1,224,460Inspections Most recent open 2026-07-13 Last loaded 2026-07-16
Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025

OSHA Inspection: SERVICE MANAGEMENT GROUP, LLC

Referral inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a referral safety inspection of SERVICE MANAGEMENT GROUP, LLC in 200 LEEDERHILL DRIVE, HAMDEN, CT 06517 (NAICS 561720). OSHA activity number 343382529.

Watch Service Management Group, LLC — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Service Management Group, LLC is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
200 LEEDERHILL DRIVE
City
HAMDEN
State
CT
ZIP
06517
Mailing
25 CONTROLS DRIVE, SHELTON, CT 06484
Inspection type
Referral (C)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
561720
Employees
1500
Ownership type
A

11 citations on file for this inspection.

1910.27 B01 II

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 3 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $9239.00 · Current $6929.00 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.27(b)(1)(ii): The employer did not ensure that no employee(s) uses any anchorage before the employer has obtained written information from the building owner that each anchorage meets the requirements of paragraph (b)(1)(i) of this section and that the employer must keep the information for the duration of the job.    Jobsite:  The employer did not obtain written information from the building owner that each anchorage had met the appropriate requirements prior to allowing employees to use a rope descent system.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $6929.25
  • — Z (S) $9239

1910.27 B02 III

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 3 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $9239.00 · Current $6929.00 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.27(b)(2)(iii): The employer did not ensure that each employee required to use a rope decent system had been trained in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.30.    Jobsite: The employer did not train each employee required to use a rope descent system in proper rigging and use of the equipment.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $6929.25
  • — Z (S) $9239

1910.27 B02 V

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 3 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
29 CFR 1910.27(b)(2)(v): The employer did not ensure that the rope descent system had proper rigging, including anchorages and tiebacks, with particular emphasis on providing tiebacks when counterweights, cornice hooks, or similar non-permanent anchorages were used;    Jobsite: The employer did not ensure that the rope descent system had the proper rigging, including anchorages and tiebacks.     On 25 June 2018, an employee fell approximately 60 feet to the ground from the roof and sustained several broken bones from the incident. The employee was transported to a hospital after the incident.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.27 B02 IX

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
29 CFR 1910.27(b)(2)(ix): The employer did not ensure that the ropes of each rope descent system were effectively padded or otherwise protected, where they could contact edges of the building, anchorage, obstructions, or other surfaces, to prevent them from being cut or weakened:    Jobsite: The employer did not ensure that the descent rope was effectively padded or otherwise protected from damage when it was tied directly to the carabine.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.28 B12 II

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $12934.00 · Current $9701.00 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.28(b)(12)(ii): The employer did not ensure that each employee using a rope descent system 4 feet (1.2 m) or more above a lower level was protected from falling by a personal fall arrest system.    Jobsite: The employer did not ensure that each employee using a rope descent system to wash the exterior windows was protected from falling by a personal fall arrest system.    On 25 June 2018, an employee fell approximately 60 feet to the ground from the roof and sustained several broken bones from the incident. The employee was transported to a hospital after the incident.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $9700.5
  • — Z (S) $12934

1910.27 B02 VI

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
29 CFR 1910.27(b)(2)(vi): The employer did not ensure that each employee was using a separate, independent personal fall arrest system that met the requirements of subpart I of this part:    Jobsite: The employer did not ensure that each employee, exposed to fall hazards while washing exterior windows was using a separate, independent personal fall arrest system.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.140 D03

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
29 CFR 1910.140(d)(3): The employer did not prohibit the use of body belts as part of a personal fall arrest system:    Jobsite: Employees were using body belts as part of a personnel fall arrest system while washing exterior windows.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.140 C06

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $9239.00 · Current $6929.00 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.140(c)(6): A competent person or qualified person did not inspect each knot in a lanyard or vertical lifeline to ensure that it did meet the requirements of paragraphs (c)(4) and (5) of this section before any employee was using the lanyard or lifeline.    Jobsite: The employer did not ensure that a competent or qualified person inspected the knots in the vertical life line to ensure the line was able to maintain a minimum breaking strength of 5,000 pounds (22.2 kN) prior to allowing employees to use the line.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $6929.25
  • — Z (S) $9239

1910.140 C19

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
29 CFR 1910.140(c)(19): The employer did not ensure that ropes, belts, lanyards, and harnesses used for personal fall protection were compatible with all connectors used.    Jobsite:  The employer did not ensure that the ropes used as part of a personnel fall protection system were compatible with the carabiner that was used to connect to the MIO Roof Rigger.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.140 C10 I

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00
29 CFR 1910.140(c)(10)(i): Personal fall protection snaphooks and carabiners were connected directly to webbing, rope, or wire rope; unless they are designed for such connections:    Jobsite: The employer did not ensure that carabiners were not connected directly to the lifeline and the descent line.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.28 B13 I

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $12934.00 · Current $9701.00 Reduced
29 CFR 1910.28(b)(13)(i): Work on low-slope roofs. When work was performed less than 6 feet (1.6 m) from the roof edge, the employer did not ensure each employee was protected from falling by a guardrail system, safety net system, travel restraint system, or personal fall arrest system.    Jobsite: The employer did not ensure that each employee exposed fall hazards of up to 60 feet above the ground while assembling the rope descent system and acting as a helper to the window washers on the flat roof was protected from falling by the use of appropriate fall protection systems/devices.    On 25 June 2018, an employee fell approximately 60 feet to the ground from the roof and sustained several broken bones from the incident. The employee was transported to a hospital after the incident.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $9700.5
  • — Z (S) $12934

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 343382529.