LUBBOCK, TX —
OSHA Inspection: TEXCRAFT, INC.
Planned inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of TEXCRAFT, INC. in 3917 CLOVIS ROAD, LUBBOCK, TX 79415 (NAICS 332999). OSHA activity number 341183622.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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
- TEXCRAFT, INC.
- Site address
- 3917 CLOVIS ROAD
- City
- LUBBOCK
- State
- TX
- ZIP
- 79415
- Mailing
- 3917 CLOVIS ROAD, LUBBOCK, TX 79415
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Planned (H)
- Scope
- Complete (A)
- 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
- 332999
- Employees
- 13
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
14 citations on file for this inspection.
1910.23 A02
- Issued
- Jun 27, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 11, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $1,440 · Current $576 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.23(a)(2): Ladderway floor opening(s) or platform(s) were not guarded by a standard railing with standard toeboard(s) on all exposed sides (except at the entrance to opening) with passage through the railing either provided with a swinging gate or so offset that a person could walk directly into the opening: The employer did not ensure employees accessing a storage area above an office was guarded by a standard guardrail system and exposed them to fall hazards.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $576
- — Z (S) $1440
1910.134 C
- Issued
- Jun 27, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 15, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $2,520 · Current $1,008 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.134(c): The employer did not develop and implement a written respiratory protection program with required worksite-specific procedures and elements for required respirator use: The employer did not develop and implement a written respiratory protection program for employee(s) who wore a half mask 3M respirator while painting and exposed them to adverse health effects.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $1008
- — Z (S) $2520
1910.134 E01
- Issued
- Jun 27, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 8, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1): The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator, before the employee was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace: The employer did not ensure each employee was medically evaluated prior to wearing a 3M half mask respirator to perform painting operations and exposed them to adverse health effects.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1910.134 F02
- Issued
- Jun 27, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 8, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $1,800 · Current $720 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2): Employee(s) using tight-fitting facepiece respirators were not fit tested prior to initial use of the respirator: The employer did not ensure employees who wore a tight-fitting 3M half mask respirator were fit-tested prior to painting and exposed them to adverse health effects.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $720
- — Z (S) $1800
1910.134 H01
- Issued
- Jun 27, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 8, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.134(h)(1): Respirators were not cleaned and disinfected using the procedures in Appendix B-2 of 29 CFR 1910.134 or equivalent procedures recommended by the respirator manufacturer: The employer did not ensure employees using respirators were cleaned and disinfected after each use and exposed them to adverse health effects.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1910.134 H02 I
- Issued
- Jun 27, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 8, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $1,800 · Current $216 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.134(h)(2)(i): Respirators were not stored to protect them from damage, contamination, dust, sunlight, extreme temperatures, excessive moisture, and damaging chemicals: The employer did not ensure employees using respirators were stored properly and exposed them to adverse health effects.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $216
- — Z (S) $1800
1910.134 K01
- Issued
- Jun 27, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 15, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.134(k)(1): The employer did not provide effective training that covered the required elements in 1910.134(k)(1)(i) through 1910.134(k)(1)(vii): The employer did not ensure an employees who wore a 3M half mask respirator to perform painting work were trained to use them and exposed them to adverse health effects.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1910.178 L
- Issued
- Jun 27, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 15, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $2,520 · Current $1,008 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.178(l): Operators were not trained in the safe operation of powered industrial trucks: The employer did not ensure forklift operators were trained to operate them and exposed them to struck-by hazards. a) Toyota forklift, located in building #1. b) Toyota forklift, located in building #1. c) Toyota forklift, Geneo 15, located in building #1. d) Toyota forklift 45, located in building #2. e) Toyota forklift 25, located in building #2.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $1008
- — Z (S) $2520
1910.179 J02 III
- Issued
- Jun 27, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 8, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $1,440 · Current $576 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.179(j)(2)(iii): Monthly inspections of hooks, with a certification record which includes the date of inspection, the signature of the person who performed the inspection and the serial number, or other identifier, of the hook inspected, were not performed: The employer did not ensure monthly hook inspections with certification records were conducted on the overhead hoist and exposed employees who operated them to struck-by hazards.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $576
- — Z (S) $1440
1910.179 J02 IV
- Issued
- Jun 27, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 8, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.179(j)(2)(iv): Monthly inspections of hoist chains, with a certification record which includes the date of inspection, the signature of the person who performed the inspection and an identifier of the chain which was inspected, were not performed: The employer did not conduct monthly chain inspections with a certification record on the overhead hoists and exposed employees using them to struck-by hazards.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1910.254 D09 III
- Issued
- Jun 27, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 8, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $1,440 · Current $576 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.254(d)(9)(iii): Cables with damaged insulation or exposed bare conductors were not replaced: The employer did not ensure damaged cables on the welding machines were replaced and exposed employees to electric shock hazards.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $576
- — Z (S) $1440
1910.1200 E01
- Issued
- Jun 27, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 15, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $1,800 · Current $720 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1): The employer did not develop, implement, and/or maintain at the workplace a written hazard communication program which describes how the criteria specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(f), (g), and (h) will be met: The employer did not ensure a written hazard communication program was established and implemented for employees who handled chemicals and exposed them to adverse health effects.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $720
- — Z (S) $1800
1910.1200 H
- Issued
- Jun 27, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 8, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1200(h): Employees were not provided effective information and training as specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(1) and -2 on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment and whenever a new hazard was introduced in the workplace: The employer did not ensure employees were trained in the hazards of chemicals in their work areas and exposed them to adverse health effects.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1910.22 D01
- Issued
- Jun 27, 2016
- Abate by
- Jul 8, 2016
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.22(d)(1): In every building or other structure, or part thereof, used for mercantile, business, industrial, or storage purpose, the load approved by the building official was not appropriately marked and posted: The employer did not ensure a load limit sign was posted on the storage structure that employees accessed and exposed them to an unprotected fall to concrete below.
Recent events (2)
- — I (O) $0
- — Z (O) $0
More inspections at Texcraft, INC.
View Texcraft, INC.'s full OSHA safety record →
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 332999)
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 341183622.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.