Control valves, fluid power, manufacturing · Minnesota

Dynamic Sealing Technologies, Inc.

Andover, MN · ~67 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.4
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Dynamic Sealing Technologies, Inc. runs at 43% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Control valves, fluid power, manufacturing workplace, earning a grade A.

Dynamic Sealing Technologies, Inc.: 1.4 TCR = 43% of Control valves, fluid power, manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Dynamic Sealing Technologies, Inc. safety composite

Dynamic Sealing Technologies, Inc. scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 78% 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).

C

65/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 1.43 per 100 workers

Safer than 62% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 78% 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

−1.7

2017→2024

Dynamic Sealing Technologies, Inc. injury rate improved

Dynamic Sealing Technologies, Inc.'s TCR fell 1.7 from 1.7 in 2017 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2018 at 3.0 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=1.7 · 2018=3.0 · 2019=1.6 · 2020=1.8 · 2021=0.0 · 2022=1.7 · 2023=1.7 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 332912 · Andover, MN AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade A · TCR 1.4 · 43% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #1/4
  • PHOTO Caterpillar Fluid Tr…
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 7 inj
  • SIZE ~67 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Caterpillar Fluid Transfer Solutions - Menominee (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Dynamic Sealing Technologies, Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Dynamic Sealing Technologies, Inc. averages 1.4 TCR (43% of the Control valves, fluid power, manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Dynamic Sealing Technologies, Inc. TCR series: 2017=1.7 · 2018=3 · 2019=1.6 · 2020=1.8 · 2021=0 · 2022=1.7 · 2023=1.7 · 2024=0 · BLS 3.3

Where Dynamic Sealing Technologies, Inc. falls in its industry

182 Control valves, fluid power, m establishments

Safer than 62% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.1.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Minnesota alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #1 safest of 4 Control valves, fluid power, m employers in Minnesota.

Dynamic Sealing Technologies, Inc. (67 employees, TCR 1.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 88 employees and a TCR of 2.1 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 02004006008001,000 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate Dynamic Sealing Technologies, Inc.
Dynamic Sealing Technologies, Inc. (67 employees, TCR 1.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 88 employees and a TCR of 2.1

Dynamic Sealing Technologies, Inc. has fewer employees than the Control valves, fluid power, manufacturi median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.1. 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
2024 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2023 1.7 1.7 1 0 0
2022 1.7 1.7 1 0 0
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 1.8 0.0 1 0 0
2019 1.6 0.0 1 0 0
2018 3.0 1.5 2 0 0
2017 1.7 1.7 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

332912 · MN · Andover

182 Control valves, fluid power, manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 15,828 rated employers in Minnesota with headcount on file · 34 employers in Andover, MN · 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 Caterpillar Fluid Transfer Solutions - Menominee 1.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Cooper Standard Fairview 1.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Quick Coupling Division - Machining 1.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Fluid Connectors : Chetek 1.5 TCR
STATE-SIZE MOORHEAD PUBLIC SERVICE 67 FTE
STATE-SIZE 505 Nicollet MNN3 67 FTE
STATE-SIZE SMA, LLC 67 FTE
STATE-SIZE 102809 - Moosejaw 67 FTE
CITY-NEAR Andover YMCA Community Center 988 FTE
CITY-NEAR WM 1999 394 FTE
CITY-NEAR 1999 348 FTE
CITY-NEAR Andover High 190 FTE
NAT-TCR S.J.Amoroso Construction Co. LLC 1.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Home Office 1.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Jones Hall 1.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Main 1.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE 606GRR 67 FTE
NAT-SIZE S.A. Camp Pump Company 67 FTE
NAT-SIZE Creative Stone, Inc. 67 FTE
NAT-SIZE Northern California Nail Co. Inc. 67 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.