Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,191,871Inspections Most recent open 2026-07-30 Last loaded 2026-08-03

OSHA Inspection: LM QUALITY CONTRACTING CORP

Complaint inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a complaint safety inspection of LM QUALITY CONTRACTING CORP in 221 ELM AVE, TEANECK, NJ 07666 (NAICS 238160). OSHA activity number 343645552.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 LM Quality Contracting Corp for free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for LM Quality Contracting Corp is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
221 ELM AVE
City
TEANECK
State
NJ
ZIP
07666
Mailing
129 FAIRVIEW AVE, SPRING VALLEY, NY 10977
Inspection type
Complaint (B)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Closing conference
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
238160
Employees
5
Ownership type
A

5 citations on file for this inspection.

1926.102 A01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Mar 6, 2019
Penalty
Initial $3,410 · Current $3,410
29 CFR 1926.102(a)(1): The employer shall ensure that each affected employee uses appropriate eye or face protection when exposed to eye or face hazards from flying particles, molten metal, liquid chemicals, acids or caustic liquids, chemical gases or vapors, or potentially injurious light radiation.   a) Building Exterior - Roof: Employees were exposed to eye and face injuries while installing plywood on the roof without the use of eye and face protection, on or about 12/7/2018
Recent events (1)
  • · Z (S) $3410

1926.501 B13

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Mar 6, 2019
Penalty
Initial $3,978 · Current $3,978
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) Building Exterior - Roof: Employees were exposed to a 20 foot fall hazard while working on a  8/12 pitched  roof of a residential home without the use of personal fall arrest system or other means of fall protection in place, on or about 12/7/2018.
Recent events (1)
  • · Z (S) $3978

1926.502 D

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Mar 6, 2019
Penalty
Initial $3,978 · Current $3,978
29 CFR 1926.502(d): "Personal fall arrest systems." Personal fall arrest systems and their use shall comply with the provisions set forth below. Effective January 1, 1998, body belts are not acceptable as part of a personal fall arrest system.  a) Building Exterior - Roof: An employee was wearing a body belt as part of personal fall arrest system, on or about 12/7/2018
Recent events (1)
  • · Z (S) $3978

1926.502 D15

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Mar 6, 2019
Penalty
Initial $3,978 · Current $3,978
29 CFR 1926.502(d)(15): Anchorage used for attachment for personal fall arrest equipment was not capable of supporting at least 5,000 pounds (22.2 kN) per employee attached nor was it designed, installed and used as follows: As part of a complete personal fall arrest system which maintains a safety factor of at least two; and under the supervision of a qualified person.  a) Building Exterior - Roof: An employee was exposed to a 20 foot fall hazard while using the edge of a roof plywood as an anchorage point, on or about 12/7/2018
Recent events (1)
  • · Z (S) $3978

1926.1053 B01

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Mar 6, 2019
Penalty
Initial $3,978 · Current $3,978
29 CFR 1926.1053(b)(1): Where portable ladders were used for access to an upper landing surface and the ladder's length allows, the ladder side rails did not extend at least 3 feet (.9 m) above the upper landing surface being accessed:   a) Building Exterior - West Side: Employees were exposed to a fall hazard while transitioning from an extension ladder to the roof of a residential home. The ladder did not extend at least 3 feet above the upper landing surface, on or about 12/7/2018.
Recent events (1)
  • · Z (S) $3978

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 343645552.

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