ROSENBERG, TX —
OSHA Inspection: SEATEX, LLC
Referral inspection · Health discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a referral health inspection of SEATEX, LLC in 239 TX HWY 36, ROSENBERG, TX 77471 (NAICS 325611). OSHA activity number 345763270.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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
- SEATEX, LLC
- Site address
- 239 TX HWY 36
- City
- ROSENBERG
- State
- TX
- ZIP
- 77471
- Mailing
- 445 TX HWY 36, ROSENBERG, TX 77471
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Referral (C)
- Scope
- Partial (B)
- Discipline
- Health
- 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
- 325611
- Employees
- 17
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
11 citations on file for this inspection.
1910.23 B12
- Issued
- Jul 28, 2022
- Penalty
- Initial $4,754 · Current $0 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.23(b)(12): The employer did not ensure that each employee used at least one hand to grasp the ladder when climbing up and down it: a) In Building B, on February 1, 2022, where the employer did not ensure that the employees used at least one hand while climbing the A-frame ladder when carrying and pouring bags of paraformaldehyde into the vessel tank.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $0
- — C (S) $4754
- — Z (S) $4754
1910.132 A
- Issued
- Jul 28, 2022
- Abate by
- Sep 1, 2022
- Penalty
- Initial $13,052 · Current $13,052
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.132(a): Protective equipment was not used when necessary whenever hazards capable of causing injury and impairment were encountered: a) In Building B, on February 1, 2022, where a Tyvek hooded suit, sleeved Tychem /PVC apron, or a Proshield suit with PVC apron and Tyvek sleeves were not used when blending aqua ammonia and paraformaldehyde.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $13052
- — C (S) $13052
- — Z (S) $13052
1910.134 D01 III
- Issued
- Jul 28, 2022
- Abate by
- Sep 1, 2022
- Penalty
- Initial $13,052 · Current $0 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.134(d)(1)(iii): The employer did not identify and evaluate the respiratory hazard(s) in the workplace, including a reasonable estimate of employee exposures to respiratory hazards and identification of the contaminant's chemical state and physical form. Where the employer could not identify or reasonably estimate the employee exposure, the employer did not consider the atmosphere to be IDLH: a) In Building B, on February 1, 2022, and times prior to, where employees' exposure to ammonia during the blending of paraformaldehyde and aqua ammonia was not estimated. b) In Building B, where employees' exposure to ammonia and nitrogen oxides during the manufacturing of 135K58 (Pronitridine) was not estimated.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $0
- — C (S) $13052
- — Z (S) $13052
1910.134 D02 I
- Issued
- Jul 28, 2022
- Abate by
- Sep 1, 2022
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.134(d)(2)(i): The employer did not provide either a full facepiece pressure demand SCBA certified by NIOSH for a minimum service life of thirty minutes or a combination full facepiece pressure demand supplied-air respirator with auxiliary self-contained air supply: a) In Building B, where the employer did not provide a full facepiece pressure demand SCBA certified by NIOSH for a minimum service life of thirty minutes or a combination full facepiece pressure demand supplied-air respirator with auxiliary self-contained air supply for employees while manufacturing 135K58 (Pronitridine). b) In Building B, on February 1, 2022, and times prior to, where the employer did not provide a full facepiece pressure demand SCBA certified by NIOSH for a minimum service life of thirty minutes or a combination full facepiece pressure demand supplied-air respirator with auxiliary self-contained air supply for employees while pouring the paraformaldehyde into the aqua ammonia.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $0
- — C (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1910.1048 G03 I A
- Issued
- Jul 28, 2022
- Abate by
- Sep 1, 2022
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $13,052
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1048(g)(3)(i)(A): The employer did not select and provide to employees the appropriate respirators specified in 29 CFR 1910.134(d)(3)(i)(A): a) In Building B, on February 1, 2022, and times prior to, where the employer did not select the appropriate respirator for employees while manufacturing 135K58 (Pronitridine).
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $13052
- — C (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1910.134 E01
- Issued
- Jul 28, 2022
- Abate by
- Sep 1, 2022
- Penalty
- Initial $4,754 · Current $4,754
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: a) In Building B, where the employer did not ensure that an employee received a medical evaluation prior to respirator use.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $4754
- — C (S) $4754
- — Z (S) $4754
1910.134 K01
- Issued
- Jul 28, 2022
- Abate by
- Sep 1, 2022
- 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): a) In Building B, where the employer did not ensure employees received respiratory protection training prior to respirator use.
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $0
- — C (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1910.134 F02
- Issued
- Jul 28, 2022
- Abate by
- Sep 1, 2022
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
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, whenever a different respirator facepiece (size, style, model or make) was used, and at least annually thereafter: a) In Building B, where the employer did not ensure that an employee was fit tested prior to respirator use. b) In Building B, where the employer did not ensure that an employee was fit tested at least annually.
Recent events (3)
- — F (O) $0
- — C (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1910.1200 H03 II
- Issued
- Jul 28, 2022
- Abate by
- Sep 1, 2022
- Penalty
- Initial $130,524 · Current $35,000 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)(ii): Employee training did not include the physical, health, simple asphyxiation, combustible dust, and pyrophoric gas hazards, as well as hazards not otherwise classified, of the chemicals in the work area: a) In Building B, on February 1, 2022, and times prior to, where the employer did not train the employees on the physical and health hazards of the chemicals in the workplace prior to the employees pouring paraformaldehyde into an aqua ammonia solution. b) In Building B, where the employer did not train the employees on the physical and health hazards of the chemicals in the workplace prior to the manufacturing of 135K58 (Pronitridine).
Recent events (3)
- — F (S) $35000
- — C (W) $130524
- — Z (W) $130524
1910.1200 H03 III
- Issued
- Jul 28, 2022
- Abate by
- Sep 1, 2022
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)(iii): Employee training did not include the measures employees could take to protect themselves from chemical hazards, including specific procedures the employer had implemented to protect employees from exposure to hazardous chemicals, such as appropriate work practices, emergency procedures, and personal protective equipment to be used: a) In Building B, on February 1, 2022, and times prior to, where the employer did not train the employees on the appropriate work practices, emergency procedures, and personal protective equipment prior to the employees pouring paraformaldehyde into an aqua ammonia solution. b) In Building B, where the employer did not train the employees on the appropriate work practices, emergency procedures, and personal protective equipment prior to the manufacturing of 135K58 (Pronitridine).
Recent events (3)
- — F (W) $0
- — C (W) $0
- — Z (W) $0
1910.1048 D01 I
- Issued
- Jul 28, 2022
- Abate by
- Sep 1, 2022
- Penalty
- Initial $10,360 · Current $20,000
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1910.1048(d)(1)(i): Employees of a workplace covered by this standard were not monitored to determine their exposure to formaldehyde: a) In Building B, on February 1, 2022, and times prior to, where the employer did not determine the employees' exposure to formaldehyde during the manufacturing of 135K58 (Pronitridine).
Recent events (3)
- — F (O) $20000
- — C (W) $10360
- — Z (W) $10360
More inspections at Seatex, LLC
View Seatex, LLC's full OSHA safety record →
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 325611)
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 345763270.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.