Connectors, electronic (e.g., coaxial, cylindrical, printed circuit, rack and panel), manufacturing · California

Detoronics

Santa Fe Springs, CA · ~27 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.1
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Detoronics runs at 32% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Connectors, electronic (e.g., coaxial, cylindrical, printed circuit, rack and panel), manufacturing workplace, earning a grade A.

Detoronics: 1.1 TCR = 32% of Connectors, electronic (e.g., coaxial, cylindrical, printed circuit, rack and panel), manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Detoronics safety composite

Detoronics scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 79% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 51%), 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

67/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 1.06 per 100 workers

Safer than 66% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 79% 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%).

Detoronics held a steady TCR band

Detoronics's TCR held near 0.0 from 0.0 in 2017 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2022 at 3.9 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=0.0 · 2018=0.0 · 2019=3.6 · 2020=0.0 · 2022=3.9 · 2023=0.0 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 334417 · Santa Fe Springs, CA AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade A · TCR 1.1 · 32% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #12/29
  • PHOTO PPC Broadband, Inc.
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 1 inj
  • SIZE ~27 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: PPC Broadband, Inc. (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Detoronics in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Detoronics averages 1.1 TCR (32% of the Connectors, electronic (e.g., coaxial, cylindrical, printed circuit, rack and panel), manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Detoronics TCR series: 2017=0 · 2018=0 · 2019=3.6 · 2020=0 · 2022=3.9 · 2023=0 · 2024=0 · BLS 3.3

Where Detoronics falls in its industry

166 Connectors, electronic (e.g., establishments

Safer than 66% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #12 safest of 29 Connectors, electronic (e.g., employers in California.

Detoronics (27 employees, TCR 1.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 144 employees and a TCR of 1.6 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 05001,0001,500 0246 Average employees Total Case Rate Detoronics
Detoronics (27 employees, TCR 1.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 144 employees and a TCR of 1.6

Detoronics has fewer employees than the Connectors, electronic (e.g., coaxial, c median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.6. 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
2024 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 3.9 3.9 0 1 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 3.6 0.0 1 0 0
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2017 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

334417 · CA · Santa Fe Springs

166 Connectors, electronic (e.g., coaxial, cylindrical, printed circuit, rack and panel), manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 310 employers in Santa Fe Springs, 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 PPC Broadband, Inc. 1.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR K01 AER - Oceanside 1.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Samtec 1.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR 435 AER - CULPEPER 1.0 TCR
STATE-SIZE HQ 27 FTE
STATE-SIZE Medeiros Farms Vineyards 27 FTE
STATE-SIZE SAND RANCH 27 FTE
STATE-SIZE San Bernabe Vineyards 27 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 423 3,217 FTE
CITY-NEAR CSI Electrical Contractors, Inc. 1,217 FTE
CITY-NEAR CSI 1,179 FTE
CITY-NEAR Vans Distribution Center - SFS 757 FTE
NAT-TCR MRC Global -099 Indianapolis, IN 1.1 TCR
NAT-TCR JMC of Jonesboro, Inc. 1.1 TCR
NAT-TCR HMI Mechanical Systems, Inc. 1.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Enclos - Chester Shop 1.1 TCR
NAT-SIZE Portland Hvc 27 FTE
NAT-SIZE Minneapolis Clinic of Neurology-ED 27 FTE
NAT-SIZE Moorhead Clinic 27 FTE
NAT-SIZE NPC South Inc. Plant 1 27 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, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.