PRIORITY FINISHING CORPORATION

According to U.S. Department of Labor enforcement records, PRIORITY FINISHING CORPORATION — a industry sector 00 facility located at 160 STEVENS STREET, FALL RIVER, MA 02722 — was the subject of a formal OSHA inspection that resulted in 80 citation(s) and cumulative proposed penalties of $127,650.00. The inspection case was opened on 1999-01-28.

Cumulative penalties significantly exceed the national median for OSHA enforcement actions. The penalty amount suggests multiple high-gravity citations, indicating conditions that presented a substantial probability of death or serious physical harm to employees.

State Context: Within MA, this facility's penalty places it at the 100th percentile among 60,671 inspected facilities. The statewide average penalty is $2,824.83.

Citation Analysis: The inspection produced 80 citations spanning 7 distinct OSHA regulatory standards. The citation breakdown includes: 10 serious — A workplace hazard that could cause death or serious physical harm exists, and the employer knew or should have known about the condition. 5 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 November 7, 1990 with the latest abatement deadline set for March 4, 1991. Of the 80 total citations, 15 (19%) have been marked as abated in DOL records, which may indicate ongoing compliance gaps requiring further regulatory attention.

Penalty Assessment: The cumulative penalty of $127,650.00 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 $1,595.63 falls within the standard penalty range.

The enforcement profile for Priority Finishing Corporation reveals a deeply entrenched pattern of systemic safety failures, characterized by an unusually high volume of 80 citations totaling $127,650 in penalties. This penalty magnitude and citation density are significantly higher than industry averages for finishing operations, signaling a comprehensive breakdown in the facility’s safety management system. The technical data highlights a dangerous nexus of mechanical and industrial hygiene hazards. Specifically, the recurring violations of 1910.219 (mechanical power-transmission apparatus) and 1910.23 (guarding floor and wall openings) indicate that workers were routinely exposed to catastrophic entanglement and fall risks. Furthermore, the simultaneous failure to implement adequate Lockout/Tagout (LOTO) procedures (1910.147) and Hazard Communication standards (1910.1200) suggests that the facility lacked the administrative controls necessary to mitigate high-gravity physical hazards. The presence of multiple serious violations regarding noise monitoring and PPE underscores a management culture that prioritized throughput over fundamental industrial hygiene. Rather than isolated incidents, these citations reflect a pervasive lack of oversight where critical safety infrastructure—ranging from physical machine guarding to employee training and recordkeeping—was consistently neglected. For compliance professionals, this record serves as a textbook example of a facility operating in a state of chronic non-compliance, necessitating aggressive abatement and sustained regulatory monitoring to prevent a sentinel event.