DELAND, FL. Back in December 2025, a state inspector walked into a DeLand Dollar General and found retail cleaning chemicals sitting on shelves directly above packaged chips and candy, a violation the store had already been cited for before.
The Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services inspected Dollar General #11349 on Deland on December 30, 2025. The store, classified as a Minor Outlet with Perishables, collected 10 total violations, including one priority violation and one repeat. None were corrected on site during the inspection itself, though the inspector noted chemicals were relocated for proper separation before the visit concluded.
What Inspectors Found
The chemical storage finding was the most direct hazard. The inspector's own notes read: "Retail cleaning chemical items stored on shelves above packaged food items including packaged chips and candy." Cleaning products stored above food create a contamination risk if a bottle leaks, tips, or is mishandled. The chemicals were moved during the visit.
The person in charge could not correctly answer questions about preventing the transmission of foodborne illness, the inspector noted. The store also lacked any written procedure for employees to follow when responding to a vomit or diarrhea incident on the premises.
Three mops were found improperly stored. One was sitting in the mop sink, one was on the floor of the employee restroom, and a third was stored in the retail area inside a mop bucket near water fountains. None were positioned to air-dry. The inspector noted the mop sink closet also "contained a collection of dirty tools and dirt."
The reach-in beverage coolers near the front entrance had visible dust buildup on top. The dumpster enclosure outside had a buildup of refuse and leaves. Neither restroom had a covered trash receptacle, and a gap existed between the base of the wall and the floor in the employee restroom.
What These Violations Mean
The chemical storage violation is the most straightforward risk for shoppers. Household cleaners and pesticides contain compounds that can cause illness if they contaminate food packaging, even without direct contact. A leaking bottle on a shelf above a bag of chips does not have to fully soak the product to transfer residue. The fact that this same violation appeared in a prior inspection makes the finding harder to dismiss as an oversight.
The person-in-charge knowledge failure matters beyond the paperwork. When the person responsible for a food retail establishment cannot correctly answer questions about preventing foodborne illness transmission, it signals that the staff operating the store may not understand when to exclude a sick employee, how to handle a contamination event, or what steps reduce transmission risk to customers. That gap in knowledge does not stay theoretical.
The missing written procedure for vomit and diarrhea incidents is directly connected to the same concern. Without a written protocol, employees have no clear guidance on how to safely clean up a bodily fluid discharge, which surfaces need disinfection, or how to protect other shoppers and themselves. This is a standard requirement for food establishments, and its absence at Dollar General #11349 in December was documented as a priority-foundation violation.
The mop storage issues are less acute but reflect a pattern of basic sanitation practices not being followed consistently across the store. Mops stored wet in sinks or on floors can become sources of bacterial growth and spread contamination to surfaces they later contact.
The Longer Record
Inspection History: Dollar General #11349, DeLand
The store has three FDACS inspections on record. The June 2023 visit produced six violations and the store passed. The December 2025 inspection found 10 violations, including a repeat of the chemical storage problem first documented more than two years earlier.
The February 2026 follow-up, classified as a focused inspection, found zero violations. Focused inspections are typically narrower in scope than full sanitation inspections and are often used to verify that specific cited issues have been resolved. That the December visit was flagged as "Check Back Needed" explains why the February visit occurred.
What the record shows is that the chemical storage problem was identified in 2023, was not prevented from recurring, and appeared again in the same form in December 2025. The person-in-charge knowledge gaps and the missing emergency response procedure were new findings in December, not repeats, which means they were not present in the prior inspection record or were not checked at that time.
The store met sanitation requirements in December despite the 10 violations. As of the February 2026 focused inspection, no violations were found outstanding.