OSHA Inspection: PREMIUM MEATS, INC.

Issued

Oct 9, 2013

Penalty

Initial $4,200 · Current $2,520 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.132(d)(2):     The employer did not verify, through a written certification, that the required workplace hazard assessment had been performed:     On or about June 13, 2013, no written workplace hazard assessment had been completed by the employer for all of their operations, including but not limited to, performing cleaning operations with ZEP FS FOAM CHLOR which has an undiluted pH of 12.5-13.

Issued

Oct 9, 2013

Abate by

Oct 30, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.133(a)(1): The employer did not ensure that each affected employees use 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:   On or about June 13, 2013, the employer failed to ensure that employees who dispensed ZEP FS FOAM CHLOR, which has a pH of 12.5-13, wore protection for the eyes and face.

Issued

Oct 9, 2013

Abate by

Dec 2, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.151(c): Where employees were exposed to injurious corrosive materials, suitable facilities for quick drenching or flushing of the eyes and body were not provided within the work area for immediate emergency use:      On or about June 13, 2013, the employer failed to have an eye wash station where employees dispense ZEP FS FOAM CHLOR, which has a pH of 12.5-13.

Issued

Oct 9, 2013

Abate by

Oct 30, 2013

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,940 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(1): The employer did not establish a program consisting of an energy control procedure, employee training and periodic inspections to ensure that before any employee performed any servicing or maintenance on a machine or equipment where the unexpected energizing, startup or release of stored energy could occur and cause injury, the machine or equipment shall be isolated from the energy source and rendered inoperative:     As of June 13, 2013, the employer's informally established lockout/tagout program did not contain energy control procedures, employee training, and periodic inspections, for employees required to perform maintenance and servicing on equipment including but not limited to the OMNI-1107 Multi-Grinder (chipper) and Biro Machines in Raw Room I, the slicer, the infrared Electric Boiler, and the Roto Claw II.

Issued

Oct 9, 2013

Abate by

Dec 2, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(d)(4)(i): Lockout or tagout devices were not affixed to each energy isolating device by authorized employees:     a)  On or about June 13, 2013, the employer failed to lockout equipment that was both hard wired and cord and plug, during cleaning operations.  The equipment includes but is not limited to the OMNI-V 1107 Multi-Grinder (chipper) and Biro Machines in Raw Room I, the slicer, the infrared Electric Boiler, and the Roto Claw II.     b)  On or about June 13, 2013, the employer failed to lockout the slicer while changing the blade.     c)  On or about August 5, 2013, the employer failed to lockout the OMNI-V 1107 Multi-Grinder (chipper) in Raw Room I, during the repositioning of meat in the feed chute.     d)  On or about July 30, 2013, the employer failed to lockout the OMNI-V 1107 Multi-Grinder (chipper) in Raw Room I, during the unjamming of the meat.

Issued

Oct 9, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $1,260 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(l)(1)(i):     The employer did not ensure that each powered industrial truck operator was 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 June 13, 2013 the employer failed to provide adequate powered industrial vehicle training and certification for employees who drive forklifts and powered pallet jacks.

Issued

Oct 9, 2013

Penalty

Initial $2,100 · Current $1,260 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.305(e)(1): Cabinets, cutout boxes, fittings, boxes, and panelboard enclosures in damp or wet locations were not installed to prevent moisture or water from entering and accumulating within the enclosures:      On June 13, 2013, in Raw Room I, the waterproof conduit and cutout box used to power the lights in the closet, were broken so that water could enter into the system.

Issued

Oct 9, 2013

Penalty

Initial $4,200 · Current $1,600 Reduced

General-duty citation text

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:     On or about June 13, 2013, the employer failed to develop, implement, and maintain a hazard communication program at the facility, for employees who work with chemicals including but not limited to ZEP FS FOAM CHLOR which contains sodium hypochlorite.

Issued

Oct 9, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1200(h):   Employees were not provided effective information and training as specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(1) and -2 on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment and whenever a new hazard was introduced:    On or about June 13, 2013, the employer failed to provide hazard communication program training at the facility, for employees who work with chemicals including but not limited to ZEP FS FOAM CHLOR which contains sodium hypochlorite.

Issued

Oct 9, 2013

Abate by

Nov 14, 2013

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.157(g)(2):    The educational program to familiarize employees with the general principles of fire extinguisher use and the hazards involved with incipient stage fire fighting was not provided to all employees upon initial employment, and at least annually thereafter:  On or about June 13, 2013, portable fire extinguishers were available for employees to use, but initial and annual training were not provided.  Note the employer may exercise one of the following options:  1. Provide portable fire extinguishers as specified in 29 CFR 1910.157(c)(1), meet the distribution requirements per 29 CFR 1910.157(d) (75 to the nearest extinguisher for Class A fires and 50 to the nearest unit for Class B fires), and provide training and education for all employees in the use of such equipment and the hazards associated with incipient stage fire fighting as specified in 29 CFR 1910.157(g).  The other sections of 29 CFR also apply.  2. Provide extinguishers as specified in 29 CFR 1910.157(c)(1), designate certain employees to be the only employees authorized to use such equipment and require all other employees to immediately evacuate upon the sound of the fire alarm, establish this in writing in an emergency action plan as outlined in 29 CFR 1910.38(a) and train/educate designated employees per 1910.157(g).  Utilizing this option exempts the employer from distribution requirements of 29 CFR 1910.157(d).  3. Establish a written fire safety policy which requires the immediate and total evacuation of employees from the workplace upon the sounding of a fire alarm signal.  This policy shall include an emergency action plan and a fire prevention plan as specified in 29 CFR 1910.38(a) and 29 CFR 1910.39(a).  Utilizing this option exempts the employer from the requirements of 29 CFR 1910.157 to include the need for providing portable fire equipment unless a specific standard requires that a portable fire extinguisher be provided (such as those requirements in 29 CFR 1910.106/107 related to the use/storage of flammable/combustible liquids).  If extinguishers are provided, but not intended for employee use, 29 CFR 1910.157(e) and (f) are still applicable (inspection, maintenance, and testing of equipment).