Tanks, military (including factory rebuilding), manufacturing · Alabama

BAE Systems Inc - Anniston Forge

Anniston, AL · ~309 workers · 6 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
2.1
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

BAE Systems Inc - Anniston Forge runs at 64% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Tanks, military (including factory rebuilding), manufacturing workplace, earning a grade B.

BAE Systems Inc - Anniston Forge: 2.1 TCR = 64% of Tanks, military (including factory rebuilding), manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 6y Form 300A (see methodology below)

BAE Systems Inc - Anniston Forge safety composite

BAE Systems Inc - Anniston Forge scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 65% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 48%), 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

56/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 2.12 per 100 workers

Safer than 65% of industry peers

DART rate
D 1.27 per 100 workers

Safer than 48% 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%).

Rising injury rate

BAE Systems Inc - Anniston Forge: 0.7 → 3.3 TCR

Peak year 2020 @ 4.2 TCR · DART/TCR 0.6× in 2024

BAE Systems Inc - Anniston Forge's TCR rose 2.6 from 0.7 in 2016 to 3.3 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2020 at 4.2 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.6× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 336992 · Anniston, AL AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade B · TCR 2.1 · 64% of ind

  • DART 1.3 DART
  • RANK #2/5
  • PHOTO Horstman Inc.
  • BOOK 6y book
  • INJ 33 inj
  • SIZE ~309 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Horstman Inc. (0.0 TCR gap)

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

BAE Systems Inc - Anniston Forge in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows BAE Systems Inc - Anniston Forge averages 2.1 TCR (64% of the Tanks, military (including factory rebuilding), manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

BAE Systems Inc - Anniston Forge TCR series: 2016=0.7 · 2017=1.2 · 2018=0.5 · 2019=2.9 · 2020=4.2 · 2024=3.3 · BLS 3.3

Where BAE Systems Inc - Anniston Forge falls in its industry

49 Tanks, military (including fac establishments

Safer than 65% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Alabama alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #2 safest of 5 Tanks, military (including fac employers in Alabama.

BAE Systems Inc - Anniston Forge (309 employees, TCR 2.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 65 employees and a TCR of 2.9 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 0200400600 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate BAE Systems Inc - Anniston Forge
BAE Systems Inc - Anniston Forge (309 employees, TCR 2.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 65 employees and a TCR of 2.9

BAE Systems Inc - Anniston Forge has more employees than the Tanks, military (including factory rebui median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.9. 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 3.3 1.3 9 4 0
2020 4.2 3.2 7 6 0
2019 2.9 1.6 9 0 0
2018 0.5 0.5 2 0 0
2017 1.2 0.6 4 0 0
2016 0.7 0.3 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

336992 · AL · Anniston

49 Tanks, military (including factory rebuilding), manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 7,418 rated employers in Alabama with headcount on file · 101 employers in Anniston, AL · 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 Horstman Inc. 2.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR BAE Systems Forge Facility 2.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Integris Composites 2.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR General Dynamics Land Systems Anniston operations 2.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE James Hardie Building Products 310 FTE
STATE-SIZE Vuteq USA 310 FTE
STATE-SIZE Newman Technology of Alabama, Inc. 308 FTE
STATE-SIZE Sysco Central AL 308 FTE
CITY-NEAR Tyler Union 432 FTE
CITY-NEAR Tyler Union Anniston 420 FTE
CITY-NEAR International Automotive Components 346 FTE
CITY-NEAR International Automotive Components Anniston 344 FTE
NAT-TCR Corporate Woodworking, Inc. 2.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Canton R&D 2.1 TCR
NAT-TCR At Home Stores #10 2.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Pratt and Whitney Advanced Coating Technologies 2.1 TCR
NAT-SIZE Field Sales North East 309 FTE
NAT-SIZE Lennar SE Florida 309 FTE
NAT-SIZE Corporate Office 309 FTE
NAT-SIZE MGS Group North America, Inc. - MGS Germantown 309 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, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 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.