All other automotive repair and maintenance · Michigan

Experimental Vehicle Bldg

Dearborn, MI · ~315 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
0.6
Avg TCR
2.1
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Experimental Vehicle Bldg runs at 27% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical All other automotive repair and maintenance workplace, earning a grade A.

Experimental Vehicle Bldg: 0.6 TCR = 27% of All other automotive repair and maintenance BLS 2.1 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Experimental Vehicle Bldg safety composite

Experimental Vehicle Bldg scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 98% 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).

B

83/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
A 0.56 per 100 workers

Safer than 98% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 89% 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

−1.3

2016→2024

Experimental Vehicle Bldg injury rate improved

Experimental Vehicle Bldg's TCR fell 1.3 from 1.6 in 2016 to 0.3 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2016 at 1.6 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=1.6 · 2017=1.0 · 2018=0.3 · 2019=0.0 · 2020=0.0 · 2021=0.0 · 2022=1.4 · 2023=0.4 · 2024=0.3

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 811198 · Dearborn, MI AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 0.6 · 27% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #1/21
  • PHOTO Lockheed Martin Corp…
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 14 inj
  • SIZE ~315 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Lockheed Martin Corporation Fort Benning GA (3810) (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Experimental Vehicle Bldg in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Experimental Vehicle Bldg averages 0.6 TCR (27% of the All other automotive repair and maintenance BLS benchmark).

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

Experimental Vehicle Bldg TCR series: 2016=1.6 · 2017=1 · 2018=0.3 · 2019=0 · 2020=0 · 2021=0 · 2022=1.4 · 2023=0.4 · 2024=0.3 · BLS 2.1

Where Experimental Vehicle Bldg falls in its industry

66 All other automotive repair an establishments

Safer than 98% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 6.0.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Michigan alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #1 safest of 21 All other automotive repair an employers in Michigan.

Experimental Vehicle Bldg (315 employees, TCR 0.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 95 employees and a TCR of 6.0 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 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Experimental Vehicle Bldg
Experimental Vehicle Bldg (315 employees, TCR 0.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 95 employees and a TCR of 6.0

Experimental Vehicle Bldg has more employees than the All other automotive repair and maintena median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 6.0. 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 0.3 0.0 1 0 0
2023 0.4 0.0 0 1 0
2022 1.4 1.1 4 0 0
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2018 0.3 0.0 1 0 0
2017 1.0 0.3 3 0 0
2016 1.6 0.6 5 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

811198 · MI · Dearborn

66 All other automotive repair and maintenance employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,393 rated employers in Michigan with headcount on file · 130 employers in Dearborn, MI · 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 Lockheed Martin Corporation Fort Benning GA (3810) 0.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Conlan Tire- Jacksonville SH 0.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR STTC Chambersburg 1.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Ground Effects, LLC - 19 Mile Sterling Heights 1.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE Corp Grove 315 FTE
STATE-SIZE WM 1836 315 FTE
STATE-SIZE Pontiac CCA 315 FTE
STATE-SIZE 4002 - TPG/PBS 315 FTE
CITY-NEAR PDC - PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT CENTER TRUCK 20,749 FTE
CITY-NEAR Dearborn Truck Plant 5,037 FTE
CITY-NEAR 2250-1 4,185 FTE
CITY-NEAR PDC - PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT CENTER DESIGN 3,940 FTE
NAT-TCR FUJIFILM Holdings America Corporation- Hanover Park, IL 0.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Construction 0.6 TCR
NAT-TCR At Home Stores #117 0.6 TCR
NAT-TCR TX/NM - Baytown - 4358 0.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Morrison Construction Company 315 FTE
NAT-SIZE Manchester Tank & Equipment- Quincy 315 FTE
NAT-SIZE Straughn Farms, LLC 315 FTE
NAT-SIZE Giant Eagle #0072 315 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.

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

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