OSHA Inspection: PEACE RIVER CITRUS PRODUCTS, INC.

Issued

May 3, 2022

Penalty

Initial $10,151 · Current $6,091 Reduced

General-duty citation text

OSH ACT of 1970 Section (5)(a)(1):The employer did not furnish employment and a place of employment which was free from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause death or serious physical harm to employees in that, employees were exposed to falls, caught-in between and crush-by hazards from a unsecured cage used to lift employees on trailers.    a.) On or about February 8, 2022, employees were lifted in a cage and were exposed to a fall and crush-by hazard  in that, the cage was not secured nor braced to the forklift.   b.) On or about February 8, 2022, employees were lifted in cage that had an access point in the front which was not properly guarded, in that the intermediate rail was  missing.  c.) On or about February 8, 2022, employees were lifted in a cage and were exposed to a fall hazard in that, the mid rail between the walking-working surface and the top edge of the guardrail system was not at least 21 inches high.   d.) On or about February 8, 2022, the cage used to lift employees was not inspected by management to ensure it was free of defects that could result in injury.

Issued

May 3, 2022

Abate by

May 27, 2022

Penalty

Initial $8,702 · Current $5,221 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.178(a)(4):Modifications and additions which affect capacity and safe operation of powered industrial truck were performed by the employer without the manufacturer's prior written approval:  a.) On or about February 14,2022, at the company's yard, employees were exposed to struck-by and crush hazards, in that, the employer used  a cage  as a forklift attachment on the powered industrial truck, without prior approval from the manufacturer.

Issued

May 3, 2022

Abate by

May 23, 2022

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.178(a)(5):The powered industrial truck was equipped with front-end attachments other than factory installed attachments, however the employer did not request that the truck be marked to identify the attachments and show the approximate weight of the truck and attachment combination at maximum elevation with load laterally centered:  a.) On or about February 14, 2022, in the company's yard, employees were exposed to struck-by and crush hazards, in that, the employer did not request for the powered industrial trucks to be marked showing the cage which was used as the attachment and the weight of the cage.

Issued

May 3, 2022

Abate by

May 23, 2022

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.178(a)(6):The employer did not ensure that all nameplates or markings were maintained in a legible condition:  a.) On or about February 14, 2022, at the company's yard, employees were exposed to struck-by and crush hazards, in that, the forklift's data plate was not legible.

Issued

May 3, 2022

Penalty

Initial $8,702 · Current $5,221 Reduced

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.28(b)(1)(i): Except as provided elsewhere in this section 29 CFR 1910.28, the employer did not ensure that each employee on a walking-working surface with an unprotected side or edge that is 4 feet (1.2 m) or more above a lower level is protected from falling by one or more of the systems described in 29 CFR 1910.28(b)(1)(i):  a.) On or about February 14, 2022 , the employer did not ensure that employees working at a height greater than 4 feet above a lower level were using a fall restraint system.

Issued

May 3, 2022

Penalty

Initial $0 · Current $0

General-duty citation text

29 CFR  1910.178(l)(6): The employer did not certify that each operator has been trained and evaluated as required by this paragraph (l):  a.) On or about February 14, 2022, at 2020 US 17 HWY, Bartow, FL, 33830, employees were exposed to struck-by and crush hazards, in that, the employer failed to certify that forklift operators were trained and evaluated.