LITCHFIELD, NH —
OSHA Inspection: MAYCOL GENERAL CONSTRUCTION INC
Complaint inspection · Safety discipline
At a glance
On , OSHA opened a complaint safety inspection of MAYCOL GENERAL CONSTRUCTION INC in 498 CHARLES BANCROFT HWY, LITCHFIELD, NH 03052 (NAICS 238160). OSHA activity number 347666729.
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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.
Where did this inspection happen?
- Establishment
- MAYCOL GENERAL CONSTRUCTION INC
- Site address
- 498 CHARLES BANCROFT HWY
- City
- LITCHFIELD
- State
- NH
- ZIP
- 03052
- Mailing
- 155 BOXFORD STREET 3RD FL, LAWRENCE, MA 01843
What kind of inspection was it?
- Inspection type
- Complaint (B)
- Scope
- Partial (B)
- Discipline
- Safety
- Advance notice
- No
- Union status
- B
When did the case open and close?
- Opened
- Closing conference
- Case closed
- Last modified
- Data loaded
Establishment context
- NAICS code
- 238160
- Employees
- 7
- Ownership type
- A
Citations
10 citations on file for this inspection.
1926.20 B01
- Issued
- Sep 6, 2024
- Abate by
- Oct 24, 2024
- Penalty
- Initial $3,457 · Current $3,000 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.20(b)(1): The employer did not initiate and maintain accident prevention programs as necessary to comply with this part: Site- The employer did not develop a safety and health program with policy, hazard assessment, and work site rules was not developed and/or implemented at this jobsite where employees were exposed to fall and struck by hazards.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $3000
- — Z (S) $3457
1926.20 B02
- Issued
- Sep 6, 2024
- Abate by
- Sep 18, 2024
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.20(b)(2): The employer did not initiate and maintain programs which provided for frequent and regular inspections of the job site, materials and equipment to be made by a competent person(s): Site- The employer did not perform frequent and regular inspections of the jobsite to ensure that it was free from recognizable hazards where employees were exposed to fall and struck by hazards.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1926.503 A01
- Issued
- Sep 6, 2024
- Abate by
- Oct 24, 2024
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.503(a)(1): The employer did not provide a training program for each employee who might be exposed to fall hazards: Site- Employees exposed to a fall hazard while working from the roof were not provided with fall protection training from the employer.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1926.100 A
- Issued
- Sep 6, 2024
- Abate by
- Sep 12, 2024
- Penalty
- Initial $3,457 · Current $0 Reduced
General-duty citation text
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: Site- Employees working from the ground were not protected from overhead struck by hazards where head protection was not required to be worn by the employer.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $3457
1926.102 A01
- Issued
- Sep 6, 2024
- Abate by
- Sep 12, 2024
- Penalty
- Initial $3,457 · Current $0 Reduced
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.102(a)(1): The employer did not ensure employees used eye and face protection equipment when machines or operations presented potential eye or face injury from physical, chemical, or radiation agents: Site- Employees operating pneumatic nail guns were not protected from eye injuries where eye protection was not required to be worn by the employer.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $3457
1926.501 B13
- Issued
- Sep 6, 2024
- Abate by
- Sep 12, 2024
- Penalty
- Initial $4,839 · Current $0 Reduced
General-duty citation text
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): Site- Employees working from the roof were not protected from a fall of approximately 10 feet where fall protection was not utilized.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $4839
1926.502 D
- Issued
- Sep 6, 2024
- Abate by
- Sep 12, 2024
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.502(d): The employer used body belts as part of a personal fall arrest system: Site- An employee working from the roof was not protected from fall related injuries where a body belt was worn as part of a personal fall arrest system.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1926.502 D16 III
- Issued
- Sep 6, 2024
- Abate by
- Sep 12, 2024
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.502(d)(16)(iii): Personal fall arrest systems, when stopping a fall, were not rigged such that an employee could not free fall more than 6 feet (1.8 m) nor contact any lower level: Site- Employees working from the roof were not protected from striking the ground approximately 10 feet below where there was excessive slack in their personal fall arrest systems.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1926.502 D17
- Issued
- Sep 6, 2024
- Abate by
- Sep 12, 2024
- Penalty
- Initial $0 · Current $0
General-duty citation text
29 CFR 1926.502(d)(17): The attachment point of the body belt was not located in the center of the wearer's back. The attachment point of the body narness was not located in the center of the wearer's back near shoulder level, or above the wearer's head. Site- An employee working from the roof was not protected from fall related injuries where the lifeline in their personal fall arrest system was connected to the employee's full body harness at the waist.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $0
1926.1053 B01
- Issued
- Sep 6, 2024
- Abate by
- Sep 12, 2024
- Penalty
- Initial $3,457 · Current $0 Reduced
General-duty citation text
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: Site- Employees using aluminum extension ladders to access the roof were not protected from a fall hazard where the ladders extended less than two feet above the landing surface.
Recent events (2)
- — I (S) $0
- — Z (S) $3457
More inspections at Maycol General Construction INC
View Maycol General Construction INC's full OSHA safety record →
More inspections in this industry (NAICS 238160)
More inspections in NH
Source
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 347666729.
Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.