MT. PLEASANT, TX —
OSHA Inspection: T.U. ELECTRIC
Unprogrammed Related inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
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.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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
- 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
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Unprogrammed Related (G)
- Scope
- Partial (B)
- Discipline
- Safety
- Advance notice
- No
- Union status
- Y
When did the case open and close?
- Opened
- Closing conference
- Case closed
- Last modified
- Data loaded
Establishment context
- NAICS code
- 000000
- SIC code (legacy)
- 7349
- Employees
- 355
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
1 citation on file for this inspection.
5(a)(1)
- Issued
- Mar 18, 1994
- Abate by
- May 4, 1994
- Penalty
- Initial $1,300
General-duty citation text
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
More inspections at T.U. Electric
View T.U. Electric's full OSHA safety record →
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 000000)
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 103626099.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.