Railway construction (e.g., interlocker, roadbed, signal, track) · Texas

Modern Railway Systems - Austin PTC

Austin, TX · ~22 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
2.5
Avg TCR
2.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Modern Railway Systems - Austin PTC runs at 88% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Railway construction (e.g., interlocker, roadbed, signal, track) workplace, earning a grade C.

Modern Railway Systems - Austin PTC: 2.5 TCR = 88% of Railway construction (e.g., interlocker, roadbed, signal, track) BLS 2.8 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Modern Railway Systems - Austin PTC safety composite

Modern Railway Systems - Austin PTC scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 73% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 32%), 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).

D

51/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 2.46 per 100 workers

Safer than 32% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 73% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 52% 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

Modern Railway Systems - Austin PTC: 0.0 → 4.9 TCR

Peak year 2019 @ 4.9 TCR · DART/TCR 0× in 2019

Modern Railway Systems - Austin PTC's TCR rose 4.9 from 0.0 in 2018 to 4.9 in 2019. In 2019, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 237990 · Austin, TX AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade C · TCR 2.5 · 88% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #105/114
  • PHOTO DMZ Builders
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 1 inj
  • SIZE ~22 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: DMZ Builders (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Modern Railway Systems - Austin PTC in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Modern Railway Systems - Austin PTC averages 2.5 TCR (88% of the Railway construction (e.g., interlocker, roadbed, signal, track) BLS benchmark).

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

Modern Railway Systems - Austin PTC TCR series: 2018=0 · 2019=4.9 · BLS 2.8

Where Modern Railway Systems - Austin PTC falls in its industry

932 Railway construction (e.g., in establishments

Safer than 32% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Texas alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #105 safest of 114 Railway construction (e.g., in employers in Texas.

Modern Railway Systems - Austin PTC (22 employees, TCR 2.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 69 employees and a TCR of 1.5 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 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Modern Railway Systems - Austin PTC
Modern Railway Systems - Austin PTC (22 employees, TCR 2.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 69 employees and a TCR of 1.5

Modern Railway Systems - Austin PTC has fewer employees than the Railway construction (e.g., interlocker, median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.5. 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
2019 4.9 0.0 1 0 0
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

237990 · TX · Austin

932 Railway construction (e.g., interlocker, roadbed, signal, track) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 38,394 rated employers in Texas with headcount on file · 1,645 employers in Austin, 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 DMZ Builders 2.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR LA Outfall Tunnel 2.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR MASS BAY TRANSPORTATION AUTHOR 2.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Stacy and Witbeck/Atkinson, A Joint Venture - E335 2.5 TCR
STATE-SIZE Matador Ranch 22 FTE
STATE-SIZE Wheeler Land & Livestock, LLC 22 FTE
STATE-SIZE Diamond B Feedyard, LLC 22 FTE
STATE-SIZE Luckey Custom Feedlot, Inc. 22 FTE
CITY-NEAR Ensign Services 11,325 FTE
CITY-NEAR NA-US-TX-Austin-Giga Texas 8,621 FTE
CITY-NEAR 6017-Loc: CORP LOC - US Austin 6,911 FTE
CITY-NEAR 6017-CORP LOC - USA UNITED STATES - AST 5,272 FTE
NAT-TCR Gen III 2.5 TCR
NAT-TCR HB Rentals, L.C. El Reno, OK 2.5 TCR
NAT-TCR TMS Petersburg 2.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Veritiv Operating Company - KY044 2.5 TCR
NAT-SIZE Modern Railway Systems - Charlotte LYNX 22 FTE
NAT-SIZE Quality Specialties, Inc. - Virginia Operations 22 FTE
NAT-SIZE Vo Wv Huntington-Workshop 22 FTE
NAT-SIZE 300A 22 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: 2019, 2018. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.