JHA / JSA / AHA builderMasonry Tuckpointing JHA
A JHA breaks the work into steps, hazards and controls. Use this example to build a draft for your actual job and review it with your crew.
Just need the example? Download it here.For the crew
You know the work. Let’s turn that experience into a plan your crew can talk through. Start with today’s job, then check the steps together.
Let’s build your JHA.
Step 1 of 4 · Working draft
Your job
Tell Jenkins what you’re planning and where the work will happen. Use the actual job details.
Use the published example’s suggestions when they fit your task, or write your own steps. These are planned controls, not verified worksite conditions.
Describe an observable step, how someone could be harmed, and the control that acts on that hazard. Identify who checks it and what evidence is needed.
Walk through the plan with the people doing the work. Resolve missing controls and agree who checks them. Moving to the next step does not approve the work.
Confirm people, equipment and emergency arrangements
Record changes, checks, and open actions
Walk the work area, review with the crew, and resolve missing controls. Follow the required approval process. This tool does not judge completeness, verify signatures or authorize work.
Print your own JHA by signing in, or contribute the selected structured categories as a guest. Signing in does not require research participation. Written job details are processed to prepare your export and are stored on our server only if you save to your private company library.
Research purpose, data fields, retention and withdrawal · Privacy notice
Sign-in uses a free account. Your tab draft is retained for the return from sign-in.
Hosted organization saving requires active jSMS access and a company workspace. View jSMS plans.
The export uses landscape pages, task-only continuation pages and a Page X of Y footer in current Chrome or Edge. Review every page. Opening an export is not proof that the JHA was printed or used. The PDF includes its research choice and reference; the private withdrawal link stays in the export’s screen-only receipt.
Device storage and other draft options
Device copies may contain private job information. Clear them when using a shared device.
Your entries stay in this working draft as you move between steps. Required field checks, employer review and work authorization remain separate.
Your Masonry Tuckpointing JHA
Walk through the job in order. Use these possible hazards, planned controls and checks to start a conversation about your actual work.
011. Release the repair limits
Possible hazards: An unstable wall or unknown coating can expose workers to collapse or hazardous dust.
Planned controls: Foreperson obtains the condition and material investigation, identifies permitted joints and holds work for unknown hazards or movement.
Check before work: Match wall condition and joint marks with the repair release.
022. Separate the work area
Possible hazards: Dust and fragments can expose occupants or passersby.
Planned controls: Control the work boundary, neighboring occupancy and access. Arrange waste collection and keep the crew’s exit clear.
Check before work: Lead confirms both worker and public separation before tool setup.
033. Set up the grinder and extraction
Possible hazards: A damaged wheel or inadequate extraction can cause impact injury or silica exposure.
Planned controls: Use compatible wheel, guard, shroud and dust collector maintained to the selected tuckpointing method. Under Table 1, provide its specified dust collection and respiratory protection; use the employer’s applicable respiratory-protection program. Do not treat extraction alone as the complete Table 1 method.
Check before work: Operator checks the tool and airflow indicators; silica competent person checks implementation.
044. Remove the released mortar
Possible hazards: Kickback, flying fragments, noise and dust can injure the operator.
Planned controls: Work from a stable position within the released joint limits, keep the shroud effective and use assessed eye, hearing and other protection. Stop for lost extraction or masonry damage.
Check before work: Operator monitors control performance and the joint condition as removal proceeds.
055. Mix and place replacement mortar
Possible hazards: Cement contact and awkward hand work can cause burns or strain.
Planned controls: Use the specified mixing and placement method with cement protection, workable tool positions and controlled batch handling. Keep extraction equipment safe while wet work begins.
Check before work: Lead checks mixing protection and the prepared joints before placement.
066. Collect dust and protect the repair
Possible hazards: Dry dust or unprotected repair material can expose the next worker.
Planned controls: Use suitable HEPA or wet cleanup consistent with the exposure plan, contain waste and identify cure and access restrictions. Avoid uncontrolled dry sweeping.
