Structural steel erecting or iron work contractors · California

Lancaster Burns Construction, Inc

Roseville, CA · ~290 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
7.8
Avg TCR
2.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Lancaster Burns Construction, Inc runs at 278% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Structural steel erecting or iron work contractors workplace, earning a grade F.

Lancaster Burns Construction, Inc: 7.8 TCR = 278% of Structural steel erecting or iron work contractors BLS 2.8 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Lancaster Burns Construction, Inc safety composite

Lancaster Burns Construction, Inc scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 53% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 20%), 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

29/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 7.79 per 100 workers

Safer than 22% of industry peers

DART rate
F 4.96 per 100 workers

Safer than 20% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 53% 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

Lancaster Burns Construction, Inc: 7.5 → 8.4 TCR

Peak year 2023 @ 9.7 TCR · DART/TCR 0.64× in 2024

Lancaster Burns Construction, Inc's TCR rose 0.9 from 7.5 in 2017 to 8.4 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2023 at 9.7 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.64× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 238120 · Roseville, CA ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade F · TCR 7.8 · 278% of ind

  • DART 5.0 DART
  • RANK #75/96
  • PHOTO Southern New Jersey …
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 158 inj
  • SIZE ~290 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Southern New Jersey Steel Company Inc. (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Lancaster Burns Construction, Inc in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Lancaster Burns Construction, Inc averages 7.8 TCR (278% of the Structural steel erecting or iron work contractors BLS benchmark).

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

Lancaster Burns Construction, Inc TCR series: 2017=7.5 · 2018=8.9 · 2020=4.7 · 2021=8.9 · 2022=6.5 · 2023=9.7 · 2024=8.4 · BLS 2.8

Where Lancaster Burns Construction, Inc falls in its industry

705 Structural steel erecting or i establishments

Safer than 22% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #75 safest of 96 Structural steel erecting or i employers in California.

Lancaster Burns Construction, Inc (290 employees, TCR 7.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 58 employees and a TCR of 3.9 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 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate Lancaster Burns Construction, Inc
Lancaster Burns Construction, Inc (290 employees, TCR 7.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 58 employees and a TCR of 3.9

Lancaster Burns Construction, Inc has more employees than the Structural steel erecting or iron work c median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.9. 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 8.4 5.0 21 1 0
2023 9.7 8.5 25 1 0
2022 6.5 5.8 18 0 0
2021 8.9 7.7 23 0 0
2020 4.7 3.5 10 2 0
2018 8.9 7.6 34 0 0
2017 7.5 6.7 27 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

238120 · CA · Roseville

705 Structural steel erecting or iron work contractors employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 311 employers in Roseville, 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 Southern New Jersey Steel Company Inc. 7.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR STEELTECH REINFORCING, INC. 7.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR ACSS, Inc. 7.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Barnett Steel Fabrication, LLC 7.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE Susanville 290 FTE
STATE-SIZE BCCI Construction, LLC 290 FTE
STATE-SIZE Bayside Interiors Inc. 290 FTE
STATE-SIZE Porto's Bakery, Inc. 290 FTE
CITY-NEAR 2032-02121801 4,395 FTE
CITY-NEAR Sutter Valley Hospitals (30003) 4,383 FTE
CITY-NEAR 0206-02621801 3,172 FTE
CITY-NEAR Sutter Roseville Medical Center (110-5001) 3,162 FTE
NAT-TCR Rhino, Inc. 7.8 TCR
NAT-TCR M-12 7.8 TCR
NAT-TCR St. Matthews Store 7.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Discover Goodwill of Southern and Western Colorado- Circle Retail 7.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE Clarks Americas, Inc. 290 FTE
NAT-SIZE TDC 290 FTE
NAT-SIZE Bartlett 290 FTE
NAT-SIZE 11909 Spencer Road 290 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, 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.