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

OSHA Inspection: ALEJANDRO BENITEZ GARCIA

Planned inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of ALEJANDRO BENITEZ GARCIA in 11715 ALAMO RANCH PKWY, SAN ANTONIO, TX 78253 (NAICS 238130). OSHA activity number 347470114.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Alejandro Benitez Garcia — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Alejandro Benitez Garcia is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
11715 ALAMO RANCH PKWY
City
SAN ANTONIO
State
TX
ZIP
78253
Mailing
5317 LA JOLLA DR., GARLAND, TX 75043
Inspection type
Planned (H)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Closing conference
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
238130
Employees
4
Ownership type
A

5 citations on file for this inspection.

1926.100 A

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jul 23, 2024
Penalty
Initial $2,765 · Current $2,765
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 or about May 07, 2024, on the east side of a commercial building, an employee was working at the ground level without being protected from overhead work.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $2765

1926.102 A01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jul 23, 2024
Penalty
Initial $2,765 · Current $2,765
29 CFR  1926.102(a)(1):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 May 07, 2024, on the east side of a commercial building's roof, an employee utilized a pneumatic air gun without proper eye protection.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $2765

1926.501 B10

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jul 23, 2024
Penalty
Initial $2,765 · Current $2,765
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 May 07, 2024, on the east side of a commercial building's roof, an employee performed roofing work without utilizing fall protection.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $2765

1926.503 A01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jul 23, 2024
Abate by
Aug 16, 2024
Penalty
Initial $2,765 · Current $2,765
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 May 07, 2024, on the east side of a commercial building's roof, an employee without fall protection was performing roofing work and was not trained on fall hazard recognition.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $2765

1926.1053 B01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jul 23, 2024
Penalty
Initial $2,765 · Current $2,765
29 CFR  1926.1053(b)(1):Where portable ladders were used for access to an upper landing surface and the ladder's length allows, the ladder side rails did not extend at least 3 feet (.9 m) above the upper landing surface being accessed:  On or about May 07, 2024, on the east side of a commercial building's roof, an employee used a Werner extension ladder with rails extended less than 3 feet, to gain access to the rooftop.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $2765

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 347470114.

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