Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,189,992Inspections Most recent open 2026-07-18 Last loaded 2026-07-22

OSHA Inspection: JOSE RAMIREZ

Referral inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a referral safety inspection of JOSE RAMIREZ in LOT 5 VAN ETTEN DRIVE, GREENLAND, NH 03840 (NAICS 238310). OSHA activity number 340999473.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Jose Ramirez — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Jose Ramirez is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Establishment
JOSE RAMIREZ
Site address
LOT 5 VAN ETTEN DRIVE
City
GREENLAND
State
NH
ZIP
03840
Mailing
105 ASHLAND STREET, MANCHESTER, NH 03104
Inspection type
Referral (C)
Scope
Complete (A)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
238310
Employees
4
Ownership type
A

15 citations on file for this inspection.

1926.100 A

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Dec 17, 2015
Abate by
Dec 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $1,600 · Current $1,600
29 CFR 1926.100(a): Employees working in areas where there was a possible danger of head injury from impact, or falling or flying objects, or from electrical shock and burns, were not protected by protective helmets:  a. Site- Employees were not protected from overhead struck by hazards where hard hats were not worn at a the jobsite.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $1600

1926.150 C01 I

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Dec 17, 2015
Penalty
Initial $1,200 · Current $1,200
29 CFR 1926.150(c)(1)(i): A fire extinguisher, rated not less than 2A, was not provided for each 3,000 square feet of the protected building area, or major fraction thereof:  a. Site- Employees were not protected from fire and entrapment hazards where fire extinguishers were not provided at the jobsite.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $1200

1926.451 B01 I

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Dec 17, 2015
Abate by
Dec 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800
29 CFR 1926.451(b)(1)(i): Each platform unit (e.g., scaffold plank, fabricated plank, fabricated deck, or fabricated platform) was not installed so that the space between adjacent units and the space between the platform and the uprights were no more than 1 inch (2.5 cm) wide, except where the employer can demonstrate that a wider space is necessary.  a. Site- Employees working from a mobile scaffold where not protected from a fall hazard where each working level of the scaffold was not fully planked.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $2800

1926.451 F03

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Dec 17, 2015
Abate by
Dec 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1926.451(f)(3): Scaffolds and scaffold components were not inspected for visible defects by a competent person before each work shift, and after any occurrence which could affect a scaffold's structural integrity:  a. Site- Employees working from a mobile scaffold were not protected from scaffold failure and fall hazards where a competent person did not inspect the scaffold for visible defects prior to each work shift.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $0

1926.451 F07

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Dec 17, 2015
Abate by
Dec 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1926.451(f)(7): Scaffolds were not erected, moved, dismantled, or altered, by trained and experienced employees under the supervision and direction of a competent person qualified in scaffold erection, moving, dismantling or alteration:  a. Site- Employees working from a mobile scaffold were not protected from scaffold failure and fall hazards where a competent person did not supervise the erection and moving of a mobile scaffold.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $0

1926.452 C03

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Dec 17, 2015
Abate by
Dec 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1926.452(c)(3): Frames and panels were not joined together vertically by coupling or stacking pins or equivalent means:  a. Site- Employees working from a mobile scaffold where not protected from scaffold failure and a fall hazard where scaffold frames were joined together vertically with pins.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $0

1926.452 W02

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Dec 17, 2015
Abate by
Dec 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1926.452(w)(2): Scaffold casters and wheels were not locked with positive wheel and/or wheel and swivel locks, or equivalent means, to prevent movement of the scaffold while the scaffold was used in a stationary manner:  a. Site- Employees working from a mobile scaffold where not protected from a fall hazard where each castor supporting the mobile scaffold was not locked to prevent movement. On or about October 18, 2015 an employee fell from the top working level of the mobile scaffold while using manual force at the top of the mobile scaffold to move the scaffold. The castors were not locked while the employee worked from the scaffold so the employee did not have to come down from the scaffold to unlock the castors before moving the mobile scaffold.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $0

1926.451 G01

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Dec 17, 2015
Abate by
Dec 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800
29 CFR 1926.451(g)(1): Employees on scaffolds more than 10 feet (3.1 m) above a lower level were not protected from falling to that lower level by fall protection established in paragraphs (g)(1)(i)-(vii) of this section:  a. Site- Employees working from a mobile scaffold where not protected from a fall of 12.3 feet where fall protection was not provided by the employer. On or about October 18, 2015 an employee fell from the top working level of the scaffold and struck their head on the ground requiring the employee to be hospitalized.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $2800

