Cups, polystyrene foam, manufacturing · California

Dart Container Lodi

Lodi, CA · ~117 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
4.4
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Dart Container Lodi runs at 133% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Cups, polystyrene foam, manufacturing workplace, earning a grade D.

Dart Container Lodi: 4.4 TCR = 133% of Cups, polystyrene foam, manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Dart Container Lodi safety composite

Dart Container Lodi scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 30%), 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).

D

37/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 4.38 per 100 workers

Safer than 30% of industry peers

DART rate
D 2.6 per 100 workers

Safer than 36% 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

−0.8

2017→2023

Dart Container Lodi injury rate improved

Dart Container Lodi's TCR fell 0.8 from 3.4 in 2017 to 2.6 in 2023. Peak filing year was 2018 at 8.2 TCR. In 2023, DART was 0.59× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=3.4 · 2018=8.2 · 2019=5.3 · 2020=4.4 · 2021=6.8 · 2022=0.0 · 2023=2.6

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 326140 · Lodi, CA ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade D · TCR 4.4 · 133% of ind

  • DART 2.6 DART
  • RANK #10/14
  • PHOTO Cellofoam-Fredericks…
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 34 inj
  • SIZE ~117 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Cellofoam-Fredericksburg, VA (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Dart Container Lodi in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Dart Container Lodi averages 4.4 TCR (133% of the Cups, polystyrene foam, manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Dart Container Lodi TCR series: 2017=3.4 · 2018=8.2 · 2019=5.3 · 2020=4.4 · 2021=6.8 · 2022=0 · 2023=2.6 · BLS 3.3

Where Dart Container Lodi falls in its industry

260 Cups, polystyrene foam, manufa establishments

Safer than 30% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.1.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #10 safest of 14 Cups, polystyrene foam, manufa employers in California.

Dart Container Lodi (117 employees, TCR 4.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 66 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 0100200300400500 0510152025 Average employees Total Case Rate Dart Container Lodi
Dart Container Lodi (117 employees, TCR 4.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 66 employees and a TCR of 3.1

Dart Container Lodi has more employees than the Cups, polystyrene foam, manufacturing median and a higher 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
2023 2.6 2.6 2 0 0
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2021 6.8 4.5 5 1 0
2020 4.4 2.2 4 0 0
2019 5.3 1.8 6 0 0
2018 8.2 2.8 12 0 0
2017 3.4 3.4 5 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

326140 · CA · Lodi

260 Cups, polystyrene foam, manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 140 employers in Lodi, CA · 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 Cellofoam-Fredericksburg, VA 4.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR FloraCraft Corporation Headquarters 4.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR United Industries - Bentonville 4.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR SSF Productions LLC 4.4 TCR
STATE-SIZE Frog Hollow Farm LLC 117 FTE
STATE-SIZE Standard Cattle LLC 117 FTE
STATE-SIZE LFA 117 FTE
STATE-SIZE Oxnard Plant #4 117 FTE
CITY-NEAR Perez Farming Services Inc. 1,145 FTE
CITY-NEAR 9292-AHLM001 - HOSPITAL 1,030 FTE
CITY-NEAR Ono-223 910 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 592 890 FTE
NAT-TCR Homeland 247 4.4 TCR
NAT-TCR San Angelo Division 4.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Sanderson Farms McComb Live Haul 4.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Dominion Sevierville, LLC 4.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE Atlanta (P&D) 141 117 FTE
NAT-SIZE Dept. of Natural Resources (20) 117 FTE
NAT-SIZE Solugen, Inc. 117 FTE
NAT-SIZE Allied Power Services - Exelon, Byron Station 117 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: 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.

Read our methodology - how this data is sourced, computed, and verified.

Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.