FAURECIA INTERIOR SYSTEMS, INC.

According to U.S. Department of Labor enforcement records, FAURECIA INTERIOR SYSTEMS, INC. — a all other plastics product manufacturing facility located at 1401 INDUSTRIAL PARK DRIVE, TUSCALOOSA, AL 35401 — was the subject of a formal OSHA inspection that resulted in 5 citation(s) and cumulative proposed penalties of $35,243.40. The inspection case was opened on 2016-05-31.

DOL records document workplace safety violations warranting formal citation under the OSH Act. While classified at the standard enforcement level, all OSHA citations require corrective action and may indicate areas where workplace safety programs should be strengthened.

BLS Injury Data: According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (2022), this industry sector has an occupational injury rate of 3.3 per 100 full-time workers — 22% above the national average of 2.7. The sector fatality rate is 2.3 per 100,000 workers.

Industry Benchmark: The total penalty of $35,243.40 is more than 4.2× the national average of $8,414.32 for facilities in the Manufacturing sector (NAICS 326199). This sector encompasses 52,095 inspected facilities nationwide with aggregate penalties totaling $438.3M.

State Context: Within AL, this facility's penalty places it at the 99th percentile among 30,935 inspected facilities. The statewide average penalty is $3,893.70.

Citation Analysis: The inspection produced 5 citations spanning 5 distinct OSHA regulatory standards. The citation breakdown includes: 2 serious — A workplace hazard that could cause death or serious physical harm exists, and the employer knew or should have known about the condition. 1 repeat — A substantially similar violation was found during a previous inspection and the original citation has become a final order. 2 other-than-serious — The violation has a direct relationship to job safety and health but is unlikely to cause death or serious physical harm.

Enforcement Timeline: Citations were issued beginning September 28, 2016 with the latest abatement deadline set for Date Not Recorded. Of the 5 total citations, 0 (0%) have been marked as abated in DOL records, which may indicate ongoing compliance gaps requiring further regulatory attention.

Penalty Assessment: The cumulative penalty of $35,243.40 reflects OSHA's gravity-based penalty calculation methodology, which considers the severity of potential injury, the probability of occurrence, the employer's size, good faith, and violation history. The per-citation average of $7,048.68 falls within the standard penalty range.

The 2016 inspection at the Faurecia Interior Systems facility in Tuscaloosa revealed a high-risk operational environment characterized by recurring mechanical hazards and systemic material management failures. The most significant finding was a Repeat violation of 1910.215(b)(5), carrying a substantial $24,941 penalty. This specific citation regarding abrasive wheel machinery—specifically the adjustment of tongue guards—indicates a failure of the employer to sustain corrective actions from previous inspections. In practical terms, this neglect exposed workers to catastrophic "bursting" wheel injuries and projectile hazards, signaling a breakdown in the facility’s preventative maintenance and tool-box safety audit protocols. The penalty severity for this single repeat violation is significantly higher than industry averages for NAICS 326199, reflecting OSHA’s intent to penalize recidivism. When coupled with Serious violations involving floor openings (1910.23) and improper material storage (1910.176), a pattern emerges of poor housekeeping and inadequate walking-working surface oversight. These combined factors suggest that safety leadership at the plant was reactive rather than proactive, allowing fundamental physical hazards to persist in high-traffic production areas. The presence of Other-than-Serious citations regarding exit routes further underscores a lack of attention to life-safety basics, suggesting that while the facility may have had safety policies on paper, the localized implementation and supervisory enforcement of those standards were inconsistent and functionally deficient.