Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
2,004,209Inspections Most recent open 2026-07-13 Last loaded 2026-07-17

OSHA Inspection: TRI-STATE GENERATION AND TRANSMISSION ASSOCIATION- NUCLA STATION

Planned inspection · Health discipline

On , OSHA opened a planned health inspection of TRI-STATE GENERATION AND TRANSMISSION ASSOCIATION- NUCLA STATION in 30739 DD 30 ROAD, NUCLA, CO 81424 (NAICS 221112). OSHA activity number 339904773.

Watch Tri-State Generation AND Transmission Association- Nucla Station — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Tri-State Generation AND Transmission Association- Nucla Station is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
30739 DD 30 ROAD
City
NUCLA
State
CO
ZIP
81424
Mailing
PO BOX 698, NUCLA, CO 81424
Inspection type
Planned (H)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Health
Advance notice
No
Union status
A
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
221112
Employees
57
Ownership type
A

5 citations on file for this inspection.

1910.119 D02 I D

Other-than-serious 3 instances 57 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $4250.00 · Current $4250.00
29 CFR 1910.119(d)(2)(i)(D): Information concerning the technology of the process did not include safe upper and lower limits for such items as temperatures, pressures, flows or compositions:    1) On August 11, 2014, and at prior times, the employers process safety information pertaining to the cooling tower water chlorination system did not include safe upper and lower limits in the following instances:      a) The process safety information did not include safe upper and lower temperature, pressure, and flow rates for the regulators.      b) The process safety information did not include safe upper and lower operating temperatures for the drip leg heater.      c) The process safety information did not include safe upper and lower flow rates and vacuum/pressure levels for the chlorination lines.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $4250
  • — Z (S) $4250

1910.119 D03 I B

Other-than-serious 1 instance 57 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
29 CFR 1910.119(d)(3)(i)(B):  Information pertaining to the equipment in the process did not include accurate piping and instrument diagrams (P&IDs):    1) On August 11, 2014, and at prior times, the employers piping and instrument diagrams were not accurate in that vacuum gauges installed on the chlorination lines were not identified on the P&ID.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.119 D03 III

Other-than-serious 1 instance 57 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $4250.00 · Current $4250.00
29 CFR 1910.119(d)(3)(iii): The employer did not document that equipment complied with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices:       1) On August 11, 2014, and at prior times, the employer failed to ensure that chlorine monitors that would detect releases of hazardous levels of chlorine were installed in the area of the cooling tower water chlorination system, in accordance with recognized and generally accepted good engineering practices such as the Chlorine Institute Pamphlet 155, section 4.4.3, and in accordance with the chlorine regulator manufacturers recommendation.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $4250
  • — Z (S) $4250

1910.120 Q09 I

Deleted Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $2550.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.120(q)(9)(i): Members of an organized and designated HAZMAT team and hazardous materials specialists were not provided with medical surveillance as required in paragraph (f) of this section:    1) On August 11, 2014, and at prior times, an employee member of the HAZMAT team had not received an annual physical as required by paragraph (f)(3)(i)(B) of this standard.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $2550

1910.119 G03

Other-than-serious 1 instance 57 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
29 CFR 1910.119(g)(3):  The employer did not ascertain that each employee involved in operating a process had received and understood the training required by this paragraph:  1) On August 11, 2014, and at prior times, the employer did not verify that operators understood the operating procedures training that they had received.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $0
  • — Z (O) $0

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 339904773.