Meat and bone meal and tankage, produced in rendering plant · Texas

Darling Ingredients Dallas, TX

Dallas, TX · ~56 workers · 6 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
9.3
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Darling Ingredients Dallas, TX runs at 282% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Meat and bone meal and tankage, produced in rendering plant workplace, earning a grade F.

Darling Ingredients Dallas, TX: 9.3 TCR = 282% of Meat and bone meal and tankage, produced in rendering plant BLS 3.3 · 6y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Darling Ingredients Dallas, TX safety composite

Darling Ingredients Dallas, TX scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 52% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 14%), 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).

F

24/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 9.32 per 100 workers

Safer than 15% of industry peers

DART rate
F 7.85 per 100 workers

Safer than 14% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 52% 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

−1.4

2016→2022

Darling Ingredients Dallas, TX injury rate improved

Darling Ingredients Dallas, TX's TCR fell 1.4 from 9.3 in 2016 to 7.8 in 2022. Peak filing year was 2019 at 11.4 TCR. In 2022, DART was 0.84× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=9.3 · 2018=10.6 · 2019=11.4 · 2020=9.0 · 2021=7.8 · 2022=7.8

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 311613 · Dallas, TX ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 9.3 · 282% of ind

  • DART 7.8 DART
  • RANK #10/13
  • PHOTO Central Bi Products …
  • BOOK 6y book
  • INJ 43 inj
  • SIZE ~56 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Central Bi Products Long Prairie (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Darling Ingredients Dallas, TX in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Darling Ingredients Dallas, TX averages 9.3 TCR (282% of the Meat and bone meal and tankage, produced in rendering plant BLS benchmark).

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

Darling Ingredients Dallas, TX TCR series: 2016=9.3 · 2018=10.6 · 2019=11.4 · 2020=9 · 2021=7.8 · 2022=7.8 · BLS 3.3

Where Darling Ingredients Dallas, TX falls in its industry

151 Meat and bone meal and tankage establishments

Safer than 15% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 5.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Texas alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #10 safest of 13 Meat and bone meal and tankage employers in Texas.

Darling Ingredients Dallas, TX (56 employees, TCR 9.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 46 employees and a TCR of 5.6 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 050100150 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Darling Ingredients Dallas, TX
Darling Ingredients Dallas, TX (56 employees, TCR 9.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 46 employees and a TCR of 5.6

Darling Ingredients Dallas, TX has more employees than the Meat and bone meal and tankage, produced median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 5.6. 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
2022 7.8 7.8 7 0 0
2021 7.8 7.8 6 0 0
2020 9.0 5.1 7 0 0
2019 11.4 10.2 8 1 0
2018 10.6 10.6 8 0 0
2016 9.3 8.0 7 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

311613 · TX · Dallas

151 Meat and bone meal and tankage, produced in rendering plant employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 38,394 rated employers in Texas with headcount on file · 2,187 employers in Dallas, TX · 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 Central Bi Products Long Prairie 9.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Sanimax ATO 9.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Pilgrims Moorefield Protein Conversion 9.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Darling Ingredients Inc Coldwater 9.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE Native Texas Nursery 56 FTE
STATE-SIZE Dalhart Cattle Feeders 56 FTE
STATE-SIZE Oasis Gin, Inc 56 FTE
STATE-SIZE Comyn GP Shelling Plant 56 FTE
CITY-NEAR AECOM DCS (US Operations) 15,100 FTE
CITY-NEAR Rexel USA, Inc 8,356 FTE
CITY-NEAR 1 CHILDRENS MEDICAL CENTER OF DALLAS 6,147 FTE
CITY-NEAR HDQ - Headquarters 5,764 FTE
NAT-TCR Thomasville Lumber Company, Inc. 9.3 TCR
NAT-TCR 1855-MIDET210 9.3 TCR
NAT-TCR 556594-Princeton Po 9.3 TCR
NAT-TCR KLS Doors, LLC COX 9.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE Diebold Nixdorf Ft Lauderdale FL 56 FTE
NAT-SIZE AGS Manufacturing, Inc. 56 FTE
NAT-SIZE 2904-SAS-IA 56 FTE
NAT-SIZE HG586 56 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: 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 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.