Pipe (e.g., heavy riveted, lock joint, seamless, welded) made from purchased iron or steel · Texas

Jindal Pipe USA Inc.

Baytown, TX · ~183 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
15.0
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Jindal Pipe USA Inc. runs at 453% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Pipe (e.g., heavy riveted, lock joint, seamless, welded) made from purchased iron or steel workplace, earning a grade F.

Jindal Pipe USA Inc.: 15.0 TCR = 453% of Pipe (e.g., heavy riveted, lock joint, seamless, welded) made from purchased iron or steel BLS 3.3 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Jindal Pipe USA Inc. safety composite

Jindal Pipe USA Inc. scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 55% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 4%), 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

34/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 14.96 per 100 workers

Safer than 4% of industry peers

DART rate
C 1.37 per 100 workers

Safer than 55% 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%).

TCR Δ

−32.6

2022→2024

Jindal Pipe USA Inc. injury rate improved

Jindal Pipe USA Inc.'s TCR fell 32.6 from 37.1 in 2022 to 4.5 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2022 at 37.1 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.09× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2022=37.1 · 2023=3.3 · 2024=4.5

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 331210 · Baytown, TX ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade F · TCR 15.0 · 453% of ind

  • DART 1.4 DART
  • RANK #45/46
  • PHOTO TARTER TUBE
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 47 inj
  • SIZE ~183 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: TARTER TUBE (0.1 TCR gap)

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

Jindal Pipe USA Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Jindal Pipe USA Inc. averages 15.0 TCR (453% of the Pipe (e.g., heavy riveted, lock joint, seamless, welded) made from purchased iron or steel BLS benchmark).

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

Jindal Pipe USA Inc. TCR series: 2022=37.1 · 2023=3.3 · 2024=4.5 · BLS 3.3

Where Jindal Pipe USA Inc. falls in its industry

329 Pipe (e.g., heavy riveted, loc establishments

Safer than 4% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.3.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Texas alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #45 safest of 46 Pipe (e.g., heavy riveted, loc employers in Texas.

Jindal Pipe USA Inc. (183 employees, TCR 15.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 99 employees and a TCR of 4.3 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 0200400600800 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Jindal Pipe USA Inc.
Jindal Pipe USA Inc. (183 employees, TCR 15.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 99 employees and a TCR of 4.3

Jindal Pipe USA Inc. has more employees than the Pipe (e.g., heavy riveted, lock joint, s median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.3. 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 4.5 1.4 13 0 0
2023 3.3 1.6 10 0 0
2022 37.1 37.1 24 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

331210 · TX · Baytown

329 Pipe (e.g., heavy riveted, lock joint, seamless, welded) made from purchased iron or steel employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 38,394 rated employers in Texas with headcount on file · 247 employers in Baytown, TX · 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 TARTER TUBE 14.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Sharon Tube Niles 15.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Major Metals Company 15.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Primus Pipe and Tube, Inc 14.7 TCR
STATE-SIZE Cherry Crushed Concrete, Inc. Dba Arcosa Crushed Concrete 183 FTE
STATE-SIZE Alterman Austin 183 FTE
STATE-SIZE Performance POP 183 FTE
STATE-SIZE BP Texas City Chemicals 183 FTE
CITY-NEAR North American Growth Olefins Recovery Project 2,988 FTE
CITY-NEAR Houston Methodist Baytown Hospital 1,920 FTE
CITY-NEAR ExxonMobil Baytown Refinery 1,328 FTE
CITY-NEAR WM 7042 1,288 FTE
NAT-TCR PITPITTSBURGHPA 15.0 TCR
NAT-TCR 105 - GB San Francisco 15.0 TCR
NAT-TCR CPK-NJ 15.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Candlewood Valley Health 15.0 TCR
NAT-SIZE Church & Dwight Colonial Heights 183 FTE
NAT-SIZE 1032 Imperial Marketplace 183 FTE
NAT-SIZE St Martha Center for Rehabilitation & Healthcare 183 FTE
NAT-SIZE New Center Stamping, Inc. 183 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.