Check before work: Foreperson checks residue, repaired joints and handover conditions.
Example scope and starting conditions
A restoration crew will remove selected mortar joints from a sound ground-level exterior brick wall with a shrouded grinder and dust extraction, then repoint them with specified mortar. This fictional learning example records planned controls; it supplies no actual inspections or work authorization.
- The investigation releases the wall condition, joint depth and hazardous-material status.
- The actual tuckpointing silica method and exposure requirements are established by the employer.
- This excludes structural wall stabilization, lead or asbestos abatement, elevated access and whole-wall demolition.
Know when to pause
- Wall movement or unknown coating appears.
- Extraction fails or dust escapes the planned boundary.
- Tool, joint depth or repair method changes.
After a pause, correct the condition, reassess the work, and obtain required authorization before restarting.
Free example and template
No account required. The worked example contains planned controls. The blank template is for your own work; neither includes fabricated inspection results, signatures or approval.
Worked exampleNeed help? Ask Jenkins
Jenkins · Your Safety Concierge
What brings you here today? Choose what you’re working on, or tell Jenkins about your situation.
Jenkins matches your words to published starting points. Keep names and private job details in your working draft. Suitable free resources come first.
For managers
Does the team have what it needs to carry out the plan? Give the crew time, equipment and support, and make it clear who will resolve anything that is missing.
Manager checks and supporting resources
Confirm the people doing the work have the time, equipment, information and support to carry out the plan. Agree who checks the controls and who resolves open actions.
Questions to resolve before work
- What confirms the wall and coatings are suitable for this repair?
- Which tuckpointing dust-control pathway applies to this tool?
- What joint limits protect the masonry while allowing repair?
Training and qualifications to confirm
- Tuckpointing tool and extraction instruction under the applicable silica plan.
- Required respirator training and fit testing where the employer’s assessment requires a respirator.
Confirm the actual training evidence for the assigned people. A toolbox talk does not establish competence.
Decisions that change the plan
Which respirator decision applies to mortar-removal grinding?
Table 1 row xi specifies a shroud and dust collection with at least 25 cfm per inch of wheel diameter, a filter at least 99 percent efficient, and a cyclonic pre-separator or filter-cleaning mechanism. It requires minimum APF 10 for up to four hours per shift and APF 25 above four hours. Fully implement that method or use the standard’s alternative exposure pathway. Required respirators need the applicable respiratory-protection program.
What must be recorded before this example is used on a job?
Replace the scenario with the actual work, identify additional hazards with the crew, and record the applicable instructions, responsible people, inspection findings, unresolved actions and required authorization. A planned verification is not an inspection result.
Keep planning connected
Resources that support this JHA
Additional tools for task planning and safe work. Start with the free resources; explore paid options only when they meet an additional need.
Toolbox talks for the work
Prepare a practical crew discussion.
Silica: Verify Dust Controls Before Cutting →Respiratory Hazards: Know What You’re Breathing →Wet Concrete: Prevent Skin and Eye Contact →
Safety program resources
Review procedures, roles, and requirements.
Browse the existing catalog and confirm the scope and purchase availability of each program.
Browse safety programs →
Paid service · Availability
Task-specific training and qualifications
Explore applicable training and qualification needs.
Task-specific training services are not currently available to book here. Start with the free training-needs lookup; a toolbox talk or online course alone does not establish competence or employer authorization.
Review training needs · Free →People, equipment, emergency arrangements and open actions are recorded in the guided JHA’s Crew review step.
Open the crew review step →For safety professionals
How do we know the planning process and controls are working? Connect what the crew reports with field checks, risk decisions and the evidence behind your system.
Industry context, SIF, control verification and AHA review
Guidance and evidence
Review the method, risk decisions and evidence behind the plan. Use the actual jurisdiction, equipment instructions, employer process and project requirements.
