Pipe fabricating (i.e., bending, cutting, threading) made from purchased metal pipe · Ohio

Cryogenic Construction Inc

Mingo Junction, OH · ~31 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
3.3
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Cryogenic Construction Inc runs at 101% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Pipe fabricating (i.e., bending, cutting, threading) made from purchased metal pipe workplace, earning a grade C.

Cryogenic Construction Inc: 3.3 TCR = 101% of Pipe fabricating (i.e., bending, cutting, threading) made from purchased metal pipe BLS 3.3 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Cryogenic Construction Inc safety composite

Cryogenic Construction Inc scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 81% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 49%), 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

60/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 3.34 per 100 workers

Safer than 49% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 81% 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

−0.7

2016→2024

Cryogenic Construction Inc injury rate improved

Cryogenic Construction Inc's TCR fell 0.7 from 3.4 in 2016 to 2.8 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2018 at 9.6 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=3.4 · 2017=7.0 · 2018=9.6 · 2019=3.6 · 2020=3.7 · 2021=0.0 · 2022=0.0 · 2023=0.0 · 2024=2.8

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 332996 · Mingo Junction, OH ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade C · TCR 3.3 · 101% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #10/21
  • PHOTO Main St.
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 9 inj
  • SIZE ~31 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Main St. (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Cryogenic Construction Inc in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Cryogenic Construction Inc averages 3.3 TCR (101% of the Pipe fabricating (i.e., bending, cutting, threading) made from purchased metal pipe BLS benchmark).

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

Cryogenic Construction Inc TCR series: 2016=3.4 · 2017=7 · 2018=9.6 · 2019=3.6 · 2020=3.7 · 2021=0 · 2022=0 · 2023=0 · 2024=2.8 · BLS 3.3

Where Cryogenic Construction Inc falls in its industry

337 Pipe fabricating (i.e., bendin establishments

Safer than 49% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.3.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Ohio alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #10 safest of 21 Pipe fabricating (i.e., bendin employers in Ohio.

Cryogenic Construction Inc (31 employees, TCR 3.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 63 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 02004006008001,000 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Cryogenic Construction Inc
Cryogenic Construction Inc (31 employees, TCR 3.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 63 employees and a TCR of 3.3

Cryogenic Construction Inc has fewer employees than the Pipe fabricating (i.e., bending, cutting median and a higher 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
2024 2.8 0.0 1 0 0
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 3.7 0.0 1 0 0
2019 3.6 0.0 1 0 0
2018 9.6 0.0 3 0 0
2017 7.0 0.0 2 0 0
2016 3.4 0.0 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

332996 · OH · Mingo Junction

337 Pipe fabricating (i.e., bending, cutting, threading) made from purchased metal pipe employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,650 rated employers in Ohio with headcount on file · 3 employers in Mingo Junction, OH · 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 Main St. 3.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Tube Fabrication Industries, Inc. 3.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR EPC-Fayetteville 3.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Paumac Tubing LLC - North Carolina 3.4 TCR
STATE-SIZE Farm 31 FTE
STATE-SIZE Pine Valley Ranch 31 FTE
STATE-SIZE Trillium Farms Layer 5 31 FTE
STATE-SIZE Trillium Farms Croton Pullet 3 31 FTE
CITY-NEAR JSW Steel USA Ohio, Inc. 257 FTE
CITY-NEAR Mingo Junction Terminal 19 FTE
NAT-TCR Sands of Kahana 3.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Durant Housecall 3.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Sparks Contracting, Inc. 3.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Hazlehurst 3.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE Iron County Road Commission 31 FTE
NAT-SIZE USA TN Memphis Plant 31 FTE
NAT-SIZE Valu Home Center #38 31 FTE
NAT-SIZE Don Park USA (LP) 31 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, 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.