Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,198,201Inspections Most recent open 2026-08-31 Last loaded 2026-09-03

OSHA Inspection: NEWBURGH METALS, INC.

Complaint inspection · Health discipline

On , OSHA opened a complaint health inspection of NEWBURGH METALS, INC. in 75 PIERCES ROAD, NEWBURGH, NY 12550 (NAICS 332322). OSHA activity number 339084204.

What this inspection record means

OSHA opens inspections for many reasons: routine scheduling under a national or local emphasis program, an employee complaint or referral, or a follow-up after a reported injury. Opening or conducting an inspection is not itself an allegation or a finding that this employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.

Watch Newburgh Metals, INC. for free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Newburgh Metals, INC. is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
75 PIERCES ROAD
City
NEWBURGH
State
NY
ZIP
12550
Mailing
75 PIERCES ROAD, NEWBURGH, NY 12550
Inspection type
Complaint (B)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Health
Advance notice
No
Union status
Non-union (B)
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
332322
Employees
60
Ownership type
Private (A)

8 citations on file for this inspection.

1910.106 E09 III

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Nov 12, 2013
Abate by
Dec 15, 2013
Penalty
Initial $2,800 · Current $2,000 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.106(e)(9)(iii): Combustible waste material and residues in a building or unit operating area were not kept to a minimum, stored in covered metal receptacles and disposed of daily:    a) On or about 5/23/13, in the powder coating area, for employees that wipe down the metal products with alcohol. The employees store the rags in a cardboard box and are not disposed of daily.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $2000
  • · Z (S) $2800

1910.132 A

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Nov 12, 2013
Abate by
Dec 15, 2013
Penalty
Initial $3,500 · Current $2,000 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.132(a): Protective equipment, including personal protective equipment for eyes, face, head, and extremities, protective clothing, respiratory devices, and protective shields and barriers, was not provided, used, and maintained in a sanitary and reliable condition wherever it is necessary by reason of hazards of processes or environment, chemical hazards, radiological hazards, or mechanical irritants encountered in a manner capable of causing injury or impairment in the function of any part of the body through absorption, inhalation or physical contact:     a). On or about 5/23/13, on site, for the employee that adds approximately 1 cup of Adjust 6 into the 5 Stage Wash System. Adjust 6 contains chemicals such as, but not limited to, sodium hydroxide. Sodium hydroxide is a corrosive and cause severe burns to eyes and skin. The employee uses the chemical based on the pH of the solution, which is checked daily. The employer did not provide and require the use of a face shield, rubber gloves, and a rubber apron.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $2000
  • · Z (S) $3500

1910.134 C01

Serious Gravity 5 3 instances 2 exposed
Issued
Nov 12, 2013
Abate by
Dec 20, 2013
Penalty
Initial $3,500 · Current $2,000 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1): In the workplace where respirators were necessary to protect the health of the employee or whenever respirators were required by the employer, the employer did not establish and implement a written respiratory protection program with worksite-specific procedures:    a). On or about 5/23/13, on site, for the employee required to don a 3M M7502 1/2 mask respirator with P100 filters when conducting sandblasting operations infrequently. The employer did not implement a written respirator program to include a medical evaluation, fit tests, and training.     b). On or about 5/23/13, on site, for employees required to don 3M 1/2 mask respirators assisting the painters in the powder coating department on a daily basis. The employer did not implement a written respirator program to include a medical evaluation, fit tests, and training.     c). On or about 5/23/13, on site, for employees required to don 3M full face respirators when conducting powder coating operations on a daily basis. The employer did not implement a written respirator program to include a medical evaluation, fit tests, and training.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $2000
  • · Z (S) $3500

1910.134 K01 VII

Serious Gravity 5 3 instances 2 exposed
Issued
Nov 12, 2013
Abate by
Dec 20, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.134(k)(1)(vii): The employer did not ensure that each employee who is required to use respirators can demonstrate knowledge on the general requirements of the standard:    a). On or about 5/23/13, on site, for the employee required to don a 3M M7502 1/2 mask respirator with P100 filters when conducting sandblasting operations infrequently. The employer did not implement a written respirator program to include a medical evaluation, fit tests, and training.     b). On or about 5/23/13, on site, for employees required to don 3M 1/2 mask respirators assisting the painters in the powder coating department on a daily basis. The employer did not implement a written respirator program to include a medical evaluation, fit tests, and training.     c). On or about 5/23/13, on site, for employees required to don 3M full face respirators when conducting powder coating operations on a daily basis. The employer did not implement a written respirator program to include a medical evaluation, fit tests, and training.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.134 E01

