Skip to profile
AN INDEPENDENT CASE STUDY Mount Pleasant, Texas
MOUNT COMPLACENTTHE PAPER TRAIL
← Back to Who’s Who?
Editorial illustration of a hard hat, safety goggles and work gloves; symbolic imagery for Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
EDITORIAL ILLUSTRATION

Federal agencies / ORGANIZATION IN THE RECORD

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

Federal workplace-safety agency

Occupational Safety and Health Administration

Linked record period: May 1, 2025 – Sep 15, 2025

Key dates ↓Related records ↓Source notes ↓

WHY THIS PROFILE IS HERE

Role in the paper trail

Appears in the photo-submission history and call-number comparisons. A matching number alone does not establish the substance of a call.

PUBLIC AGENCY DATA / SEPARATE SNAPSHOT

Compare the agency records

Historical name and address matches, with geography, record types and reporting limits kept visible. These totals are separate from this profile’s individually reviewed chronology.

Explore the public-data comparisons →

CHRONOLOGY

Key dates & context

  1. Selected source collection

    Selected photographs and videos of Store 131 conditions

    The collection documents roof activity, debris, refrigeration, storage and other reported conditions, alongside earlier roof-leak photographs submitted to OSHA.

    Context, limits & source references

    This entry describes a collection spanning several months, rather than an incident on May 1. It is a limited selection from a larger documented production; images from other stores are identified separately.

    • Selected Store 131 photographs and recordings · May–October 2025; earlier roof-leak photographs
  2. Timing comparison

    September: OSHA-number matches near the inspection sequence

    Five September 9 records to Building & Code Enforcement display the OSHA Dallas number. A September 15 record to the Police line lasts 2:41.

    Context, limits & source references

    The City’s September 16 report states that no violations were present. Exact-number matches and adjacent dates do not establish what was discussed or authenticate the incoming caller.

    • vendor:30326 · Copy of CDR_903-575-4149_Jun25-Nov25_262306.xlsx · Inbound Outbound!A1414:E1414
    • vendor:30327 · Copy of CDR_903-575-4149_Jun25-Nov25_262306.xlsx · Inbound Outbound!A1415:E1415
    • vendor:30328 · Copy of CDR_903-575-4149_Jun25-Nov25_262306.xlsx · Inbound Outbound!A1416:E1416
    • vendor:30329 · Copy of CDR_903-575-4149_Jun25-Nov25_262306.xlsx · Inbound Outbound!A1417:E1417
    • vendor:30330 · Copy of CDR_903-575-4149_Jun25-Nov25_262306.xlsx · Inbound Outbound!A1418:E1418
    • vendor:32000 · Copy of CDR_903-575-4004_Jun25-Nov25_262299.xlsx · Inbound Outbound!A8543:E8543

Source notes

Symbolic editorial illustration; imagined objects and buildings, not official insignia or documentary evidence.

This profile is drawn from the case study’s reviewed chronology and correspondence index, through September 21, 2026. Roles identify the capacity described by the linked material; the date range is not a verified employment term.

Source statements, transcript excerpts, reported concerns, historical comparisons and timing analysis retain their separate labels. An invitation does not prove attendance. A copied recipient does not establish agreement or action. A call-number match does not establish call content.

Editorial portraits are illustrations, not documentary photographs. Original documents and recordings control over the profile summary. About the method ↗