Guided missile and space vehicle parts (except engines) manufacturing · Texas

Oceaneering Space Systems

Houston, TX · ~193 workers · 5 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
0.3
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Oceaneering Space Systems runs at 8% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Guided missile and space vehicle parts (except engines) manufacturing workplace, earning a grade A.

Oceaneering Space Systems: 0.3 TCR = 8% of Guided missile and space vehicle parts (except engines) manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 5y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Oceaneering Space Systems safety composite

Oceaneering Space Systems scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 88% 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).

B

75/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 0.28 per 100 workers

Safer than 88% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 79% 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

−0.5

2016→2021

Oceaneering Space Systems injury rate improved

Oceaneering Space Systems's TCR fell 0.5 from 0.5 in 2016 to 0.0 in 2021. Peak filing year was 2019 at 0.5 TCR. In 2021, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=0.5 · 2017=0.5 · 2018=0.0 · 2019=0.5 · 2021=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 336419 · Houston, TX AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 0.3 · 8% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #2/4
  • PHOTO Mission Systems Orch…
  • BOOK 5y book
  • INJ 3 inj
  • SIZE ~193 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Mission Systems Orchard Park (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Oceaneering Space Systems in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Oceaneering Space Systems averages 0.3 TCR (8% of the Guided missile and space vehicle parts (except engines) manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Oceaneering Space Systems TCR series: 2016=0.5 · 2017=0.5 · 2018=0 · 2019=0.5 · 2021=0 · BLS 3.3

Where Oceaneering Space Systems falls in its industry

41 Guided missile and space vehic establishments

Safer than 88% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.1.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Texas alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #2 safest of 4 Guided missile and space vehic employers in Texas.

Oceaneering Space Systems (193 employees, TCR 0.3) among 20 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 193 employees and a TCR of 1.1 2×2 strategic matrix plotting 21 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 01,0002,0003,0004,0005,000 0246 Average employees Total Case Rate Oceaneering Space Systems
Oceaneering Space Systems (193 employees, TCR 0.3) among 20 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 193 employees and a TCR of 1.1

Oceaneering Space Systems has more employees than the Guided missile and space vehicle parts ( median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.1. 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
2019 0.5 0.0 1 0 0
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2017 0.5 0.0 1 0 0
2016 0.5 0.0 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

336419 · TX · Houston

41 Guided missile and space vehicle parts (except engines) manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 38,394 rated employers in Texas with headcount on file · 5,116 employers in Houston, 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 Mission Systems Orchard Park 0.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Aerospace : Dublin 0.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Ducommun - Appleton 0.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR HS Management Services, Inc. 0.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE 31041 193 FTE
STATE-SIZE Lone Star Paving Company - Austin 193 FTE
STATE-SIZE Tellepsen Industrial 193 FTE
STATE-SIZE Russell Marine LLC 193 FTE
CITY-NEAR IAH IAH 11,560 FTE
CITY-NEAR IAH - Airport United Airlines Offices 10,239 FTE
CITY-NEAR 6925-IAH 9,442 FTE
CITY-NEAR Houston Methodist Hospital Texas Medical Center 8,873 FTE
NAT-TCR Jaynes Corporation - Albuquerque, NM 0.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Campbell Wrapper Corporation 0.3 TCR
NAT-TCR 4769-5001-CORPORATE 0.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Epoxy : Argo 0.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE USCS- Covington, TN 193 FTE
NAT-SIZE C.W. Hendrix Farms, Inc. 193 FTE
NAT-SIZE CR-CR-CHARLOTTE 193 FTE
NAT-SIZE The Orchard 193 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, 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.