Commercial refrigeration system installation · California

Applied Process Cooling Corporation

Modesto, CA · ~161 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
3.2
Avg TCR
2.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Applied Process Cooling Corporation runs at 116% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Commercial refrigeration system installation workplace, earning a grade C.

Applied Process Cooling Corporation: 3.2 TCR = 116% of Commercial refrigeration system installation BLS 2.8 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Applied Process Cooling Corporation safety composite

Applied Process Cooling Corporation scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 42%), blended into one 0-100 breakdown against same-industry peers. A missing measure drops out and redistributes its weight rather than deflating the score. This is a per-dimension breakdown, distinct from the single letter grade above it (which weights TCR alone against the BLS industry benchmark).

D

48/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 3.24 per 100 workers

Safer than 51% of industry peers

DART rate
D 1.76 per 100 workers

Safer than 42% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 51% of industry peers

Benchmarked live against every credibly-rated employer in the same NAICS industry code in the current OSHA extract (a segment must have at least 8 rated peers to benchmark). Not a legal or compliance determination; PlainSafetyScore's own weighting (TCR 40%, DART 35%, fatalities 25%).

TCR Δ

−0.7

2017→2019

Applied Process Cooling Corporation injury rate improved

Applied Process Cooling Corporation's TCR fell 0.7 from 3.6 in 2017 to 2.9 in 2019. Peak filing year was 2017 at 3.6 TCR. In 2019, DART was 0.54× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=3.6 · 2018=3.2 · 2019=2.9

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 238220 · Modesto, CA ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade C · TCR 3.2 · 116% of ind

  • DART 1.8 DART
  • RANK #255/594
  • PHOTO Service Minds LLC DB…
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 16 inj
  • SIZE ~161 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Service Minds LLC DBA Mister Sparky Ben Franklin Plumbing One Hour Air Lakeland (0.0 TCR gap)

Read with this employer → · Industry book → · California employers → · Look up another →

Applied Process Cooling Corporation in the TCR neighbourhood

Average Total Case Rate among this establishment and nearest same-industry peers

TCR

What this shows Applied Process Cooling Corporation averages 3.2 TCR (116% of the Commercial refrigeration system installation BLS benchmark).

Source U.S. Department of Labor, OSHA Injury Tracking Application (Form 300A) As of 2026-08-25

Applied Process Cooling Corporation TCR series: 2017=3.6 · 2018=3.2 · 2019=2.9 · BLS 2.8

Where Applied Process Cooling Corporation falls in its industry

5,793 Commercial refrigeration syste establishments

Safer than 51% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.3.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #255 safest of 594 Commercial refrigeration syste employers in California.

Applied Process Cooling Corporation (161 employees, TCR 3.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 60 employees and a TCR of 3.3 2×2 strategic matrix plotting 30 entities by Average employees (X) and Total Case Rate (Y), with a crosshair dividing the plot into four quadrants. Larger & higher-riskSmaller & higher-riskLarger & saferSmaller & safer than peers 050100150200250 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Applied Process Cooling Corporation
Applied Process Cooling Corporation (161 employees, TCR 3.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 60 employees and a TCR of 3.3

Applied Process Cooling Corporation has more employees than the Commercial refrigeration system installa median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.3. Workforce size and injury rate do not always move together within the same industry -- some of its smaller peers run higher rates than its larger ones, and vice versa.

Year-by-Year Safety Data

Year TCR DART Injuries Illnesses Fatalities
2019 2.9 1.8 5 0 0
2018 3.2 3.2 5 0 0
2017 3.6 3.0 6 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

238220 · CA · Modesto

5,793 Commercial refrigeration system installation employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 418 employers in Modesto, CA · 4 cross-state NAT-TCR peers · 4 cross-state NAT-SIZE peers. Closest matches by relationship code are listed below.

Rel Establishment Metric
NAICS-TCR Service Minds LLC DBA Mister Sparky Ben Franklin Plumbing One Hour Air Lakeland 3.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Safe Aire Heating and Cooling Company, Inc. 3.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Hyland Filter Service Owensboro, Inc 3.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Access Service Group 3.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE La Valle Sabbia, Inc. 161 FTE
STATE-SIZE El Espinal FLC 161 FTE
STATE-SIZE Henry Avocado Corporation 161 FTE
STATE-SIZE CA-SONGS Station 161 FTE
CITY-NEAR Sutter Valley Hospitals (30240) 3,153 FTE
CITY-NEAR Modesto Operations 3,043 FTE
CITY-NEAR 4701-930 3,018 FTE
CITY-NEAR 930 DOCTORS MEDICAL CENTER OF MODESTO 2,759 FTE
NAT-TCR JST Mfg 1 3.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Advanced Drainage Systems Inc.-Eagle Grove 3.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Advanced Drainage Systems Inc. --Fairmont 3.2 TCR
NAT-TCR UMP Clinics & Surgery Center-EVS 3.2 TCR
NAT-SIZE Camso Manufacturing USA, Ltd. 161 FTE
NAT-SIZE NOV Rolligon Anderson 161 FTE
NAT-SIZE DCB Bremen 161 FTE
NAT-SIZE Presto Weyauwega 161 FTE

Rel codes: NAICS-TCR · STATE-SIZE · CITY-NEAR · NAT-TCR/NAT-SIZE cross-state. Read with this employer →

Data Source: OSHA Injury Tracking Application (ITA), mandatory establishment-level injury/illness reports. Grades compare employer Total Case Rate (TCR) to BLS IIF industry benchmarks. Data covers years reported by this establishment: 2019, 2018, 2017. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.