1926.452 W01

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Dec 17, 2015
Abate by
Dec 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800
29 CFR 1926.452(w)(1): The mobile scaffold was not braced by cross, horizontal, or diagonal braces, or combination thereof, to prevent racking or collapse of the scaffold and secure vertical members together laterally so as to automatically square and align the vertical members:  a. Site- Employees working from a mobile scaffold where not protected from scaffold failure and a fall hazard where each scaffold frame was not braced with cross braces on each end to prevent racking or collapse. On or about October 18, 2015 an employee fell from the top working level of the mobile scaffold while using manual force at the top of the mobile scaffold to move the scaffold. The scaffold did not remain square while being moved contributing to a scaffold failure causing the employee to fall.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $2800

1926.452 W03

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Dec 17, 2015
Abate by
Dec 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800
29 CFR 1926.452(w)(3): Manual force used to move the scaffold was not applied as close to the base as practicable, but no more than 5 feet above the supporting surface.  a. Site- Employees working from a mobile scaffold where not protected from a fall hazard where the mobile scaffold was moved with manual force at the top working level, approximately 12 above the supporting surface. On or about October 18, 2015 an employee fell from the top working level of the mobile scaffold while using manual force at the top of the mobile scaffold to move the scaffold.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $2800

1926.452 W06 II

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Dec 17, 2015
Abate by
Dec 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1926.452(w)(6)(ii): Employee(s) were allowed to ride on a scaffold that had a height that was more than two times the base width and had not been designed and constructed to meet or exceed nationally recognized stability test requirements.  a. Site- Employees working from a mobile scaffold where not protected from a scaffold failure and fall hazard where a mobile scaffold was moved with manual force while an employee was on the top working level and the scaffold height exceeded two times the base width. On or about October 18, 2015 an employee fell from the top working level of the mobile scaffold while using manual force at the top of the mobile scaffold to move the scaffold.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $0

1926.452 W09

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Dec 17, 2015
Abate by
Dec 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800
29 CFR 1926.452(w)(9): Caster stems and wheel stems shall be pinned or otherwise secured in scaffold legs or adjustment screws:  a. Site- Employees working from a mobile scaffold where not protected from scaffold failure and a fall hazard where each castor supporting the scaffold was not pinned to prevent collapse. On or about October 18, 2015 an employee fell from the top working level of the mobile scaffold while using manual force at the top of the mobile scaffold to move the scaffold. A castor detached from the scaffold causing the scaffold to fail and an employee fell from the top working level.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $2800

1926.454 A

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Dec 17, 2015
Abate by
Jan 7, 2016
Penalty
Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800
29 CFR 1926.454(a): The employer did not have each employee who performed work while on a scaffold trained by a person qualified in the subject matter to recognize the hazards associated with the type of scaffold being used and to understand the procedures to control or minimize those hazards.  a. Site- Employees working from a mobile scaffold were not protected from scaffold failure and fall hazards where the employer failed to provide scaffold training by a qualified person in the subject matter re recognize hazards.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $2800

1926.501 B13

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Dec 17, 2015
Abate by
Dec 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $2,800 · Current $2,800
29 CFR 1926.501(b)(13): Each employee(s) engaged in residential construction activities 6 feet (1.8 m) or more above lower levels were not protected by guardrail systems, safety net system, or personal fall arrest system, nor were employee(s) provided with an alternative fall protection measure under another provision of paragraph 1926.501 (b):   a. Site- Employees working from the second floor near the stairway were exposed to a fall of approximately 9 feet where fall protection was not provided along the unprotected floor edge.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $2800

1926.1052 C01 II

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Dec 17, 2015
Abate by
Dec 23, 2015
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR 1926.1052(c)(1)(ii): Stairways having four or more risers or rising more than 30 inches (76 cm), whichever is less, were not equipped with a stairrail system along each unprotected side or edge:  Site- Employees using the stairs to access the second floor were exposed to a fall of approximately 9 feet at the top of the stairs where fall protection was not provided along the unprotected stair edge.
Recent events (1)
  • — Z (S) $0

View Jose Ramirez's full OSHA safety record →

This record is reproduced from the U.S. Department of Labor Open Data API (OSHA inspection dataset). The original IMIS detail view is available at OSHA's Establishment Search for activity number 340999473.

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