Stamping metal motor vehicle body parts · Texas

LW Engineering Plant 11- Arlington Stamping

Grand Prairie, TX · ~134 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
9.4
Avg TCR
5.4
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

LW Engineering Plant 11- Arlington Stamping runs at 175% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Stamping metal motor vehicle body parts workplace, earning a grade D.

LW Engineering Plant 11- Arlington Stamping: 9.4 TCR = 175% of Stamping metal motor vehicle body parts BLS 5.4 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

LW Engineering Plant 11- Arlington Stamping safety composite

LW Engineering Plant 11- Arlington Stamping scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 10%), 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

21/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 9.45 per 100 workers

Safer than 10% of industry peers

DART rate
F 5.14 per 100 workers

Safer than 12% 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

−1.3

2016→2017

LW Engineering Plant 11- Arlington Stamping injury rate improved

LW Engineering Plant 11- Arlington Stamping's TCR fell 1.3 from 10.1 in 2016 to 8.8 in 2017. Peak filing year was 2016 at 10.1 TCR. In 2017, DART was 0.54× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=10.1 · 2017=8.8

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 336370 · Grand Prairie, TX ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade D · TCR 9.4 · 175% of ind

  • DART 5.1 DART
  • RANK #10/12
  • PHOTO Flex-N-Gate Urbana
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 23 inj
  • SIZE ~134 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Flex-N-Gate Urbana (0.0 TCR gap)

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

LW Engineering Plant 11- Arlington Stamping in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows LW Engineering Plant 11- Arlington Stamping averages 9.4 TCR (175% of the Stamping metal motor vehicle body parts BLS benchmark).

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

LW Engineering Plant 11- Arlington Stamping TCR series: 2016=10.1 · 2017=8.8 · BLS 5.4

Where LW Engineering Plant 11- Arlington Stamping falls in its industry

510 Stamping metal motor vehicle b establishments

Safer than 10% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Texas alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #10 safest of 12 Stamping metal motor vehicle b employers in Texas.

LW Engineering Plant 11- Arlington Stamping (134 employees, TCR 9.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 145 employees and a TCR of 4.5 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 05001,0001,500 024681012 Average employees Total Case Rate LW Engineering Plant 11- Arlington Stamping
LW Engineering Plant 11- Arlington Stamping (134 employees, TCR 9.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 145 employees and a TCR of 4.5

LW Engineering Plant 11- Arlington Stamping has fewer employees than the Stamping metal motor vehicle body parts median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.5. 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
2017 8.8 5.1 12 0 0
2016 10.1 4.7 11 4 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

336370 · TX · Grand Prairie

510 Stamping metal motor vehicle body parts employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 38,394 rated employers in Texas with headcount on file · 405 employers in Grand Prairie, 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 Flex-N-Gate Urbana 9.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR SODECIA Roseville 9.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Maumee Assembly and Stamping 9.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Schaller Corporation Plant 2 9.3 TCR
STATE-SIZE 2362/1956-Lubbock, TX-Mfg (Monsanto Co.) 134 FTE
STATE-SIZE Bluebonnet Electric Cooperative, Inc. - Giddings Campus 134 FTE
STATE-SIZE 111479-CHENIERE CC 134 FTE
STATE-SIZE Tripoint Construction Services Incorporated 134 FTE
CITY-NEAR Lockheed Martin Corporation Grand Prairie Campus (1435) 3,544 FTE
CITY-NEAR Poly-America, L.P. 2,377 FTE
CITY-NEAR Poly America 2,318 FTE
CITY-NEAR Inmar - 4355 Grand Prairie, TX 1,200 FTE
NAT-TCR 0082 - Montgomery, Al 9.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Huntingburg (Inhun) 9.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Penske : 5064-00 BMW-DCM/Easton, PA 9.4 TCR
NAT-TCR #613 Aberdeen Shoprite 9.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE Stop & Shop 100527 134 FTE
NAT-SIZE Giant 2376 134 FTE
NAT-SIZE Cranial Technologies Corporate & Manufacturing 134 FTE
NAT-SIZE La Crosse (Wilac) 134 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: 2017, 2016. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.