Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
105,991Records 70,589Employers 85,836Hospitalizations 27,959Amputations 2015-01-01 2025-11-30

OSHA Accident Investigation · Summary #14224919

RAMSEY & SON LUMBER CORP.

Event
AMPUTATED, SAWYER, GUARD, CAUGHT BY, SAW, CAUGHT BETWEEN, SAWMILL
NAICS
000000
Inspection type
Planned
Activity number
#105697833
Employer profile
RAMSEY & SON LUMBER CORP.
Summary number
14224919
Report ID
355119

Event description

AMPUTATION OF FINGER IN A PINCH POINT

Investigation abstract

At about 8:00 a.m. on January, 6 1989, Employee #1 was operating a trim saw stra is first phalange. He was not hospitalized. ightening 1-in. by 6-in. boards, 10 to12 ft long. Boards are fed by horizontal l evel top chains that run in the direction of the end saw. The conveyor chain tur ns around a sprocket 28 inches above the floor nearest the operator station. The chain & sprocket pinch point was guarded on the operator's side but the inside pinch point, (chain approx 3 inches wide), was not guarded. Employee #1 was stan ding at his control station, a pedestal stand 37 inches above the floor and 24 i nches away from the sprocket, reached over the chain to straightened a board and stuck his right middle finger into the pinch point resulting in amputation of h

Victim

  1. #1 Non-hospitalized injury Age 26 Male

    Nature of injury
    Amputation (1)
    Part of body
    FINGER(S) (10)
    Accident type
    CAUGHT IN OR BETWEEN (2)
    Source of injury
    MATERIALS HANDLG EQ. (27)
    Occupation
    Sawing machine operators (727)
    Human factor
    MISJUDGMENT, HAZ. SITUATION (1)
    Environmental factor
    PINCH POINT ACTION (1)
    Task assigned
    Task regularly assigned (1)

Labels are OSHA's own, from the code dictionary published with the accident-investigation file. The raw code is shown beside each one so this page can be reconciled against OSHA's bulk data. OSHA notes that nature of injury, part of body, source of injury and accident type in this file are not coded to the Occupational Injury and Illness Classification System, and that the occupation titles are not standardised — so these values are not directly comparable with the OIICS-coded severe injury reports.