ORVAL KENT FOOD COMPANY INC

According to U.S. Department of Labor enforcement records, ORVAL KENT FOOD COMPANY INC — a industry sector 00 facility located at 5001 S SOTO ST, VERNON, CA 90058 — was the subject of a formal OSHA inspection that resulted in 15 citation(s) and cumulative proposed penalties of $47,965.00. The inspection case was opened on 1996-05-13.

The volume of citations issued during this inspection suggests systematic compliance deficiencies rather than isolated incidents. Facilities with 10 or more citations typically face comprehensive abatement requirements and may be subject to follow-up inspections.

State Context: Within CA, this facility's penalty places it at the 100th percentile among 184,062 inspected facilities. The statewide average penalty is $3,010.44.

Citation Analysis: The inspection produced 15 citations spanning 3 distinct OSHA regulatory standards. The citation breakdown includes: 8 other-than-serious — The violation has a direct relationship to job safety and health but is unlikely to cause death or serious physical harm. 7 serious — A workplace hazard that could cause death or serious physical harm exists, and the employer knew or should have known about the condition.

Enforcement Timeline: Citations were issued beginning June 24, 1996 with the latest abatement deadline set for January 9, 2002. Of the 15 total citations, 15 (100%) have been marked as abated in DOL records, indicating substantial compliance with corrective action requirements.

Penalty Assessment: The cumulative penalty of $47,965.00 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 $3,197.67 falls within the standard penalty range.

The inspection of Orval Kent Food Company revealed a deeply concerning pattern of machine safety and electrical hazards that transcended simple technical non-compliance, pointing instead to a systemic failure in the facility’s safety culture. The most striking element of this enforcement action was the $22,500 penalty assessed for a single violation of gear and sprocket guarding standards. In the mid-1990s regulatory landscape, a penalty of this magnitude