Crespac Safety Record

Tucker, GA · Manufacturing

F

Significantly elevated violation rate. This employer's safety record is among the worst on file.

Last inspected 06/26/2019

Based on public OSHA records. How is this calculated? · Data updated March 2026

According to OSHA enforcement records, Crespac in Tucker, Georgia has 88 workplace safety violations across 8 inspections, with 56 classified as serious and $218,433 in total penalties. Safety grade: F (significantly elevated violations). OSHA records span 2008 to 2019.

Crespac in Tucker, Georgia has received an F safety grade, indicating a significantly elevated rate of workplace safety violations compared to other employers. Within the manufacturing industry, this places Crespac among the most frequently cited employers. An F grade is assigned when an employer's weighted violation score exceeds 6.0 per inspection, factoring in the severity of each citation.

56 of the 88 violations on record are classified as serious, meaning OSHA determined they posed a risk of death or serious physical harm. The $218,433 in total penalties reflects the severity and frequency of these citations. Workers at employers with F safety grades may want to understand their rights under OSHA regulations, including the right to file a complaint about unsafe working conditions without fear of retaliation. Georgia workers who have been injured on the job may also be eligible for workers' compensation benefits.

11.0 Crespac violations/inspection
vs
4.1 Manufacturing avg
Above industry average
View Manufacturing industry report →
88 Violations
8 Inspections
56 Serious
$218,433 Penalties
Serious?
56 ($104,049)
Other-than-Serious?
18 ($606)
Repeat?
10 ($38,778)
Willful?
4 ($75,000)
1910.0022 Walking-Working Surfaces — General
Cited in 4 inspections (7 total) since 2008
1910.0037 Means of Egress — Maintenance
Cited in 3 inspections (4 total) since 2008
1910.0178 Powered Industrial Trucks (Forklifts)
Cited in 3 inspections (4 total) since 2008
5A00.01 General Duty Clause
Cited in 3 inspections (3 total) since 2010
1910.0303 Electrical — General Requirements
Cited in 2 inspections (8 total) since 2008
Violations decreased 100% over the past 5 years (0 recent vs 88 prior).
OSHA initially proposed $362,791 in penalties for Crespac, later reduced to $218,433 — a 40% reduction through informal settlement or contest. Learn how OSHA penalties work.
1910.0303 Electrical — General Requirements
8 citations $18,300
1910.0305 Electrical — Wiring Methods
7 citations $12,700
1910.0022 Walking-Working Surfaces — General
7 citations $15,088
1910.0212 Machine Guarding — General
5 citations $55,000
1910.0134 Respiratory Protection
5 citations

Workers' Compensation in Georgia

Workers injured on the job in Georgia may be entitled to medical coverage, temporary & permanent disability, death benefits, vocational rehabilitation, catastrophic injury benefits.

This is general information about workers' compensation laws in Georgia, not legal advice. Consult a licensed attorney for your specific situation.

Were you injured at Crespac?

This employer has 88 OSHA violations on record, including 56 classified as serious. If you've been hurt on the job, you may be entitled to compensation.

Free case review · No obligation · Confidential

Attorney advertising. Free consultations available in most states. Not legal advice. By submitting, you agree to be contacted about your potential claim.

No workplace accident investigations on file for Crespac in OSHA records.

DateTypeLocationViolationsPenalties
06/26/2019 Complaint? Tucker, GA 10 $19,700
08/28/2013 Complaint? Tucker, GA 3 $13,811
04/12/2012 Follow-Up? Tucker, GA 4 $8,072
04/09/2012 Planned? Tucker, GA 5 $20,600
09/09/2010 Complaint? Tucker, GA 1 $3,000
07/14/2009 Referral? Tucker, GA 12 $12,000
06/10/2009 Referral? Tucker, GA 36 $115,500
03/04/2008 Complaint? Tucker, GA 17 $25,750

Improve Your Safety Grade

Links may be affiliate-supported. This does not affect our safety ratings or recommendations.

Injured at Crespac? You may be entitled to compensation. Get Free Case Review