OSHA Inspection: CARUSO'S COFFEE PMD

Issued

Aug 31, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,380 · Current $1,190 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.24(h): Standard railings were not provided on the open sides of all exposed stairways and stair platforms:    On or before May 14, 2015, the employer failed to ensure the open side of a stair platform, which was affixed to the side of the Lilla Coffee Roaster for employee access, was protected by a rail or other means of fall protection.

Issued

Aug 31, 2015

Abate by

Sep 18, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,450 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.212(a)(1): One or more methods of machine guarding was not provided to protect the operator and other employees in the machine area from hazards such as those created by point of operation, ingoing nip points, rotating parts, flying chips and sparks:    a)  On or before May 2, 2015 and again on May 14, 2015, the employer  failed to ensure proper machine guarding was in place on the Hopper/Grinder roller belt and pulley system where coffee chaff is being expelled during the process into a metal discard box located directly under the moving belt/pulley system of the Hopper/Grinder.  (Hopper/Grinder is located across from the AMS Keypack Machine).  Once the metal discard box starts getting full, an employee (a Roaster usually) will empty it and then set it back into place.    b)  On or before May 2, 2015 and again on May 14, 2015, the employer failed to ensure proper machine guarding was in place on the AMS Keypack Machine conveyor belt at the end where the product drops off into the box.  The conveyor has rotating parts and pinch points.

Issued

Aug 31, 2015

Abate by

Oct 22, 2015

Penalty

Initial $4,900 · Current $2,450 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.    On or before May 14, 2015, the employer did not have a written program or procedure in place dealing with the Control of Hazardous Energy (Lock Out Tag Out) nor did they train either affected or authorized employees in such a program although there are employees performing servicing and repair on various machines and equipment (roaster, hopper, keypack etc.).

Issued

Aug 31, 2015

Abate by

Oct 22, 2015

Penalty

Initial $2,800 · Current $1,400 Reduced

General-duty citation text

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 before May 14, 2015, the employer did not ensure that employees who were operating a Powered Industrial Vehicle were competent as demonstrated by being trained, certified and evaluated by a competent person.

Issued

Aug 31, 2015

Abate by

Sep 18, 2015

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(q)(7): Industrial trucks were not examined before being placed in service:  On or about May 15, 2015, the employer failed to perform pre-shift operational inspections of the Powered Industrial Vehicles (PIV) which are being placed into service.  The Yellow Yale PIV has a broken seat belt.