Spring waters, purifying and bottling · Louisiana

Music Mountain Water, Inc

Shreveport, LA · ~80 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
2.3
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Music Mountain Water, Inc runs at 70% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Spring waters, purifying and bottling workplace, earning a grade B.

Music Mountain Water, Inc: 2.3 TCR = 70% of Spring waters, purifying and bottling BLS 3.3 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Music Mountain Water, Inc safety composite

Music Mountain Water, Inc scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 83% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 50%), 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

64/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 2.3 per 100 workers

Safer than 56% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 83% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 50% 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→2024

Music Mountain Water, Inc injury rate improved

Music Mountain Water, Inc's TCR fell 1.3 from 1.3 in 2016 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2021 at 6.3 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=1.3 · 2017=1.4 · 2018=0.0 · 2019=4.0 · 2021=6.3 · 2022=4.5 · 2023=1.1 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 312112 · Shreveport, LA AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade B · TCR 2.3 · 70% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #1/4
  • PHOTO Niagara Bottling, LL…
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 15 inj
  • SIZE ~80 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Niagara Bottling, LLC - Columbus (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Music Mountain Water, Inc in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Music Mountain Water, Inc averages 2.3 TCR (70% of the Spring waters, purifying and bottling BLS benchmark).

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

Music Mountain Water, Inc TCR series: 2016=1.3 · 2017=1.4 · 2018=0 · 2019=4 · 2021=6.3 · 2022=4.5 · 2023=1.1 · 2024=0 · BLS 3.3

Where Music Mountain Water, Inc falls in its industry

192 Spring waters, purifying and b establishments

Safer than 56% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Louisiana alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #1 safest of 4 Spring waters, purifying and b employers in Louisiana.

Music Mountain Water, Inc (80 employees, TCR 2.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 98 employees and a TCR of 2.6 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 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Music Mountain Water, Inc
Music Mountain Water, Inc (80 employees, TCR 2.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 98 employees and a TCR of 2.6

Music Mountain Water, Inc has fewer employees than the Spring waters, purifying and bottling median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.6. 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 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2023 1.1 0.0 1 0 0
2022 4.5 2.2 4 0 0
2021 6.3 1.3 5 0 0
2019 4.0 0.0 3 0 0
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2017 1.4 1.4 1 0 0
2016 1.3 1.3 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

312112 · LA · Shreveport

192 Spring waters, purifying and bottling employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 6,723 rated employers in Louisiana with headcount on file · 403 employers in Shreveport, LA · 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 Niagara Bottling, LLC - Columbus 2.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Newport Springs Bottling 2.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Poland Spring 2.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Poland Spring-Kingfield 2.3 TCR
STATE-SIZE Nelson Plant 80 FTE
STATE-SIZE McInnis Brothers Construction Inc 80 FTE
STATE-SIZE US FUSION and Specialty Construction 80 FTE
STATE-SIZE Tri-Parish Contractors, Inc. 80 FTE
CITY-NEAR Willis-Knighton Medical Center 3,163 FTE
CITY-NEAR UNIVERSITY HEALTH SHEREVPORT, LLC d/b/a OCHSNER LSU HEALTH SHREVEPORT 2,771 FTE
CITY-NEAR University Health Shreveport 2,424 FTE
CITY-NEAR Willis-Knighton Pierremont Health Center 1,567 FTE
NAT-TCR McKay Press 2.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Dot Shop 2.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Linden Warehouse & Distribution 2.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Cottage Grove Lumber 2.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE Crown Lift Trucks New York 80 FTE
NAT-SIZE Andersen Logistics-Fall River 80 FTE
NAT-SIZE Interstate Roofing and Waterproofing, Inc. 80 FTE
NAT-SIZE Orange County Printing 80 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, 2019, 2018, 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.