Tube (e.g., heavy riveted, lock joint, seamless, welded) made from purchased iron or steel · Pennsylvania
Hofmann Sinking Spring Plant
Sinking Spring, PA · ~34 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.
- F
- Failing Safety Record
- 7.5
- Avg TCR
- 3.3
- Industry avg
- 0
- Fatalities
The verdict
Hofmann Sinking Spring Plant runs at 227% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Tube (e.g., heavy riveted, lock joint, seamless, welded) made from purchased iron or steel workplace, earning a grade F.
- F
- Failing Safety Record
- 7.5
- avg TCR · per 100 workers
- 3.3
- industry benchmark (BLS)
- 19
- recordable injuries tracked
Grade compares Hofmann Sinking Spring Plant's OSHA Total Case Rate of 7.5 to the Tube (e.g., heavy riveted, lock joint, seamless, welded) made from purchased iron or steel BLS benchmark of 3.3 (227% of benchmark) across 8 years of Form 300A filings (2016–2024). <a href="/methodology">See methodology</a> for reporting-limitation caveats.
Injury rate over time
Hofmann Sinking Spring Plant's yearly Total Case Rate, against the 3.3 industry benchmark.
Where Hofmann Sinking Spring Plant falls in its industry
342 Tube (e.g., heavy riveted, loc establishmentsSafer than 25% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.1.
Narrower to Pennsylvania alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #25 safest of 32 Tube (e.g., heavy riveted, loc employers in Pennsylvania.
Trend analysis for Hofmann Sinking Spring Plant
Between 2016 and 2023, Hofmann Sinking Spring Plant's Total Case Rate improved from 2.7 to 0.0 recordable injuries per 100 full-time workers, a 100% decrease across 7 years of OSHA reporting.
The safest year on record was 2017, at a TCR of 0.0, while 2022 saw the highest rate, at 18.2, a spread of 18.2 points between the best and worst reporting years. That's a wide swing relative to the establishment's overall rate, worth checking the year-by-year table below for whether a single severe year is driving the average, rather than a sustained trend.
Summed across those 8 reporting years, Hofmann Sinking Spring Plant recorded 19 total injuries and illnesses, with no fatalities reported in any of those years. Readers comparing establishments should weigh the 8-year trend above alongside establishment size, since a larger workforce naturally accumulates more raw incidents even at a lower per-100-worker rate.
Verify This Employer with OSHA
The 19 injuries, 2 illnesses shown on this page for Hofmann Sinking Spring Plant are sourced from its own 8 years of mandatory OSHA Form 300A summaries. Cross-check the underlying establishment record directly against the federal source, name, NAICS classification, recordable case totals, and inspection history are all searchable on OSHA's Establishment-Specific Injury and Illness Data system.
Verify on OSHA Establishment SearchSource: U.S. Department of Labor, OSHA Establishment-Specific Injury and Illness Data. NAICS 331210 - Tube (e.g., heavy riveted, lock joint, seamless, welded) made from purchased iron or steel.
DART Rate, Transparent Calculation (2023)
What is the DART rate formula?
DART (Days Away, Restricted, or Transferred) is computed by OSHA as incidents × 200,000 ÷ hours worked. The 200,000-hour denominator equals roughly 100 full-time workers, which lets establishments of very different sizes be compared directly.
0 DART incidents × 200,000 ÷ 32,917 hours worked = 0.00 DART
Methodology: 29 CFR 1904, OSHA Form 300A recordkeeping
Cross-Validating Context, Establishment vs Industry vs State
| Benchmark | TCR | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Hofmann Sinking Spring Plant (this establishment) | 7.50 | OSHA ITA Form 300A, 8-year avg |
| Tube (e.g., heavy riveted, lock joint, seamless, welded) made from purchased iron or steel industry avg | 3.30 | BLS IIF, NAICS 331210 |
| Pennsylvania state avg (all industries) | 5.06 | OSHA ITA, state-level rollup |
Industry benchmarks: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Injuries, Illnesses, and Fatalities (IIF) program
Reportable Incident Timeline
Year-by-year reportable incidents (recordable injuries + illnesses + fatalities) submitted by Hofmann Sinking Spring Plant to OSHA's Injury Tracking Application. Each row anchors to OSHA's inspection records search where you can pull the underlying inspection case numbers and citations for that establishment-year.
- 2023: 0 reportable incidents · 0 injuries, 0 illnesses, 0 fatalities - OSHA inspection records (case numbers)
- 2022: 6 reportable incidents · 6 injuries, 0 illnesses, 0 fatalities - OSHA inspection records (case numbers)
- 2021: 6 reportable incidents · 4 injuries, 2 illnesses, 0 fatalities - OSHA inspection records (case numbers)
- 2020: 3 reportable incidents · 3 injuries, 0 illnesses, 0 fatalities - OSHA inspection records (case numbers)
- 2019: 4 reportable incidents · 4 injuries, 0 illnesses, 0 fatalities - OSHA inspection records (case numbers)
- 2018: 1 reportable incidents · 1 injuries, 0 illnesses, 0 fatalities - OSHA inspection records (case numbers)
- 2017: 0 reportable incidents · 0 injuries, 0 illnesses, 0 fatalities - OSHA inspection records (case numbers)
- 2016: 1 reportable incidents · 1 injuries, 0 illnesses, 0 fatalities - OSHA inspection records (case numbers)
Source: OSHA Inspection Information System (IMIS) - inspection case-number records
Year-by-Year Safety Data
| Year | TCR | DART | Injuries | Illnesses | Fatalities |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2022 | 18.2 | 18.2 | 6 | 0 | 0 |
| 2021 | 15.6 | 10.4 | 4 | 2 | 0 |
| 2020 | 7.9 | 0.0 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
| 2019 | 12.5 | 9.4 | 4 | 0 | 0 |
| 2018 | 3.1 | 3.1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| 2017 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| 2016 | 2.7 | 0.0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
What this grade means for you
Use this grade as a relative read on Hofmann Sinking Spring Plant's reported OSHA injury record versus its Tube (e.g., heavy riveted, lock joint, seamless, welded) made from purchased iron or steel peers, not a verdict on whether any single site is safe today.
- At 227% of the Tube (e.g., heavy riveted, lock joint, seamless, welded) made from purchased iron or steel benchmark, Hofmann Sinking Spring Plant reports more injuries than typical peers, ask specifically how the employer is reducing them. Know your rights
- Judge this record against the wider Tube (e.g., heavy riveted, lock joint, seamless, welded) made from purchased iron or steel sector, where injury rates vary widely, before comparing it in isolation. See the industry
- Grades reflect 2016–2024 filings; check the latest establishment record straight from OSHA, or look up a different employer. Look up another
Safety grades reflect employers' self-reported OSHA Form 300A filings from 2016 to 2024 and can lag current conditions. A grade is not a guarantee that any specific workplace is safe or unsafe today. See our methodology and disclaimer.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Hofmann Sinking Spring Plant's safety grade?
How many injuries has Hofmann Sinking Spring Plant reported?
Similar Employers
Matched by safety record across the industry, by workforce size within Pennsylvania, and by nearby establishments in Sinking Spring - a different peer set than the category browse links below.
Similar TCR (~7.5)
Similar size (~34 workers)
Read our methodology - how this data is sourced, computed, and verified.
Every figure and grade on PlainSafetyScore is computed directly from OSHA's published Injury Tracking Application data and BLS industry benchmarks, no number is typed in by an editor. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these safety grades, or report a data error. Data current as of 2016-2024 OSHA ITA release.