OSHA Inspection: MPLS HOSPITALITY

Issued

Apr 7, 2020

Abate by

May 29, 2020

Penalty

Initial $4,424 · Current $2,654 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(c):       The employer did not develop and implement a written respiratory protection program with required worksite-specific procedures and elements for required respirator use:      The employer is failing to protect employees from respiratory hazards through the development and implementation of a written respiratory protection program.  This was most recently documented on November 18, 2019 at 3321 S. 72nd St. Omaha, Nebraska.  The employer failed to develop and implement a written respiratory protection program as required under this sub part.

Issued

Apr 7, 2020

Abate by

May 29, 2020

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1):        The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator, before the employee was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace       The employer is failing to ensure that employees are protected from the hazards associated with inadequate respiratory protection. This was most recently documented on November 18, 2019 at 3321 S. 72nd St. Omaha, Nebraska.  The employer failed to ensure that employees were provided with a medical evacuation prior to using a respirator in the workplace.

Issued

Apr 7, 2020

Abate by

May 29, 2020

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(1):        The employer did not ensure that employee(s) required to use a tight-fitting facepiece respirator passed the appropriate qualitative fit test (QLFT) or quantitative fit test (QNFT):       The employer is failing to ensure that employees are protected from chemical hazards by failing to ensure that respiratory protection is adequate for the assigned tasks. This was most recently documented on November 18, 2019 at 3321 S. 72nd St. Omaha, Nebraska.  The employer failed to ensure that employees were fit tested prior to wearing a tight-fitting facepiece respirator.

Issued

Apr 7, 2020

Abate by

May 29, 2020

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.134(g)(1)(i)(A):      Respirators with tight-fitting facepieces were worn by employees who had facial hair that came between the sealing surface of the facepiece and the face or that interfered with valve function:      The employer failed to ensure that employees are protected from chemical inhalation hazards.  This was most recently documented on November 8, 2019, at 3321 S. 72nd St. Omaha, Nebraska.  The employer failed to ensure that employees did not have facial hair, which prevents a seal between the respirator and the employees face prior to requiring them to wear a tight-fitting respirator.

Issued

Apr 7, 2020

Abate by

May 1, 2020

Penalty

Initial $12,145 · Current $7,287 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR 1910.1000(a)(2):       Employee(s) were exposed to an airborne concentration of Carbon Monoxide listed in Table Z-1 in excess of the 8 hour Time Weighted Average concentration of 50 PPM: This was most recently documented on November 18, 2019 at 3321 S 72nd. St Omaha, NE 68124. The employer is failing to ensure that employees are not exposed to airborne contaminants that can cause serious injury.        The employer is failing to ensure that employees are not exposed to chemical hazards. This was most recently documented on November 17, 2019 at 3321 S. 72nd St. Omaha, Nebraska.  The employer failed to ensure that the employee was not exposed to high levels of Carbon Monoxide when performing work adjacent to the boiler room.  The employee was exposed to carbon monoxide during a 120 minute occupational exposure at a mean of 1127.30 parts per million. The carboxyhemoglobin level in the employee's blood reached a calculated peak of 45.42%. The 8-hour Time Weighted Average (TWA) concentration of carbon monoxide was 282 parts per million CO, which is 5.64 times the OSHA-PEL of 50 ppm.  The employer did not ensure that employee exposure to carbon monoxide was below the permissible exposure limit, thus exposing employee(s) to chemical hazard, on or about, November 17, 2019.