Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,191,288Inspections Most recent open 2026-07-24 Last loaded 2026-07-29

OSHA Inspection: T.U. ELECTRIC

Unprogrammed Related inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened an unprogrammed Related safety inspection of T.U. ELECTRIC in 9 MILES SOUTH, FARM RD. 127, MT. PLEASANT, TX 75455 (NAICS 000000). OSHA activity number 103626099.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 T.U. Electric — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for T.U. Electric is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Establishment
T.U. ELECTRIC
Site address
9 MILES SOUTH, FARM RD. 127
City
MT. PLEASANT
State
TX
ZIP
75455
Mailing
P.O. BOX 1266, MT. PLEASANT, TX 75456
Inspection type
Unprogrammed Related (G)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
Y
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
000000
SIC code (legacy)
7349
Employees
355
Ownership type
A

1 citation on file for this inspection.

5(a)(1)

Deleted Serious Gravity 02 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Mar 18, 1994
Abate by
May 4, 1994
Penalty
Initial $1,300
SECTION 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970:  The
employer did not
furnish employment and a place of employment which were free from
recognized hazards that
were causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to
employees in that employees
were exposed to:
a.Burns by high temperature and high pressure steam from the unexpected
release
of steam:  Where the contractor performing work did not have a
lockout/tagout program and an
authorized employee, the employer did not assure that all hazardous
energy sources were
rendered safe by the employer's lockout/tagout procedure, and where the
application of the
procedures were not feasible, the employer did not assure that the
contractor's employees were
protected by personal protective equipment for possible exposure to high
temperature and high
pressure steam where they were assigned the task of removal of insulation
on a line where a
known leak existed; on the feedwater heater drain line between heater #2
and heater #3, on
generating unit #3, at the Monticello facility, Mount Pleasant, Texas.
One feasible abatement method is:
1.Assure that Fluor Daniel develops and implements a lockout/tagout
program,
wherein "authorized", "affected", and "other" employees are trained
according
to the program requirements.
2.Have the Fluor Daniel authorized employee involved with TU personnel
lin an
evaluation of the likelyhood of a rupture occurring based on any and all
available
data regarding thinning of lines and their locations, as well a sin the
decision
process of determining the need for lockout/tagout.
3.Where lockout/tagout is not feasible, require the use of personal
protective
equipment most suited to afford the best protection possible form the
effects of
steam.
4.Inform "affected" and "other" fluor Daniel employees of the procedures
to be
followed following the evaluation and decision process, and assure that
the
selected procedures are followed.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S)
  • — Z (S) $1300.00

View T.U. Electric's full OSHA safety record →

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 103626099.

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