Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,189,214Inspections Most recent open 2026-07-16 Last loaded 2026-07-20

OSHA Inspection: EASTERN PLUMBING SUPPLY COMPANY GP, LLC

Complaint inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a complaint safety inspection of EASTERN PLUMBING SUPPLY COMPANY GP, LLC in 10770 TURBEVILLE ROAD, DALLAS, TX 75243 (NAICS 423720). OSHA activity number 346426281.

Watch Eastern Plumbing Supply Company GP, LLC — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Eastern Plumbing Supply Company GP, LLC is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
10770 TURBEVILLE ROAD
City
DALLAS
State
TX
ZIP
75243
Mailing
10770 TURBEVILLE ROAD, DALLAS, TX 75243
Inspection type
Complaint (B)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
423720
Employees
41
Ownership type
A

14 citations on file for this inspection.

5(a)(1)

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 8 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $10938.00 · Current $10938.00
Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970: The employer did not furnish to each employee a place of employment which was free from a recognized crushed-by hazard that was causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees:  (a) On or about January 10, 2023, employees operating the BYD powered industrial truck were not protected from a crushed-by hazard in that they sat on the seat belt instead of wearing it.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $10938
  • — Z (S) $10938

5(a)(1)

Serious Gravity 5 3 instances 19 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $9376.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced
Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970: The employer did not furnish to each of his employees a place of employment which was free from recognized crushed-by hazards that were causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to his employees:  On or about January 10, 2023, at the establishment located at 10770 Tuberville Rd, Dallas, TX, where employees loading/unloading materials on storage racks were exposed to a struck-by hazard in that:   (a) Racks located on the mezzanine over the office areas: (1) Did not have a permanent plaque containing; the maximum permissible unit load and/or maximum uniformly distributed load per level, the average unit load if applicable, and maximum total load per bay. (2) Did not have load application and rack configuration drawings for each rack installation. (3) Some columns did not have base plates. (4) The columns were not anchored to the floor with anchor bolts.  (b) Racks located in the warehouse: (1) Did not have a permanent plaque containing; the maximum permissible unit load and/or maximum uniformly distributed load per level, the average unit load if applicable, and maximum total load per bay. (2) Did not have load application and rack configuration drawings for each rack installation. Note: In the center of the warehouse there is a configuration of at least 5 rows of racks with a mezzanine built into them. (3) The columns were not anchored to the floor with anchor bolts.  (c) Racks located in the plastic fitting shed: (1) Did not have a permanent plaque containing; the maximum permissible unit load and/or maximum uniformly distributed load per level, the average unit load if applicable, and maximum total load per bay. (2) Did not have load application and rack configuration drawings for each rack installation. (3) The columns were not anchored to the floor with anchor bolts. Note: Blocks were found under one rack end frame causing the rack to be out of plumb. (4) One of the racks had visible damage to the end frame and had not been taken out of service, repaired, and evaluated.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $9376

1910.178 L01 I

Serious Gravity 10 2 instances 37 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $10938.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.178(l)(1)(i): The employer did not ensure that each powered industrial truck operator is competent to operate a powered industrial truck safely, as demonstrated by the successful completion of the training and evaluation specified in this paragraph (l):  On or about January 10, 2023, employees required to operate the following powered industrial trucks exposed employees in the area to crushed-by hazards in that they were not competent to do so:   (a) A Hyundai, Model: 25G-7A, a compressed gas powered industrial truck.   (b) A BYD, Model: ECB18S-B, electric powered industrial truck.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $10938

1910.22 B

Serious Gravity 5 2 instances 19 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $7813.00 · Current $7813.00
29 CFR 1910.22(b): The employer did not ensure that each walking-working surface can support the maximum intended load for that surface:  (a) On or about January 10, 20223, employees were not protected from a fall hazard in the event of a collapse; in that, the mezzanine area over the offices and the mezzanine built into the racking system located in the middle of the warehouse were not evaluated and marked with their maximum intended loads.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $7813
  • — Z (S) $7813

1910.22 D02

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 8 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $9376.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.22(d)(2): Hazardous conditions on walking-working surfaces were not corrected or repaired before an employee uses the walking-working surface again. If the correction or repair cannot be made immediately, the hazard must be guarded to prevent employees from using the walking-working surface until the hazard is corrected or repaired:  (a) On or about January 10, 2023, employees were not protected from a loss-of-control-hazard while required to operate powered industrial trucks on the concrete drives and lots within and surrounding the facility that had indentions/potholes.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $9376

1910.23 E01 III

Serious Gravity 5 4 instances 19 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $9376.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.23(e)(1)(iii): The employer did not ensure that mobile ladder stands and platforms are capable of supporting at least four times their maximum intended load:  On or about January 10, 2023, employees were exposed to tip over hazards in that mobile ladder stands had been repaired/welded or needed repairs and were not evaluated to ensure they could support at least four times their maximum intended load:   a. Yellow mobile ladder stand located within the warehouse had been welded/repaired.   b. Blue 4 step mobile ladder stand located within the warehouse was missing a caster wheel and had a bent leg.   c. Yellow mobile ladder stand located in the plastic fitting shed had been welded/repaired.   d. Yellow mobile ladder stand located in the plastic fitting shed had its left leg welded/repaired.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $9376

1910.23 E01 V

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 19 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $9376.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.23(e)(1)(v): The employer did not ensure that, unless otherwise specified in 29 CFR 1910.23(e), mobile ladder stands and platforms with a top step height of 4 feet (1.2 m) or above have handrails with a vertical height of 29.5 inches (75 cm) to 37 inches (94 cm), measured from the front edge of a step. Removable gates or non-rigid members, such as chains, may be used instead of handrails in special use applications:  (a) On or about January 10, 2023, employees were exposed to a fall hazard of up to approximately 7 feet in that a green mobile ladder stand located within the warehouse had a broken weld on its left handrail.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $9376