Serious Gravity 10 3 instances 2 exposed
Issued
Nov 12, 2013
Abate by
Dec 20, 2013
Penalty
Initial $4,900 · Current $2,000 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1): The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator, before the employee is fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace:    a). On or about 5/23/13, on site, for the employee required to don a 3M M7502 1/2 mask respirator with P100 filters when conducting sandblasting operations infrequently. The employer did not implement a written respirator program to include a medical evaluation, fit tests, and training.     b). On or about 5/23/13, on site, for employees required to don 3M 1/2 mask respirators assisting the painters in the powder coating department on a daily basis. The employer did not implement a written respirator program to include a medical evaluation, fit tests, and training.     c). On or about 5/23/13, on site, for employees required to don 3M full face respirators when conducting powder coating operations on a daily basis. The employer did not implement a written respirator program to include a medical evaluation, fit tests, and training.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $2000
  • · Z (S) $4900

1910.134 F02

Serious Gravity 10 3 instances 2 exposed
Issued
Nov 12, 2013
Abate by
Dec 20, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.134(f)(2): The employer did not ensure that an employee using a tight-fitting facepiece respirator is fit tested prior to initial use of the respirator, whenever a different respirator facepiece (size, style, model or make) is used, and at least annually thereafter:    a). On or about 5/23/13, on site, for the employee required to don a 3M M7502 1/2 mask respirator with P100 filters when conducting sandblasting operations infrequently. The employer did not implement a written respirator program to include a medical evaluation, fit tests, and training.     b). On or about 5/23/13, on site, for employees required to don 3M 1/2 mask respirators assisting the painters in the powder coating department on a daily basis. The employer did not implement a written respirator program to include a medical evaluation, fit tests, and training.     c). On or about 5/23/13, on site, for employees required to don 3M full face respirators when conducting powder coating operations on a daily basis. The employer did not implement a written respirator program to include a medical evaluation, fit tests, and training.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.1200 E01

Serious Gravity 5 2 instances 2 exposed
Issued
Nov 12, 2013
Abate by
Dec 20, 2013
Penalty
Initial $3,500 · Current $2,000 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.1200(e)(1): The employers did not develop, implement, and maintain at each workplace, a written hazard communication program which at least describes how the criteria specified in paragraphs (f), (g), and (h) of this section for labels and other forms of warning, material safety data sheets, and employee information and training will be met:    a). On or about 5/23/13, on site, for the employee that dispenses approximately 1 cup of Adjust 6 into the 5 Stage Wash System. Adjust 6 contains chemicals such as, but not limited to, Sodium Hydroxide. The employer did not implement a hazard communication program to include a written program and training.    b). On or about 5/23/13, on site, for the employees that conduct MIG welding operation on stainless steel products.  Employees may be exposed to Hexavalent Chromium generated form MIG welding on stainless steel. The employer did not implement a hazard communication program to include a written program and training.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $2000
  • · Z (S) $3500

1910.1200 H01

Serious Gravity 5 2 instances 2 exposed
Issued
Nov 12, 2013
Abate by
Dec 20, 2013
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(1): The employer did not provide employees with effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment, and whenever a new physical or health hazard the employees have not previously been trained about is introduced into their work area:    a). On or about 5/23/13, on site, for the employee that dispenses approximately 1 cup of Adjust 6 into the 5 Stage Wash System. Adjust 6 contains chemicals such as, but not limited to, Sodium Hydroxide. The employer did not implement a hazard communication program to include a written program and training.    b). On or about 5/23/13, on site, for the employees that conduct MIG welding operation on stainless steel products.  Employees may be exposed to Hexavalent Chromium generated form MIG welding on stainless steel. The employer did not implement a hazard communication program to include a written program and training.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

View Newburgh Metals, INC.'s full OSHA safety record →

This record is reproduced from the U.S. Department of Labor Open Data API (OSHA inspection dataset). OSHA publishes its own view of this case as inspection number 339084204.

Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.