02
- Issued
- Feb 18, 2015
- Abate by
- Mar 18, 2015
- Penalty
- Initial $1,600 · Current $1,600
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.451(b)(2): Scaffold platforms and walkways were not at least 18 inches wide. At this workplace, employees conducted construction operations at the height of greater than twelve feet, scaffoldings platforms and walkways were less than eighteen inches wide.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $1600
1926.451 E01
- Issued
- Feb 18, 2015
- Abate by
- Mar 18, 2015
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
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, sturcure, personnel hoist, or similar surface was not used. Crossbraces were used as a means of access. At this workplace, employees conducted construction operations at the height of greater than twelve feet, and did not have ladders for a point of access in areas such as but not limited to: a. to access scaffolding b. to access first floor roof.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $0
1926.451 G01
- Issued
- Feb 18, 2015
- Abate by
- Mar 18, 2015
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.451(g)(1): Employees on scaffolds more than 10 feet (3.1 m) above a lower level were not protected from falling to that lower level by fall protection established in paragraphs (g)(1)(i)-(vii) of this section: At this workplace, employees conducted construction operations on scaffolds at the height of greater than twelve feet and did not have a fall protection system in place.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $0
1926.451 H02 II
- Issued
- Feb 18, 2015
- Abate by
- Mar 18, 2015
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.451(h)(2)(ii): A toeboard was not erected along the edge of platforms more than 10 feet (3.1 m) above lower levels for a distance sufficient to protect employees below:Note: This requirement does not apply to float (ship) scaffolds where an edging of 3/4 inch x 1 1/2 inch (2 x 4 cm) wood or equivalent was used in lieu of toeboards. At this workplace, employees conducted construction operations on scaffolds at the height of greater than twelve feet, and toeboards were not erected while employees worked below.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $0
1926.501 B13
- Issued
- Feb 18, 2015
- Abate by
- Mar 18, 2015
- Penalty
- Initial $1,600 · Current $1,600
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. At this workplace, employees conducted construction operations from a residential roof at the height greater than twenty one feet, and did not have a fall protection system in place.
Recent events (1)
- · Z (S) $1600
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 236115)
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 340095017.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.