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

OSHA Inspection: CUZCO GENERAL CONTRACTOR INC.

Planned inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of CUZCO GENERAL CONTRACTOR INC. in 242 BOULEVARD, PASSAIC, NJ 07055 (NAICS 238160). OSHA activity number 345647374.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Cuzco General Contractor INC. — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Cuzco General Contractor INC. is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
242 BOULEVARD
City
PASSAIC
State
NJ
ZIP
07055
Mailing
2 COURLAND TRAIL, MAHWAH, NJ 07430
Inspection type
Planned (H)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Closing conference
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
238160
Employees
3
Ownership type
A

5 citations on file for this inspection.

1926.102 A01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
May 13, 2022
Penalty
Initial $3,729 · Current $2,429 Reduced
29 CFR 1926.102(a)(1): Eye and face protective equipment were not used when machines or operations presented potential eye or face injury:                                                                                                            A) Exterior, Roof Level of house: Employees were exposed to eye/face injuries while using pneumatic nail guns and were not protected with any type of eye/face protection, on or about 11/18/21.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $2428.85
  • — Z (S) $3729

1926.501 B13

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
May 13, 2022
Penalty
Initial $4,351 · Current $2,828 Reduced
29 CFR 1926.501(b)(13): 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 (b)  A) Exterior, Roof of the house: Employees were exposed to fall hazards of approximately 28 feet while engaged in roofing work on the roof of a house without a means of fall protection in place, on or about 11/18/21.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $2828.15
  • — Z (S) $4351

1926.502 D15 II

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
May 13, 2022
Penalty
Initial $4,351 · Current $2,828 Reduced
29 CFR 1926.502(d)(15)(ii): Anchorages points were not installed under the supervision of a qualified person.  a) Building Exterior-Roof: An employee was exposed to a fall hazard, while engaged in roofing activities and the anchorage point was not installed under the supervision of a qualified person, on or about 11/18/21.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $2828.15
  • — Z (S) $4351

1926.502 D

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
May 13, 2022
Penalty
Initial $4,351 · Current $2,828 Reduced
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. Note: The use of a body belt in a positioning device system is acceptable and is regulated under paragraph (e) of this section.  A) Building Exterior Roof: Personal fall arrest systems did not comply with the provisions as required. Employee was tied around his waist with a vertical life line as part of a personal fall arrest system, on or about 11/18/21.  -
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $2828.15
  • — Z (S) $4351

1926.1053 B01

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
May 13, 2022
Penalty
Initial $4,351 · Current $2,828 Reduced
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) Exterior, Roof of the structure: Employees were exposed to fall hazards of approximately 28 feet while using an extension ladder that was not extended at least 3 feet over the landing that they were accessing, on or about 11/18/21
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $2828.15
  • — Z (S) $4351

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 345647374.

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