OSHA Inspection: HEARTLAND GOURMET, LLC

Issued

Apr 4, 2017

Abate by

Apr 19, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,622 · Current $3,622

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(4)(i): Procedures were not developed, documented and utilized for the control of potentially hazardous energy when employees were engaged in activities covered by this section:  The employer is failing to protect employees from caught between and struck-by hazards associated with operating and maintaining equipment without having developed or implemented written specific procedures for securing stored energy.  The most recent occurrence of this was evident during the inspection of the facility located at 5220 S. 19th St. Lincoln, NE; where the employer has employees maintaining and cleaning the Ribbon blender and dough mixer without having developed and implemented written procedures that outline the step by step process necessary to safely release the stored energy for that equipment.

Issued

Apr 4, 2017

Abate by

Apr 19, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,622 · Current $3,622

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.147(c)(7)(i)(C): Employees whose work operations were in an area where energy control procedures were utilized were not instructed about the procedure:   The employer is failing to train other employees on the hazards associated with operating or working around equipment that requires the isolation of hazardous energy while performing maintenance or cleaning.  The most recent occurrence of this was evident during the inspection of the facility located at 5220 S. 19th St. Lincoln, NE; where the employer has employees operating or working around the ribbon blender and dough mixer without having been trained on the lockout/tagout procedure used to isolate the hazardous energy during maintenance or cleaning operations.

Issued

Apr 4, 2017

Abate by

Apr 19, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,622 · Current $3,622

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(g)(2): Battery charging apparatus for industrial trucks located in battery changing and charging installation was not protected from damage by trucks:   The employer is failing to protect employees from electrical hazards associated with charging forklift batteries on unprotected forklift charging apparatuses.  The most recent occurrence of this was evident during the inspection of the facility located at 5220 S. 19th St. Lincoln, NE; where the employer has positioned the forklift charging apparatuses on a pallet next to a garage door exposing them to a potential struck by a forklift.; the employees are exposed to the charging apparatuses every time they charge their lifts.

Issued

Apr 4, 2017

Abate by

Apr 19, 2017

Penalty

Initial $3,622 · Current $3,622

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.178(l)(2)(ii): The employer did not ensure that each operator had successfully completed the training consisting of a combination of formal instruction (e.g., lecture, discussion, interactive computer learning, video tape, written material), practical training (demonstrations performed by the trainer and practical exercises performed by the trainee), and evaluation of the operator's performance in the workplace.   The employer is failing to train and protect employees from struck by hazards associated with operating forklifts.  The most recent occurrence of this was evident during the inspection of the facility located at 5220 S. 19th St. Lincoln, NE; where the employer has employees who were never evaluated on operating forklifts prior to using them.  Instances include but are not limited to:        i.      The employer did not conduct hands on drivers evaluation of operators while they operate the forklift within their facility as part of the training program.       ii.      The employer did not provide feedback to the operator on their strengths and weaknesses while operating the forklifts

Issued

Apr 4, 2017

Abate by

Apr 19, 2017

Penalty

Initial $2,173 · Current $2,173

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:   The employer is failing to protect employees from chemical hazards associated with using hazardous chemicals in the work place.  The most recent occurrence of this was evident during the inspection of the facility located at 5220 S. 19th St. Lincoln, NE; where the employer has employees using cleaners to maintain the restroom facilities without having developed and implemented a written Hazard Communications Program.