1,224,460Inspections Most recent open 2026-07-13 Last loaded 2026-07-16
Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025

OSHA Inspection: ALEXANDRIA TILE COMPANY INC.

Federal Agency inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened a federal Agency safety inspection of ALEXANDRIA TILE COMPANY INC. in MTA PROJECT EAST SIDE ACCESS MADISON AVENUE AND EAST 49TH STREET, NEW YORK, NY 10017 (NAICS 238340). OSHA activity number 344533286.

Watch Alexandria Tile Company INC. — free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Alexandria Tile Company INC. is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
MTA PROJECT EAST SIDE ACCESS MADISON AVENUE AND EAST 49TH STREET
City
NEW YORK
State
NY
ZIP
10017
Mailing
2337 80TH STREET, BROOKLYN, NY 11214
Inspection type
Federal Agency (M)
Scope
Partial (B)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
A
Opened
Closing conference
Last modified
Data loaded
NAICS code
238340
Employees
11
Ownership type
A

7 citations on file for this inspection.

1910.134 C01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 11 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $3856.00 · Current $3856.00

Hazardous substances 9015

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:    Location: a) At MTA East Side Access Project:  On or about 12/27/2019, employees were installing tiles with mortar. Employees typically used approximately 6 to 8 bags of mortar in a day. They were exposed to chemical hazard of silica. The employer did not establish a written respiratory protection program.
Recent events (2)
  • — C (S) $3856
  • — Z (S) $3856

1910.134 E01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 11 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $3856.00 · Current $3856.00

Hazardous substances 9015

29 CFR 1910.134(e)(1): The employer did not provide a medical evaluation to determine the employee's ability to use a respirator, before the employee was fit tested or required to use the respirator in the workplace  Location: a) At MTA East Side Access Project:  On or about 12/27/2019, employees were installing tiles with mortar. Employees typically used approximately 6 to 8 bags of mortar in a day. They were exposed to chemical hazard of silica. The employer did not provide employees with medical evaluation.
Recent events (2)
  • — C (S) $3856
  • — Z (S) $3856

1910.134 F01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 11 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $3856.00 · Current $3856.00

Hazardous substances 9015

29 CFR 1910.134(f)(1): The employer did not ensure that employee(s) required to use a tight-fitting facepiece respirator passed the appropriate qualitative fit test (QLFT) or quantitative fit test (QNFT):  Location: a) At MTA East Side Access Project:  On or about 12/27/2019, employees were installing tiles with mortar. Employees typically used approximately 6 to 8 bags of mortar in a day. They were exposed to chemical hazard of silica. The employer did not ensure the employees required to wear the tight fitting half face elastomeric respirators were fit tested.
Recent events (2)
  • — C (S) $3856
  • — Z (S) $3856

1910.134 K03

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 11 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $3856.00 · Current $3856.00

Hazardous substances 9015

29 CFR 1910.134(k)(3): Training was not provided prior to requiring employees to use a respirator in the workplace:  Location: a) At MTA East Side Access Project:  On or about 12/27/2019, employees were installing tiles with mortar. Employees typically used approximately 6 to 8 bags of mortar in a day. They were exposed to chemical hazard of silica. The employer did not provide training to the employees required to wear the tight fitting half face elastomeric respirators.
Recent events (2)
  • — C (S) $3856
  • — Z (S) $3856

1910.1200 E01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 11 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $3856.00 · Current $3856.00

Hazardous substances 05779015

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. As reference in 29 CFR 1926.59.  Location: a) At MTA East Side Access Project:  On or about 12/27/2019, employees were installing tiles, and were exposed to chemical hazard including but not limited to flexible additive, and thin set mortar. The employer did not develop and implement a written hazard communication program.
Recent events (2)
  • — C (S) $3856
  • — Z (S) $3856

1910.1200 H01

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 11 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $0.00 · Current $0.00

Hazardous substances 05779015

29 CFR 1910.1200(h)(1): Employees were not provided effective information and training on hazardous chemicals in their work area at the time of their initial assignment and whenever a new hazard that the employees had not been previously trained about was introduced into their work area. As reference in 29 CFR 1926.59.   Location:  a) At MTA East Side Access Project:  On or about 12/27/2019, employees were installing tiles, and were exposed to chemical hazard including but not limited to flexible additive, and thin set mortar. The employer did not provide training on the hazards associated to the chemicals used at the site.
Recent events (2)
  • — C (S) $0
  • — Z (S) $0

1926.1153 D02 I

Serious Gravity 5 1 instance 11 exposed
Issued
Abate by
Penalty
Initial $3856.00 · Current $3856.00

Hazardous substances 9015

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:  On or about 12/27/2019, employees were installing tiles with mortar. Employees typically used approximately 6 to 8 bags of mortar in a day. They were exposed to chemical hazard of silica. The employer did not assess the exposure of employees who may reasonably be expected to exposed to respirable crystalline silica.
Recent events (2)
  • — C (S) $3856
  • — Z (S) $3856

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 344533286.