Gas tanks assembled, automotive, truck, and bus, manufacturing · South Carolina

Magna Energy Storage Systems USA

Spartanburg, SC · ~77 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
12.4
Avg TCR
5.4
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Magna Energy Storage Systems USA runs at 230% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Gas tanks assembled, automotive, truck, and bus, manufacturing workplace, earning a grade F.

Magna Energy Storage Systems USA: 12.4 TCR = 230% of Gas tanks assembled, automotive, truck, and bus, manufacturing BLS 5.4 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Magna Energy Storage Systems USA safety composite

Magna Energy Storage Systems USA scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 2%), 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 12.44 per 100 workers

Safer than 2% of industry peers

DART rate
F 11.11 per 100 workers

Safer than 2% 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%).

Magna Energy Storage Systems USA held a steady TCR band

Magna Energy Storage Systems USA's TCR held near 0.1 from 12.4 in 2022 to 12.5 in 2023. In 2023, DART was 0.89× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2022=12.4 · 2023=12.5

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 336390 · Spartanburg, SC ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 12.4 · 230% of ind

  • DART 11.1 DART
  • RANK #30/30
  • PHOTO Premier Manufacturin…
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 17 inj
  • SIZE ~77 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Premier Manufacturing Company (0.1 TCR gap)

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

Magna Energy Storage Systems USA in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Magna Energy Storage Systems USA averages 12.4 TCR (230% of the Gas tanks assembled, automotive, truck, and bus, manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Magna Energy Storage Systems USA TCR series: 2022=12.4 · 2023=12.5 · BLS 5.4

Where Magna Energy Storage Systems USA falls in its industry

772 Gas tanks assembled, automotiv establishments

Safer than 2% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to South Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #30 safest of 30 Gas tanks assembled, automotiv employers in South Carolina.

Magna Energy Storage Systems USA (77 employees, TCR 12.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 154 employees and a TCR of 3.2 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 Magna Energy Storage Systems USA
Magna Energy Storage Systems USA (77 employees, TCR 12.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 154 employees and a TCR of 3.2

Magna Energy Storage Systems USA has fewer employees than the Gas tanks assembled, automotive, truck, median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.2. 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
2023 12.5 11.1 9 0 0
2022 12.4 6.2 8 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

336390 · SC · Spartanburg

772 Gas tanks assembled, automotive, truck, and bus, manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 7,610 rated employers in South Carolina with headcount on file · 294 employers in Spartanburg, SC · 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 Premier Manufacturing Company 12.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Nippon Thermostat of America Corp. 12.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Nickson 12.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Horizon Global Americas, Edgerton DC 12.0 TCR
STATE-SIZE Laurens CPW 77 FTE
STATE-SIZE C.R. Hipp Construction, Inc. 77 FTE
STATE-SIZE US175: Charleston, SC 210 - SG 77 FTE
STATE-SIZE Covercraft Industries - Landrum 77 FTE
CITY-NEAR SPARTANBURG FOOD 8,650 FTE
CITY-NEAR Spartanburg Medical Center 5,386 FTE
CITY-NEAR Spartanburg County 1,633 FTE
CITY-NEAR Spartanburg County Government 1,561 FTE
NAT-TCR Loffredo Fresh Foods - CB 12.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Bowers Hill Yard 12.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Lincoln Landscaping Company 12.4 TCR
NAT-TCR US Foods Allentown 12.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE Public Works - Parks 77 FTE
NAT-SIZE Hendrick Professional Center 77 FTE
NAT-SIZE Milliken Hatch 77 FTE
NAT-SIZE RAL-HRP-RALEIGH 77 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: 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.