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

OSHA Inspection: YOUNG DEVELOPERS, LLC

Planned inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a planned safety inspection of YOUNG DEVELOPERS, LLC in 1979 NORTH MAIN STREET, WATERBURY, CT 06704 (NAICS 238160). OSHA activity number 348749268.

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employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.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 Young Developers, LLC — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Young Developers, LLC is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
1979 NORTH MAIN STREET
City
WATERBURY
State
CT
ZIP
06704
Mailing
9 HAMDEN PARK DRIVE, HAMDEN, CT 06517
Inspection type
Planned (H)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
A
Opened
Closing conference
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
238160
Employees
2
Ownership type
A

4 citations on file for this inspection.

1926.502 D06 I

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Mar 10, 2026
Penalty
Initial $9,931 · Current $9,931
29 CFR1926.502(d)(6)(i):  Unless the snap hook is a locking type and designed for the following connections, snap hooks shall not be engaged directly to webbing, rope, or wire rope.  Roof: On or about February 13, 2026, the employer did not ensure that the lifelines of the personal fall arrest systems used by the employees were connected directly to an approved anchor point. The Foreman and Roofer were using personal fall arrest systems  while installing trim at the edge of the flat roof at a height of approximately 26 feet, 10 inches from ground level. Their lifeline snap hooks were  wrapped around an air conditioner bracket attached back on their lifeline ropes, which exposed them to fall hazards.
Recent events (3)
  • — A (S) $9931
  • — I (S) $4965.5
  • — Z (S) $9931

1926.502 D15

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Mar 10, 2026
Penalty
Initial $0 · Current $0
29 CFR1926.502(d)(15): The employer did not ensure that employees using personal fall arrest equipment were anchored to an anchorage point that could support at least 5000 pounds.  Roof: On or about February 13, 2026, the employer did not ensure that the the personal fall arrest systems used by the employees were connected to anchors rated for at least 5000 pounds, while working on a flat roof approximately 26 feet, 10 inches from ground level. The Site Foreman and Roofer used a single unrated air conditioning bracket as an anchor point for their personal fall arrest systems, which exposed them to fall hazards.
Recent events (2)
  • — I (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1926.503 C03

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Mar 10, 2026
Penalty
Initial $9,931 · Current $9,931
29 CFR1926.503(c)(3): Inadequacies in an affected employee's knowledge or use of fall protection systems or equipment indicate that the employee has not retained the requisite understanding or skill.  Roof:  On or about February 13, 2026, the employer did not ensure that the Site Foreman and Roofer, who had been given prior fall protection training, retained the requisite understanding or skills, to effectively use an appropriate fall protection system working on a flat roof at a height of approximately 26 feet, 10 inches.
Recent events (3)
  • — A (S) $9931
  • — I (S) $4965.5
  • — Z (S) $9931

1926.502 D16 III

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Mar 10, 2026
Penalty
Initial $9,931 · Current $9,931
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.  Rooftop: On or about February 13, 2026, the employer did not ensure that the Site Foreman used a deceleration device as part of his personal fall arrest system. This exposed him to shock-load injuries. A deceleration device would slow the rate of speed in case of a fall and not allow the Site Foreman to free fall more than six feet.
Recent events (3)
  • — A (S) $9931
  • — I (S) $4965.5
  • — Z (S) $9931

View Young Developers, LLC'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 348749268.

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