Igniters, ammunition tracer (i.e., more than 30 mm., more than 1.18 inch), manufacturing · Pennsylvania

Nammo Pocal Inc. Moscow

Covington Twp., PA · ~48 workers · 5 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
2.7
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Nammo Pocal Inc. Moscow runs at 82% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Igniters, ammunition tracer (i.e., more than 30 mm., more than 1.18 inch), manufacturing workplace, earning a grade C.

Nammo Pocal Inc. Moscow: 2.7 TCR = 82% of Igniters, ammunition tracer (i.e., more than 30 mm., more than 1.18 inch), manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 5y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Nammo Pocal Inc. Moscow safety composite

Nammo Pocal Inc. Moscow scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 82% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 31%), 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

54/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 2.72 per 100 workers

Safer than 31% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 82% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 53% 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

−2.4

2016→2021

Nammo Pocal Inc. Moscow injury rate improved

Nammo Pocal Inc. Moscow's TCR fell 2.4 from 2.4 in 2016 to 0.0 in 2021. Peak filing year was 2017 at 9.6 TCR. In 2021, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=2.4 · 2017=9.6 · 2018=0.0 · 2020=1.6 · 2021=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 332993 · Covington Twp., PA AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade C · TCR 2.7 · 82% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #4/6
  • PHOTO General Dynamics OTS…
  • BOOK 5y book
  • INJ 6 inj
  • SIZE ~48 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: General Dynamics OTS Garland (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Nammo Pocal Inc. Moscow in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Nammo Pocal Inc. Moscow averages 2.7 TCR (82% of the Igniters, ammunition tracer (i.e., more than 30 mm., more than 1.18 inch), manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Nammo Pocal Inc. Moscow TCR series: 2016=2.4 · 2017=9.6 · 2018=0 · 2020=1.6 · 2021=0 · BLS 3.3

Where Nammo Pocal Inc. Moscow falls in its industry

36 Igniters, ammunition tracer (i establishments

Safer than 31% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.7.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Pennsylvania alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #4 safest of 6 Igniters, ammunition tracer (i employers in Pennsylvania.

Nammo Pocal Inc. Moscow (48 employees, TCR 2.7) among 26 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 188 employees and a TCR of 1.7 2×2 strategic matrix plotting 27 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 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate Nammo Pocal Inc. Moscow
Nammo Pocal Inc. Moscow (48 employees, TCR 2.7) among 26 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 188 employees and a TCR of 1.7

Nammo Pocal Inc. Moscow has fewer employees than the Igniters, ammunition tracer (i.e., more median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.7. 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
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 1.6 0.0 1 0 0
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2017 9.6 2.4 4 0 0
2016 2.4 0.0 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

332993 · PA · Covington Twp.

36 Igniters, ammunition tracer (i.e., more than 30 mm., more than 1.18 inch), manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,692 rated employers in Pennsylvania with headcount on file · 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 General Dynamics OTS Garland 2.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Combined Systems Inc 2.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR General Dynamics - OTS Garland TX 2.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Nammo Defense Systems 3.1 TCR
STATE-SIZE Sylvan America, Inc. 48 FTE
STATE-SIZE Esbenshade North 48 FTE
STATE-SIZE Rolling Rock Building Stone, Inc. 48 FTE
STATE-SIZE Central Stores Building 48 FTE
CITY-NEAR Nammo Pocal Inc. Plant 2 28 FTE
NAT-TCR Cumberland Plastic Systems LLC 2.7 TCR
NAT-TCR International Paper Olympia Container 2.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Community Mental Health Lenox Avenue 2.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Lindal North America 2.7 TCR
NAT-SIZE Amos Construction Inc. 48 FTE
NAT-SIZE CCI Manufacturing 48 FTE
NAT-SIZE Wilson Care and Rehabilitation Center 48 FTE
NAT-SIZE Downs Care and Rehab 48 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: 2021, 2020, 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.