Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
2,004,209Inspections Most recent open 2026-07-13 Last loaded 2026-07-17

OSHA Inspection: PRO MASONRY, LLC

Complaint inspection · Health discipline

On , OSHA opened a complaint health inspection of PRO MASONRY, LLC in 292 PEQUOT AVENUE, NEW LONDON, CT 06320 (NAICS 238140). OSHA activity number 347608333.

Watch PRO Masonry, LLC — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for PRO Masonry, LLC is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Establishment
PRO MASONRY, LLC
Site address
292 PEQUOT AVENUE
City
NEW LONDON
State
CT
ZIP
06320
Mailing
100 MULLEN HILL ROAD, WATERFORD, CT 06385
Inspection type
Complaint (B)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Health
Advance notice
No
Union status
B
Opened
Closing conference
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
238140
Employees
4
Ownership type
A

10 citations on file for this inspection.

1926.1153 C01

Serious Gravity 10 2 instances 4 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $4839.00 · Current $2925.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9000

29 CFR  1926.1153(c)(1): For each employee engaged in a task identified on Table 1, the employer did not fully and properly implement the engineering controls, work practices, and respiratory protection specified for the task on Table 1, unless the employer assesses and limits the exposure of the employee to respirable crystalline silica in accordance with paragraph (d) of this section.   292 Pequot Avenue, New London, CT  1.) On or about July 11, 2024, for each employee engaged in a task identified on Table 1, the employer did not fully and properly implement the engineering controls specified for the task on Table 1 (vii), while removing mortar between brick joints with a handheld hammer drill.  The drill was not equipped with a shroud and dust collection system to minimize dust emissions and conform with Table 1.  Employees conducted the task  with no respiratory protection and for up to eight hours per shift.  2.) On or about July 11, 2024, for each employee engaged in a task identified on Table 1, the employer did not fully and properly implement the engineering controls specified for the task on Table 1 (xi), while removing mortar between brick joints with handheld angle grinder.  The grinder was not equipped with a shroud and dust collection system to minimize dust emissions and conform with Table 1. Employees conducted the task for up to eight hours per shift.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $2925
  • — C (S) $4839
  • — Z (S) $4839

1926.1153 D02 I

Serious Gravity 10 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 9000

29 CFR  1926.1153(d)(2)(i): The employer did not assess the exposure of each employee who was or may reasonably be expected to be exposed to respirable crystalline silica at or above the action level in accordance with either the performance option in paragraph (d)(2)(ii) or the scheduled monitoring option in paragraph (d)(2)(iii) of this section:  292 Pequot Avenue, New London, CT  On or about July 11, 2024, employees were conducting Table 1 tasks that require engineering controls as a method of protection from silica dust.  Employees were cutting brick and mortar with handheld power grinders and drills that did not have a dust collection system or shroud as required by Table 1. The employer did not perform an exposure assessment to determine exposure to respirable crystalline silica and appropriate respiratory protection to reduce risk of respiratory illness and silicosis.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $0
  • — C (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1926.1153 G01

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $2074.00 · Current $1250.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9000

29 CFR  1926.1153(g)(1): The employer did not establish and implement a written exposure control plan:  COMPANY-WIDE:  On or about July 9, 2024, the employer had not developed and implemented a silica Exposure Control Plan to outline methods used to protect employees from the hazards of respirable crystalline silica.  Employees were conducting Table 1 tasks that require engineering controls as a method of protection from silica dust.  Employees were cutting brick and mortar with handheld power grinders and drills that did not have a dust collection system or shroud as required by Table 1. The employer did not perform an exposure assessment to determine exposure to respirable crystalline silica and appropriate respiratory protection to reduce risk of respiratory illness and silicosis.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $1250
  • — C (S) $2074
  • — Z (S) $2074

1926.1153 E02

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $3457.00 · Current $2075.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9000

29 CFR  1926.1153(e)(2): Where respirator use is required by this section, the employer did not institute a respiratory protection program in accordance with 29 CFR 1910.134:  COMPANY-WIDE:  On or about July 11, 2024, where respirator use was mandated when grinding bricks and mortar ( a Table 1 task), the employer provided N95 face filtering respirators to employees who were drilling and grinding mortar and concrete bricks and did not develop and implement a respiratory protection program with all elements including but not limited to, medical evaluations, fit-testing and training. One employee had a beard.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $2075
  • — C (S) $3457
  • — Z (S) $3457

1910.134 C01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 9000

29 CFR  1910.134(c)(1): A written respiratory protection program that included the provisions in 29 CFR 1910.134(c)(1)(i) - (ix) with worksite specific procedures was not established and implemented for required respirator use:   COMPANY-WIDE:  On or about July 11, 2024, where respirator use was mandated when grinding bricks and mortar ( a Table 1 task), the employer provided N95 face filtering respirators to employees who were drilling and grinding mortar and concrete bricks and did not develop and implement a respiratory protection program with all elements including but not limited to, medical evaluations, fit-testing and training.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $0
  • — C (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.134 E01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 9000

29 CFR  1910.134(e)(1): The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use an N-95 respirator, before the employee is fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace.  COMPANY-WIDE:  On or about July 11,2024, where respirators use was mandated when grinding bricks and mortar ( a Table 1 task), employees were not medically evaluated for their ability to use an N-95 face-filtering respirator.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $0
  • — C (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.134 F02

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 9000

29 CFR  1910.134(f)(2): Employer did not ensure that employee(s) using tight-fitting facepiece respirators were fit tested prior to initial use of the respirator:  COMPANY-WIDE:  On or about July 11, 2024, employees were required to wear N-95 respirators during tasks when respirator use was mandated including, but not limited to, grinding bricks and mortar ( a Table 1 task), and the employer did not ensure that employees had been fit tested prior to initial use.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $0
  • — C (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1910.134 K03

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 9000

29 CFR  1910.134(k)(3): The employer did not provide training prior to providing respirators.  COMPANY-WIDE:  On or about July 11, 2024, where employees were required to wear N-95 respirators during tasks when respirator use was mandated including, but not limited to, grinding bricks and mortar (a Table 1 task), the employer did not provide respirator training prior to use.   One employee had a beard.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $0
  • — C (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1926.1153 I01

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $2074.00 · Current $1250.00 Reduced

Hazardous substances 9000

29 CFR  1926.1153(i)(1): The employer did not include respirable crystalline silica in the program established to comply with the hazard communication standard (HCS) (29 CFR 1910.1200):  29 CFR  1910.1200(e)(1): The employer did not develop, implement, and/or maintain at the workplace a written hazard communication program which describes how the criteria specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(f), (g), and (h) will be met:   COMPANY-WIDE:  On or about July 9, 2024, the employer had not developed a company-specific Hazard Communication program that included respirable crystalline silica from drilling and chipping bricks and mortar.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $1250
  • — C (S) $2074
  • — Z (S) $2074

1910.1200 E01

Serious Gravity 1 1 instance 4 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 9000

29 CFR  1910.1200(e)(1): The employer did not develop, implement, and/or maintain at the workplace a written hazard communication program which describes how the criteria specified in 29 CFR 1910.1200(f), (g), and (h) will be met: (Construction Reference: 1926.59)  COMPANY-WIDE:  On or about July 9, 2024, the employer had not developed a company-specific Hazard Communication program where employees use the following chemicals: Diesel, mortar containing Portland Cement, and Respirable Crystalline Silica from drilling and chipping bricks and mortar and operating the boom lift.
Recent events (3)
  • — F (S) $0
  • — C (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

View PRO MASONRY, 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 347608333.