Batts and batting (except nonwoven fabrics) manufacturing · South Carolina

AstenJohnson CLT

Clinton, SC · ~192 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.4
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

AstenJohnson CLT runs at 44% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Batts and batting (except nonwoven fabrics) manufacturing workplace, earning a grade A.

AstenJohnson CLT: 1.4 TCR = 44% of Batts and batting (except nonwoven fabrics) manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

AstenJohnson CLT safety composite

AstenJohnson CLT scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 83% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 51%), 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).

C

73/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 1.44 per 100 workers

Safer than 83% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 78% 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

−0.9

2018→2024

AstenJohnson CLT injury rate improved

AstenJohnson CLT's TCR fell 0.9 from 2.1 in 2018 to 1.2 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2022 at 3.3 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2018=2.1 · 2019=0.5 · 2020=1.2 · 2021=1.8 · 2022=3.3 · 2023=0.0 · 2024=1.2

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 314999 · Clinton, SC AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 1.4 · 44% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #2/5
  • PHOTO Vantage Custom Class…
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 16 inj
  • SIZE ~192 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Vantage Custom Classics- St. Louis (0.1 TCR gap)

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

AstenJohnson CLT in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows AstenJohnson CLT averages 1.4 TCR (44% of the Batts and batting (except nonwoven fabrics) manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

AstenJohnson CLT TCR series: 2018=2.1 · 2019=0.5 · 2020=1.2 · 2021=1.8 · 2022=3.3 · 2023=0 · 2024=1.2 · BLS 3.3

Where AstenJohnson CLT falls in its industry

89 Batts and batting (except nonw establishments

Safer than 83% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.1.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to South Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #2 safest of 5 Batts and batting (except nonw employers in South Carolina.

AstenJohnson CLT (192 employees, TCR 1.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 81 employees and a TCR of 3.1 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 02004006008001,000 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate AstenJohnson CLT
AstenJohnson CLT (192 employees, TCR 1.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 81 employees and a TCR of 3.1

AstenJohnson CLT has more employees than the Batts and batting (except nonwoven fabri median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.1. 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
2024 1.2 0.0 2 0 0
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 3.3 1.7 6 0 0
2021 1.8 0.6 3 0 0
2020 1.2 0.6 1 1 0
2019 0.5 0.0 0 1 0
2018 2.1 1.0 4 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

314999 · SC · Clinton

89 Batts and batting (except nonwoven fabrics) manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 7,610 rated employers in South Carolina with headcount on file · 27 employers in Clinton, SC · 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 Vantage Custom Classics- St. Louis 1.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Global Products, Inc. - Cherokee 1.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Gentex Corporation 1.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Aerostar Sulphur Springs 1.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE Beaufort Jasper Water and Sewer Authority 192 FTE
STATE-SIZE Crane Payment Innovations, Inc 192 FTE
STATE-SIZE 1937 - Greer 192 FTE
STATE-SIZE WM 795 192 FTE
CITY-NEAR Sterilite Corporation CSC 609 FTE
CITY-NEAR LAURENS COUNTY MEDICAL CAMPUS 392 FTE
CITY-NEAR PL Developments - Clinton plant 211 FTE
CITY-NEAR astenjohnson clinton 205 FTE
NAT-TCR International Paper - Maryland Heights 1.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Physical Security L.L.C. 1.4 TCR
NAT-TCR 4M - St. Louis 1.4 TCR
NAT-TCR HIS Comp LLC 1.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE ProVia Sugarcreek Facility 192 FTE
NAT-SIZE KARL STORZ Endoscopy-America, Inc. (Auburn) 192 FTE
NAT-SIZE Enterprise Recycling LTD 192 FTE
NAT-SIZE Bigos Management 192 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: 2024, 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.