Warehousing (except farm products, general merchandise, refrigerated) · New Jersey

BPT Port Reading Terminal

Port Reading, NJ · ~58 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
0.8
Avg TCR
5.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

BPT Port Reading Terminal runs at 14% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Warehousing (except farm products, general merchandise, refrigerated) workplace, earning a grade A.

BPT Port Reading Terminal: 0.8 TCR = 14% of Warehousing (except farm products, general merchandise, refrigerated) BLS 5.8 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

BPT Port Reading Terminal safety composite

BPT Port Reading Terminal scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 87% 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).

B

75/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 0.81 per 100 workers

Safer than 87% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 79% 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

−3.2

2016→2024

BPT Port Reading Terminal injury rate improved

BPT Port Reading Terminal's TCR fell 3.2 from 3.2 in 2016 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2016 at 3.2 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=3.2 · 2022=0.0 · 2023=0.0 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 493190 · Port Reading, NJ AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade A · TCR 0.8 · 14% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #3/19
  • PHOTO Tampa Terminal FL (2…
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 2 inj
  • SIZE ~58 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Tampa Terminal FL (2101 GATX Dr) (Tampa Area) (0.0 TCR gap)

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

BPT Port Reading Terminal in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows BPT Port Reading Terminal averages 0.8 TCR (14% of the Warehousing (except farm products, general merchandise, refrigerated) BLS benchmark).

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

BPT Port Reading Terminal TCR series: 2016=3.2 · 2022=0 · 2023=0 · 2024=0 · BLS 5.8

Where BPT Port Reading Terminal falls in its industry

453 Warehousing (except farm produ establishments

Safer than 87% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.7.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to New Jersey alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #3 safest of 19 Warehousing (except farm produ employers in New Jersey.

BPT Port Reading Terminal (58 employees, TCR 0.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 2.7 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 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate BPT Port Reading Terminal
BPT Port Reading Terminal (58 employees, TCR 0.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 2.7

BPT Port Reading Terminal has more employees than the Warehousing (except farm products, gener median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.7. 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 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2016 3.2 1.6 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

493190 · NJ · Port Reading

453 Warehousing (except farm products, general merchandise, refrigerated) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 11,201 rated employers in New Jersey with headcount on file · 13 employers in Port Reading, NJ · 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 Tampa Terminal FL (2101 GATX Dr) (Tampa Area) 0.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Space Center Boulevard 0.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Associated Spring Raymond - Maumee 0.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR NuVasive, Inc. - Memphis 0.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE UTY - New Jersey - Toms River,NJ 58 FTE
STATE-SIZE D K SOLUTIONS LLC OPERATING IN DE AS DNK SOLUTIONS LLC 58 FTE
STATE-SIZE Caldwell Marine International, LLC 58 FTE
STATE-SIZE Railroad Construction Co., Inc. -Paterson 58 FTE
CITY-NEAR Bed Bath and Beyond Port Reading 1,170 FTE
CITY-NEAR Port Reading PR3 131 FTE
CITY-NEAR Port Reading PRD 129 FTE
CITY-NEAR Panalpina NYLogistics 129 FTE
NAT-TCR Norotos, Inc. 0.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Haven House 0.8 TCR
NAT-TCR BrandSafway Industries LLC - Chemours Washington Works Chemical 0.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Nokomis LLC. 0.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE Peer Chain 58 FTE
NAT-SIZE Albany Ga - 268 58 FTE
NAT-SIZE Gardena Ca - 322 58 FTE
NAT-SIZE ELITE Delivery Team 58 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, 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.