Steam traps, industrial-type, manufacturing · Michigan

Armstrong International Three Rivers Division

Three Rivers, MI · ~259 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
1.9
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Armstrong International Three Rivers Division runs at 58% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Steam traps, industrial-type, manufacturing workplace, earning a grade B.

Armstrong International Three Rivers Division: 1.9 TCR = 58% of Steam traps, industrial-type, manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Armstrong International Three Rivers Division safety composite

Armstrong International Three Rivers Division scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 53% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 50%), 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

52/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 1.91 per 100 workers

Safer than 53% of industry peers

DART rate
D 0.43 per 100 workers

Safer than 51% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 50% 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

−0.4

2016→2018

Armstrong International Three Rivers Division injury rate improved

Armstrong International Three Rivers Division's TCR fell 0.4 from 2.1 in 2016 to 1.7 in 2018. Peak filing year was 2016 at 2.1 TCR. In 2018, DART was 0.23× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=2.1 · 2018=1.7

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 332911 · Three Rivers, MI AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade B · TCR 1.9 · 58% of ind

  • DART 0.4 DART
  • RANK #4/11
  • PHOTO McWane Plant & Indus…
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 9 inj
  • SIZE ~259 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: McWane Plant & Industrial Exeter (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Armstrong International Three Rivers Division in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Armstrong International Three Rivers Division averages 1.9 TCR (58% of the Steam traps, industrial-type, manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Armstrong International Three Rivers Division TCR series: 2016=2.1 · 2018=1.7 · BLS 3.3

Where Armstrong International Three Rivers Division falls in its industry

298 Steam traps, industrial-type, establishments

Safer than 53% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.0.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Michigan alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #4 safest of 11 Steam traps, industrial-type, employers in Michigan.

Armstrong International Three Rivers Division (259 employees, TCR 1.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 92 employees and a TCR of 2.0 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 0200400600800 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Armstrong International Three Rivers Division
Armstrong International Three Rivers Division (259 employees, TCR 1.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 92 employees and a TCR of 2.0

Armstrong International Three Rivers Division has more employees than the Steam traps, industrial-type, manufactur median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.0. 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
2018 1.7 0.4 4 0 0
2016 2.1 1.7 5 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

332911 · MI · Three Rivers

298 Steam traps, industrial-type, manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,393 rated employers in Michigan with headcount on file · 41 employers in Three Rivers, MI · 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 McWane Plant & Industrial Exeter 1.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Hoerbiger Corporation of America 1.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR FlowSafe 1.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Armstrong International - Three Rivers Division 1.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE KLS Stryker PDC, RDC 259 FTE
STATE-SIZE ACCESS 259 FTE
STATE-SIZE BARAGA CORRECTIONAL FACILITY 259 FTE
STATE-SIZE Hydaker-Wheatlake Statewide 876 MI 260 FTE
CITY-NEAR AAM TRMF 1,280 FTE
CITY-NEAR Three Rivers Health 481 FTE
CITY-NEAR Three Rivers Hospital 302 FTE
CITY-NEAR WM 3791 261 FTE
NAT-TCR Big Save - Kapaa 1.9 TCR
NAT-TCR John Bean Technologies Corporation RDU 1.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Womack Transportation LLC 1.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Giant Eagle #8991 1.9 TCR
NAT-SIZE Insys Therapeutics, Inc. 259 FTE
NAT-SIZE 4017 Florida A&M 259 FTE
NAT-SIZE Kiel, WI Plant 259 FTE
NAT-SIZE DFW - Airport United Airlines Offices 259 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: 2018, 2016. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.