Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,196,249Inspections Most recent open 2026-08-20 Last loaded 2026-08-24

OSHA Inspection: SIKA CORPORATION

Complaint inspection · Health discipline

On , OSHA opened a complaint health inspection of SIKA CORPORATION in 875 VALLEY BROOK ROAD, LYNDHURST, NJ 07071 (NAICS 325520). OSHA activity number 341527794.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Sika Corporation for free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Sika Corporation is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Establishment
SIKA CORPORATION
Site address
875 VALLEY BROOK ROAD
City
LYNDHURST
State
NJ
ZIP
07071
Mailing
875 VALLEY BROOK ROAD, LYNDHURST, NJ 07071
Inspection type
Complaint (B)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Health
Advance notice
No
Union status
Union (A)
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
325520
Employees
150
Ownership type
Private (A)

6 citations on file for this inspection.

1910.37 B02

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 3 exposed
Issued
Oct 6, 2016
Penalty
Initial $5,345 · Current $3,742 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.37(b)(2): Each exit was not clearly visible and marked by a sign reading "Exit":  a) Specialty Department: An exit door that is designated as an emergency exit was missing an exit sign above the door, on or about, 6/7/16.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $3741.5
  • · Z (S) $5345

1910.134 E01

Deleted Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Oct 6, 2016
Abate by
Nov 25, 2016
Penalty
Initial $5,345 · Current $0 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 was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace:  a) Specialty/Compounding Department: Employees are required to wear respiratory protection when responding to chemical releases. The employer did not provide medical evaluation for employees who are required to wear respiratory protection, on or about, 4/25/16.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (S) $0
  • · Z (S) $5345

1910.134 K

Other-than-serious 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Oct 6, 2016
Abate by
Oct 26, 2016
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.134(k): The employer did not provide effective training to employees who are required to use respirators:    a) Specialty/Compounding Department: Employees responding to a chemical release were not wearing respirators when required by the employer, on or about, 4/25/16.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (O) $0
  • · Z (S) $0

1910.22 A01

Other-than-serious 1 instance 3 exposed
Issued
Oct 6, 2016
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.22(a)(1): All places of employment, passageways, storerooms or service rooms were not kept clean and orderly or in a sanitary condition:  a) Mixing Department (Mezzanine Area): The floor area had accumulation of dust from processing equipment. The employer did not ensure that the workplace was kept clean and orderly, on or about, 6/7/16.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (O) $0
  • · Z (O) $0

1910.1200 F10

Other-than-serious 1 instance 3 exposed
Issued
Oct 6, 2016
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.1200(f)(10): The employer did not ensure that workplace labels or other forms of warnings were legible:  a) Mixing Department: The labels on several containers of LX Salicylic Acid 5% acid were obscured, on or about, 6/7/16.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (O) $0
  • · Z (O) $0

1910.1200 H03 I

Other-than-serious 1 instance 3 exposed
Issued
Oct 6, 2016
Abate by
Oct 26, 2016
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(3)(i): The employee training did not include the methods and observations used to detect the presence or release of a hazardous chemical in the work area:  a) Specialty/Compounding Department: Employee involved in the cleanup of a chemical spill did not follow proper cleanup spill procedures, as outlined in the safety data sheet for Desmodur TU-19 SF. The employer did not provide effective training for employees who respond to the release of hazardous chemicals, on, or about, 4/25/16.
Recent events (2)
  • · I (O) $0
  • · Z (O) $0

View Sika Corporation'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 341527794.

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