Ingot, nonferrous metals (except aluminum, copper), secondary smelting and refining · Illinois

Imperial Zinc Corporation

Chicago, IL · ~67 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
13.2
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Imperial Zinc Corporation runs at 399% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Ingot, nonferrous metals (except aluminum, copper), secondary smelting and refining workplace, earning a grade F.

Imperial Zinc Corporation: 13.2 TCR = 399% of Ingot, nonferrous metals (except aluminum, copper), secondary smelting and refining BLS 3.3 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Imperial Zinc Corporation safety composite

Imperial Zinc Corporation scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 0%), 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

14/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 13.17 per 100 workers

Safer than 2% of industry peers

DART rate
F 24.1 per 100 workers

Safer than 0% 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

Imperial Zinc Corporation: 4.0 → 24.1 TCR

Peak year 2024 @ 24.1 TCR · DART/TCR 1.83× in 2024

Imperial Zinc Corporation's TCR rose 20.2 from 4.0 in 2022 to 24.1 in 2024. In 2024, DART was 1.83× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 331492 · Chicago, IL ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 13.2 · 399% of ind

  • DART 24.1 DART
  • RANK #9/10
  • PHOTO Buckeye Metal Company
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 22 inj
  • SIZE ~67 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Buckeye Metal Company (0.3 TCR gap)

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

Imperial Zinc Corporation in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Imperial Zinc Corporation averages 13.2 TCR (399% of the Ingot, nonferrous metals (except aluminum, copper), secondary smelting and refining BLS benchmark).

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

Imperial Zinc Corporation TCR series: 2022=4 · 2023=11.4 · 2024=24.1 · BLS 3.3

Where Imperial Zinc Corporation falls in its industry

132 Ingot, nonferrous metals (exce establishments

Safer than 2% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.7.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Illinois alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #9 safest of 10 Ingot, nonferrous metals (exce employers in Illinois.

Imperial Zinc Corporation (67 employees, TCR 13.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 67 employees and a TCR of 3.7 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 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Imperial Zinc Corporation
Imperial Zinc Corporation (67 employees, TCR 13.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 67 employees and a TCR of 3.7

Imperial Zinc Corporation has more employees than the Ingot, nonferrous metals (except aluminu median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.7. 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 24.1 24.1 13 0 0
2023 11.4 11.4 7 0 0
2022 4.0 4.0 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

331492 · IL · Chicago

132 Ingot, nonferrous metals (except aluminum, copper), secondary smelting and refining employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,804 rated employers in Illinois with headcount on file · 2,934 employers in Chicago, IL · 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 Buckeye Metal Company 12.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Ritchey Metals Scenery Hill 13.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Cronimet Specialty Metals Wheatland 11.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Mayco Industries 11.0 TCR
STATE-SIZE Decatur Cogeneration 67 FTE
STATE-SIZE SWECO - Chicago 67 FTE
STATE-SIZE AMEREN ILLINOIS - Galesburg 67 FTE
STATE-SIZE 75G - Western S - IL Gas Ops 67 FTE
CITY-NEAR Chicago Public Schools 49,500 FTE
CITY-NEAR Chicago/Corporate 18,831 FTE
CITY-NEAR University of Illinois at Chicago 13,092 FTE
CITY-NEAR University Health Service UIC UIC Campus 12,732 FTE
NAT-TCR Boomerang Rubber Inc 13.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Fat-Cat Fish LLC 13.2 TCR
NAT-TCR TruJacodi Delivery Express 13.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Amazon.com Services LLC - SMF7 13.2 TCR
NAT-SIZE Gary 108 67 FTE
NAT-SIZE Salt Lake 67 FTE
NAT-SIZE Eufaula Indian Health Facility 67 FTE
NAT-SIZE wichita falls ford 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.