Heating, ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) contractors · California

Frank M. Booth, Inc.

Marysville, CA · ~331 workers · 6 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
3.4
Avg TCR
2.8
Industry avg
1
Fatality
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Frank M. Booth, Inc. runs at 120% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Heating, ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) contractors workplace, earning a grade D.

Frank M. Booth, Inc.: 3.4 TCR = 120% of Heating, ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) contractors BLS 2.8 · 6y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Frank M. Booth, Inc. safety composite

Frank M. Booth, Inc. scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 57% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 1%), 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

40/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 3.37 per 100 workers

Safer than 49% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0.63 per 100 workers

Safer than 57% of industry peers

Fatalities
F 1

Safer than 1% 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

−1.9

2019→2024

Frank M. Booth, Inc. injury rate improved

Frank M. Booth, Inc.'s TCR fell 1.9 from 3.8 in 2019 to 1.9 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2022 at 4.8 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.19× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2019=3.8 · 2020=2.3 · 2021=3.0 · 2022=4.8 · 2023=4.6 · 2024=1.9

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 238220 · Marysville, CA ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade D · TCR 3.4 · 120% of ind

  • DART 0.6 DART
  • RANK #265/594
  • PHOTO Rabe Environmental S…
  • BOOK 6y book
  • INJ 55 inj
  • SIZE ~331 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Rabe Environmental Systems, Inc. (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Frank M. Booth, Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Frank M. Booth, Inc. averages 3.4 TCR (120% of the Heating, ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) contractors BLS benchmark).

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

Frank M. Booth, Inc. TCR series: 2019=3.8 · 2020=2.3 · 2021=3 · 2022=4.8 · 2023=4.6 · 2024=1.9 · BLS 2.8

Where Frank M. Booth, Inc. falls in its industry

5,793 Heating, ventilation and air-c establishments

Safer than 49% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.3.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #265 safest of 594 Heating, ventilation and air-c employers in California.

Frank M. Booth, Inc. (331 employees, TCR 3.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 60 employees and a TCR of 3.3 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 0100200300400 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Frank M. Booth, Inc.
Frank M. Booth, Inc. (331 employees, TCR 3.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 60 employees and a TCR of 3.3

Frank M. Booth, Inc. has more employees than the Heating, ventilation and air-conditionin median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.3. 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 1.9 0.6 6 0 0
2023 4.6 2.7 12 0 0
2022 4.8 2.5 15 0 1
2021 3.0 1.9 8 0 0
2020 2.3 1.8 5 0 0
2019 3.8 2.5 9 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

238220 · CA · Marysville

5,793 Heating, ventilation and air-conditioning (HVAC) contractors employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 39 employers in Marysville, 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 Rabe Environmental Systems, Inc. 3.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Green Mechanical Construction, Inc - Glasgow 3.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR PBBS Equipment Corporation - Eagan 3.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR WFS MIAMI 3.4 TCR
STATE-SIZE Hillside Farms Farm Labor Contracting, Inc. 331 FTE
STATE-SIZE Cicon Engineering 331 FTE
STATE-SIZE Teledyne Controls, LLC 331 FTE
STATE-SIZE WM 2002 331 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 64 2,413 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 583 2,413 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 619 2,413 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 57 2,054 FTE
NAT-TCR Bomarko, Inc. 3.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Grand Forks Transportation 3.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Del0000444 Workforce Initiatives 3.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Adams Party Rental 3.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE Harvey Building Products 331 FTE
NAT-SIZE 4M - San Antonio 331 FTE
NAT-SIZE Baptist Health Medical Center - Conway 331 FTE
NAT-SIZE Fairfield Memorial Hospital 331 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. 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.