MANSFIELD, TX —
OSHA Inspection: RAUL MENDEZ
Planned inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of RAUL MENDEZ in 1107 KNOLL CREST DR., MANSFIELD, TX 76063 (NAICS 238350). OSHA activity number 342929957.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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
- RAUL MENDEZ
- Site address
- 1107 KNOLL CREST DR.
- City
- MANSFIELD
- State
- TX
- ZIP
- 76063
- Mailing
- 3312 SAINT LOUIS AVE., FORT WORTH, TX 76110
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Planned (H)
- Scope
- Partial (B)
- Discipline
- Safety
- Advance notice
- No
- Union status
- B
When did the case open and close?
- Opened
- Closing conference
- Case closed
- Last modified
- Data loaded
Establishment context
- NAICS code
- 238350
- Employees
- 4
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
5 citations on file for this inspection.
1926.100 A
- Issued
- Feb 6, 2018
- Abate by
- Mar 7, 2018
- Penalty
- Initial $1,663 · Current $0 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.100(a): Employees working in areas where there was a possible danger of head injury from impact, or falling or flying objects, or from electrical shock and burns, were not protected by protective helmets. On the east side of the construction site, employees were exposed to struck-by hazards from falling and flying objects while working below other workers.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $1663
1926.102 A01
- Issued
- Feb 6, 2018
- Abate by
- Mar 7, 2018
- Penalty
- Initial $1,663 · Current $0 Reduced
General-duty citation text
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, molten metal, liquid chemicals, acids or caustic liquids, chemical gases or vapors, or potentially injurious light radiation. On the east side of the construction site, employees engaged in framing activities used pneumatic nail guns and were not wearing eye and face protection exposing them to struck-by hazards and eye injuries.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $1663
1926.501 B13
- Issued
- Feb 6, 2018
- Abate by
- Mar 7, 2018
- Penalty
- Initial $3,880 · Current $0 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.501(b)(13): Each employee(s) engaged in residential construction activities 6 feet (1.8 m) or more above lower levels were not protected by guardrail systems, safety net system, or personal fall arrest system, nor were employee(s) provided with an alternative fall protection measure under another provision of paragraph 1926.501 (b). On the east side of the construction site, employees engaged in framing activities without fall protection were exposed to fall hazards of approximately 10 feet to the ground below.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $3880
1926.503 A02
- Issued
- Feb 6, 2018
- Abate by
- Mar 7, 2018
- Penalty
- Initial $1,663 · Current $0 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.503(a)(2): The employer did not assure that each employee exposed to fall hazards was trained by a competent person qualified in the areas specified in 29 CFR 1926.503 (a)(2)(i) through (viii). On the south side of the construction site, employees worked over 6 feet without fall protection and were not provided training on fall protection or fall hazard recognition.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $1663
1926.1051 A
- Issued
- Feb 6, 2018
- Abate by
- Mar 7, 2018
- Penalty
- Initial $2,217 · Current $0 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.1051(a): Stairway(s) or ladder(s) were not provided at all personnel points of access where there was a break in elevation of 19 inches (48 cm) or more, or no ramp, runway, sloped embankment, or personnel hoist was provided. On the east side of the construction site, the employer did not provide a ladder where employees could access and egress the upper landings exposing them to a potential fall of more than 6 feet.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $2217
More inspections at Raul Mendez
View Raul Mendez's full OSHA safety record →
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 238350)
More inspections in TX
Source
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 342929957.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.