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

Maruichi American Corporation

Santa Fe Springs, CA · ~73 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
4.5
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Maruichi American Corporation runs at 137% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Tube (e.g., heavy riveted, lock joint, seamless, welded) made from purchased iron or steel workplace, earning a grade D.

Maruichi American Corporation: 4.5 TCR = 137% of Tube (e.g., heavy riveted, lock joint, seamless, welded) made from purchased iron or steel BLS 3.3 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Maruichi American Corporation safety composite

Maruichi American Corporation scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 86% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 48%), 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).

C

62/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 4.53 per 100 workers

Safer than 48% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 86% 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%).

Maruichi American Corporation held a steady TCR band

Maruichi American Corporation's TCR held near 0.2 from 4.4 in 2017 to 4.6 in 2023. In 2023, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=4.4 · 2023=4.6

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 331210 · Santa Fe Springs, CA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 4.5 · 137% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #6/11
  • PHOTO Tube Facility
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 4 inj
  • SIZE ~73 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Tube Facility (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Maruichi American Corporation in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Maruichi American Corporation averages 4.5 TCR (137% of the Tube (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

Maruichi American Corporation TCR series: 2017=4.4 · 2023=4.6 · BLS 3.3

Where Maruichi American Corporation falls in its industry

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

Safer than 48% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.3.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #6 safest of 11 Tube (e.g., heavy riveted, loc employers in California.

Maruichi American Corporation (73 employees, TCR 4.5) 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 Maruichi American Corporation
Maruichi American Corporation (73 employees, TCR 4.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 99 employees and a TCR of 4.3

Maruichi American Corporation has fewer employees than the Tube (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
2023 4.6 0.0 1 2 0
2017 4.4 4.4 3 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

331210 · CA · Santa Fe Springs

329 Tube (e.g., heavy riveted, lock joint, seamless, welded) made from purchased iron or steel employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 310 employers in Santa Fe Springs, 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 Tube Facility 4.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR PA146 SUPERIOR TUBE COMPANY, INC. 4.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Sanoh-Archbold 4.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Tulsa-Fab 4.5 TCR
STATE-SIZE CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATION 73 FTE
STATE-SIZE New Columbia 73 FTE
STATE-SIZE Main Location 73 FTE
STATE-SIZE P-R Farms Inc/Palomate Inc 73 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Department of Transportation Facility 423 3,217 FTE
CITY-NEAR CSI Electrical Contractors, Inc. 1,217 FTE
CITY-NEAR CSI 1,179 FTE
CITY-NEAR Vans Distribution Center - SFS 757 FTE
NAT-TCR Nupress Of Miami Inc. 4.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Dublin Assisted Living and Memory Support 4.5 TCR
NAT-TCR MT3 Corporation 4.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Jackson Purchase Medical Center 4.5 TCR
NAT-SIZE Sun Glo of Idaho, Inc. 73 FTE
NAT-SIZE Hill's Winder 73 FTE
NAT-SIZE Field Work 73 FTE
NAT-SIZE P&M Brick LLC. 73 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, 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.