Steel forgings made from purchased steel, unfinished · Minnesota

Gerdau Duluth Grinding Ball

Duluth, MN · ~41 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
7.8
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Gerdau Duluth Grinding Ball runs at 238% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Steel forgings made from purchased steel, unfinished workplace, earning a grade F.

Gerdau Duluth Grinding Ball: 7.8 TCR = 238% of Steel forgings made from purchased steel, unfinished BLS 3.3 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Gerdau Duluth Grinding Ball safety composite

Gerdau Duluth Grinding Ball scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 6%), 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).

F

24/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 7.84 per 100 workers

Safer than 22% of industry peers

DART rate
F 9.77 per 100 workers

Safer than 6% 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%).

Rising injury rate

Gerdau Duluth Grinding Ball: 4.2 → 9.8 TCR

Peak year 2022 @ 19.3 TCR · DART/TCR 1.25× in 2024

Gerdau Duluth Grinding Ball's TCR rose 5.5 from 4.2 in 2017 to 9.8 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2022 at 19.3 TCR. In 2024, DART was 1.25× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 332111 · Duluth, MN ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 7.8 · 238% of ind

  • DART 9.8 DART
  • RANK #3/5
  • PHOTO Phoenix Forging Co.,…
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 17 inj
  • SIZE ~41 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Phoenix Forging Co., Inc. (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Gerdau Duluth Grinding Ball in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Gerdau Duluth Grinding Ball averages 7.8 TCR (238% of the Steel forgings made from purchased steel, unfinished BLS benchmark).

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

Gerdau Duluth Grinding Ball TCR series: 2017=4.2 · 2018=6.6 · 2019=4.8 · 2020=10 · 2021=2.8 · 2022=19.3 · 2023=5.2 · 2024=9.8 · BLS 3.3

Where Gerdau Duluth Grinding Ball falls in its industry

241 Steel forgings made from purch establishments

Safer than 22% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 5.0.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Minnesota alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #3 safest of 5 Steel forgings made from purch employers in Minnesota.

Gerdau Duluth Grinding Ball (41 employees, TCR 7.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 86 employees and a TCR of 5.0 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 0100200300400 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Gerdau Duluth Grinding Ball
Gerdau Duluth Grinding Ball (41 employees, TCR 7.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 86 employees and a TCR of 5.0

Gerdau Duluth Grinding Ball has fewer employees than the Steel forgings made from purchased steel median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 5.0. 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 9.8 9.8 2 2 0
2023 5.2 2.6 2 0 0
2022 19.3 11.0 4 3 0
2021 2.8 0.0 1 0 0
2020 10.0 10.0 1 2 0
2019 4.8 4.8 2 0 0
2018 6.6 6.6 3 0 0
2017 4.2 4.2 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

332111 · MN · Duluth

241 Steel forgings made from purchased steel, unfinished employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 15,828 rated employers in Minnesota with headcount on file · 340 employers in Duluth, 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 Phoenix Forging Co., Inc. 7.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Superior Forge and Steel - New Castle 7.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR The Dayton Forging & Heat Treating Company 8.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Hydrafab Northwest Inc 8.0 TCR
STATE-SIZE Minnesota Farming 41 FTE
STATE-SIZE Feedmill TW Shop - SE 41 FTE
STATE-SIZE Hobbs Brigade Energy Services 41 FTE
STATE-SIZE Wild Rice Electric Cooperative, Inc. 41 FTE
CITY-NEAR St Mary's Medical Center 3,230 FTE
CITY-NEAR St. Luke's Hospital of Duluth 3,052 FTE
CITY-NEAR Building D-Miller Dwan Medical Center 1,880 FTE
CITY-NEAR University of Minnesota Duluth 1,701 FTE
NAT-TCR W.B. Starr, Inc. 7.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Plastic Products Co., Inc. - Greenville 7.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Visiting Angels of Hanover 7.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Newington High School 7.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE ICCS - Greeley 41 FTE
NAT-SIZE Pepe Ganga Cidra 41 FTE
NAT-SIZE Carson City Office 41 FTE
NAT-SIZE Brookdale Fisher's Landing 41 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.