Task-by-task control and verification rationale
1. Release the repair limits
Hazard: An unstable wall or unknown coating can expose workers to collapse or hazardous dust.
Control: Foreperson obtains the condition and material investigation, identifies permitted joints and holds work for unknown hazards or movement.
Verification: Match wall condition and joint marks with the repair release.
Why this belongs in the analysis: A cosmetic repair description does not establish material safety.
2. Separate the work area
Hazard: Dust and fragments can expose occupants or passersby.
Control: Control the work boundary, neighboring occupancy and access. Arrange waste collection and keep the crew’s exit clear.
Verification: Lead confirms both worker and public separation before tool setup.
Why this belongs in the analysis: The wall may border a route used by people outside the crew.
3. Set up the grinder and extraction
Hazard: A damaged wheel or inadequate extraction can cause impact injury or silica exposure.
Control: Use compatible wheel, guard, shroud and dust collector maintained to the selected tuckpointing method. Under Table 1, provide its specified dust collection and respiratory protection; use the employer’s applicable respiratory-protection program. Do not treat extraction alone as the complete Table 1 method.
Verification: Operator checks the tool and airflow indicators; silica competent person checks implementation.
Why this belongs in the analysis: Tuckpointing has its own task-specific silica decision.
4. Remove the released mortar
Hazard: Kickback, flying fragments, noise and dust can injure the operator.
Control: Work from a stable position within the released joint limits, keep the shroud effective and use assessed eye, hearing and other protection. Stop for lost extraction or masonry damage.
Verification: Operator monitors control performance and the joint condition as removal proceeds.
Why this belongs in the analysis: Removing mortar must not become uncontrolled brick cutting.
5. Mix and place replacement mortar
Hazard: Cement contact and awkward hand work can cause burns or strain.
Control: Use the specified mixing and placement method with cement protection, workable tool positions and controlled batch handling. Keep extraction equipment safe while wet work begins.
Verification: Lead checks mixing protection and the prepared joints before placement.
Why this belongs in the analysis: The wet phase creates different exposures from grinding.
6. Collect dust and protect the repair
Hazard: Dry dust or unprotected repair material can expose the next worker.
Control: Use suitable HEPA or wet cleanup consistent with the exposure plan, contain waste and identify cure and access restrictions. Avoid uncontrolled dry sweeping.
Verification: Foreperson checks residue, repaired joints and handover conditions.
Why this belongs in the analysis: The dust control must extend through cleanup.
Compare control wording
| Needs improvement | More useful for this scenario |
|---|---|
| Be careful around the equipment. | Use compatible wheel, guard, shroud and dust collector maintained to the specified tuckpointing method. Establish required respiratory protection under the employer’s program where applicable. |
| Check the area before starting. | Foreperson obtains the condition and material investigation, identifies permitted joints and holds work for unknown hazards or movement. |
Common questions
Can this be used as a JSA?
Use the Task | Hazard | Control structure if it meets the employer’s format. Adapt the boundaries, controls, verification and records to the actual job.
Does this provide a completed USACE AHA?
No. Use the project’s required AHA process, risk method, supporting fields and acceptance requirements. The existing formwork AHA explains the additional structure.
Are these resources part of a paid course?
This walkthrough, browser draft builder and downloads are free public resources, separate from Academy course enrollment.
References and source note
- OSHA 1926.1153 Respirable crystalline silica
- OSHA 1926.300 Hand and power tools
- OSHA 1910.1200 Hazard communication
- OSHA 1926.21 Safety training and education
Original worked example developed for the stated scenario. Primary references support the planning framework; the actual equipment manual, product instructions and project design must supply applicable operating and acceptance criteria. Use actual equipment instructions and site requirements alongside these references. Reference review: October 9, 2026.
Developed by Todd Jerome Jenkins, MS, CSP · Edition v1.0 · October 9, 2026
Use the builder’s Print / Save as PDF action after signing in or accepting research participation.