1910.23 E01 VIII

Serious Gravity 10 11 instances 19 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $10938.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.23(e)(1)(viii): The employer did not ensure that no mobile ladder stand, or platform moves when an employee is on it:  On or about January 10, 2023, employees required to use mobile ladder stands were exposed to fall hazards of up to approximately 10 feet 10 inches or more when they moved while the employees were on them in that:   a. A green mobile ladder stand located within the warehouse had a brake mechanism that it did not hold and did not have any rubber pads/boots;   b. A yellow mobile ladder stand located within the warehouse had no brake mechanism in that it was missing outrigger legs and rubber pads/boots;   c. A yellow mobile ladder stand located within the warehouse had a brake mechanism that did not have rubber pads/boots;   d. A blue 4-step mobile ladder stand located within the warehouse had missing rubber pads/boots;   e. A yellow 5-step mobile ladder stand located within the warehouse had a brake mechanism that did not have rubber pads/boots;   f. A rusted gray mobile adder stand located by the American standard shed had a broken brake mechanism and did not have rubber pads/boots;   g. A green mobile ladder stand located within the American standard shed had a broken brake mechanism in that its lever was bent not allowing it to function;   h. A yellow mobile ladder stand located within the plastic fitting shed had a missing brake mechanism and did not have rubber pads/boots;   i. A yellow mobile ladder stand located within the plastic fitting shed had a broken leg on its brake mechanism and did not have rubber pads/boots;   j. A blue 4-step mobile ladder stand located within the plastic fitting shed was missing a rubber pad/boot;   k. An Aluminum 4-step mobile ladder stand located within the plastic fitting shed was missing rubber pads/boots.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $10938

1910.25 B04

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 19 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $4687.00 · Current $4687.00
29 CFR 1910.25(b)(4): The employer did not ensure that stairway landings and platforms are at least the width of the stair and at least 30 inches (76 cm) in depth, as measured in the direction of travel:  (a) On or about January 10, 2023, employees were exposed to a tripping hazard in that a furnace box was at the bottom landing of the stairs leading to the mezzanine area over the offices and the landing was approximately 14.5 inches in depth.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $4687
  • — Z (S) $4687

1910.25 C02

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 19 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $7813.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.25(c)(2): The employer did not ensure that standard stairs have a maximum riser height of 9.5 inches (24 cm):  (a) On or about January 10, 2023, employees were exposed to a tripping hazard in that, wooden stairs leading to the mezzanine in the warehouse had a rise 0.5 inches more than the maximum allowed.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $7813

1910.25 C03

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 19 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $9376.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.25(c)(3): The employer did not ensure that standard stairs have a minimum tread depth of 9.5 inches (24 cm); and  (a) On or about January 10, 2023, employees were exposed to a missed step hazard in that metal stairs going to the mezzanine in the warehouse had a run 1.5 inches less than the required 9.5 inches.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $9376

1910.28 B03 III

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 19 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $6250.00 · Current $6250.00
29 CFR 1910.28(b)(3)(iii): 29 CFR 1910.28(b)(3)(iii):  The employer did not ensure that each employee is protected from falling into a stairway floor hole by a fixed guardrail system on all exposed sides, except at the stairway entrance. However, for any stairway used less than once per day where traffic across the stairway floor hole prevents the use of a fixed guardrail system (e.g., holes located in aisle spaces), the employer may protect employees from falling into the hole by using a hinged floor hole cover that meets the criteria in � 1910.29 and a removable guardrail system on all exposed sides, except at the entrance to the stairway.  (a) On or about January 10, 2023, employees were not protected from a stairway floor hole in that when accessing the mezzanine over the offices; the 1st step down had a hole cut in it and was unguarded exposing them to a step-into hazard. Note: The stairway is used more than once per day making the exemption of a fixed guardrail not applicable.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $6250
  • — Z (S) $6250

1910.29 B10

Serious Gravity 5 2 instances 19 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $7813.00 · Current $0.00 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.29(b)(10): The employer did not ensure that when guardrail systems are used at hoist areas, a removable guardrail section, consisting of a top rail and midrail, are placed across the access opening between guardrail sections when employees are not performing hoisting operations. The employer may use chains or gates instead of a removable guardrail section at hoist areas if the employer demonstrates the chains or gates provide a level of safety equivalent to guardrails:  (a) On or about January 10, 2023, employees working on the mezzanine in the center of the warehouse were exposed to a fall hazard of approximately 102 inches or more in that the following areas did not have railing systems and only had a single chain placed across them:   1. In the center on the East side.   2. On the Southeast end.   3. On the Southwest end.   4. On the Northwest end by the metal stairway.   5. On the Northeast end.  (b) On or about January 10, 2023, employees working on the mezzanine located above the offices within the warehouse were exposed to a fall hazard of approximately 110 inches or more in that the single chain across the area where product is placed up onto the mezzanine was not hooked up nor adequate.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $7813

1904.40 A

Other-than-serious 1 instance 41 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $1562.00 · Current $937.00 Reduced
29 CFR 1904.40(a): The employer did not provide an authorized government representative the records within the four business hours:  (a) On January 10, 2023, the employer did not provide within four business hours the following records: 1)	Form 300, Log of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses for calendar years 2020, 2021, 2022, and 2023 to present. 2)	Form 300-A. the summary of Work-Related Injuries and Illnesses for calendar years 2020, 2021 and 2022.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (O) $937.2
  • — Z (O) $1562

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 346426281.