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

OSHA Inspection: JOSE PINA

Planned inspection · Health discipline

On , OSHA opened a planned health inspection of JOSE PINA in 2812 RIVER BEND PLACE, CELINA, TX 75009 (NAICS 238140). OSHA activity number 344956040.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Jose Pina — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Jose Pina is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Establishment
JOSE PINA
Site address
2812 RIVER BEND PLACE
City
CELINA
State
TX
ZIP
75009
Mailing
227 LOMA DR., GARLAND, TX 75040
Inspection type
Planned (H)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Health
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
238140
Employees
2
Ownership type
A

8 citations on file for this inspection.

1926.102 A01

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Oct 12, 2020
Abate by
Nov 9, 2020
Penalty
Initial $1,735 · Current $1,735
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, molten metal, liquid chemicals, acids or caustic liquids, chemical gases or vapors, or potentially injurious light radiation.  At the job site, employees were not provided eye protection when operating a masonry saw cutting bricks and were exposed to eye injuries from flying objects.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $1735

1926.451 B01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Oct 12, 2020
Abate by
Nov 9, 2020
Penalty
Initial $2,892 · Current $2,892
29 CFR 1926.451(b)(1): Each platform on all working levels of scaffolds was not fully planked or decked between the front uprights and the guardrail supports as specified in paragraphs 1926.451(b)(1)(i)-(ii).  At the construction site, employees were working on a welded frame scaffold that was not fully planked. The employees performing masonry activities were exposed to a 13 feet fall hazard.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $2892

1926.451 G04 I

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Oct 12, 2020
Abate by
Nov 9, 2020
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1926.451(g)(4)(i): Guardrail systems were not installed along all open sides and ends of platforms.  At the construction site, employees were working on a welded frame scaffold without guardrails. The employees performing masonry activities were exposed to a 13 feet fall hazard.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $0

1926.451 E01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Oct 12, 2020
Abate by
Nov 9, 2020
Penalty
Initial $2,892 · Current $2,892
29 CFR 1926.451(e)(1): When scaffold platforms were more than 2 feet (0.6 m) above or below a point of access, portable ladders, hook-on ladders, attachable ladders, stair towers (scaffold stairways/towers), stairway-type ladders (such as ladder stands), ramps, walkways, integral prefabricated scaffold access, or direct access from other scaffold, structure, personnel hoist, or similar surface was not used.  Crossbraces were used as a means of access.  At the construction site, employees were working on a welded frame scaffold without ladder access. The employees performing masonry activities on the ground below were exposed to a fall hazard.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $2892

1926.454 A

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Oct 12, 2020
Abate by
Nov 9, 2020
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1926.454(a): The employer did not have each employee who performed work while on a scaffold trained by a person qualified in the subject matter to recognize the hazards associated with the type of scaffold being used and to understand the procedures to control or minimize those hazards.  At the construction site, employees were working on a welded frame scaffold without fall protection training. The employees performing masonry activities on the ground below were exposed to being struck by material falling from above and fall hazards.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $0

1926.1153 C01

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Oct 12, 2020
Abate by
Nov 9, 2020
Penalty
Initial $1,735 · Current $1,735
29 CFR 1926.1153(c)(1): For each employee engaged in a task identified on Table 1, the employer shall fully and properly implement the engineering controls, work practices, and respiratory protection specified for the task on Table 1, unless the employer assesses and limits the exposure of the employee to respirable crystalline silica in accordance with paragraph (d) of this section.   At the construction site, the employer did not ensure that employees using a masonry saw to cut bricks were protected from being exposed to silica with the use of engineering controls, work practices and respiratory protection.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $1735

1926.1153 D02 I

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Oct 12, 2020
Abate by
Nov 9, 2020
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1926.1153(d)(2)(i): The employer did not assess the exposure of each employee who was or may reasonably be expected to be exposed to respirable crystalline silica at or above the action level in accordance with either the performance option in paragraph (d)(2)(ii) or the scheduled monitoring option in paragraph (d)(2)(iii) of this section:   At the residential construction site, the employer did not assess the exposure for employees using a stationary masonry saw to cut bricks. Employees were potentially exposed to silica.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.1200 E01

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Oct 12, 2020
Abate by
Nov 9, 2020
Penalty
Initial $1,735 · Current $1,735
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: (Construction Reference: 1926.59)(a)   The employer had not developed a written hazard communication program for employees using a masonry saw to cut bricks. Employees were potentially exposed to respirable crystalline silica.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $1735

View Jose Pina'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 344956040.

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