Shot peening metal and metal products for the trade · Georgia

Peening Technologies of Georgia, Inc.

Austell, GA · ~28 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
8.9
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Peening Technologies of Georgia, Inc. runs at 269% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Shot peening metal and metal products for the trade workplace, earning a grade F.

Peening Technologies of Georgia, Inc.: 8.9 TCR = 269% of Shot peening metal and metal products for the trade BLS 3.3 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Peening Technologies of Georgia, Inc. safety composite

Peening Technologies of Georgia, Inc. scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 13%), 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).

F

28/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 8.87 per 100 workers

Safer than 13% of industry peers

DART rate
F 3.76 per 100 workers

Safer than 30% 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%).

Rising injury rate

Peening Technologies of Georgia, Inc.: 6.5 → 11.3 TCR

Peak year 2022 @ 11.3 TCR · DART/TCR 0.42× in 2022

Peening Technologies of Georgia, Inc.'s TCR rose 4.8 from 6.5 in 2020 to 11.3 in 2022. In 2022, DART was 0.42× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 332811 · Austell, GA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 8.9 · 269% of ind

  • DART 3.8 DART
  • RANK #3/4
  • PHOTO Bodycote Thermal Pro…
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 5 inj
  • SIZE ~28 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Bodycote Thermal Processing Inc Covington Division (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Peening Technologies of Georgia, Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Peening Technologies of Georgia, Inc. averages 8.9 TCR (269% of the Shot peening metal and metal products for the trade BLS benchmark).

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

Peening Technologies of Georgia, Inc. TCR series: 2020=6.5 · 2022=11.3 · BLS 3.3

Where Peening Technologies of Georgia, Inc. falls in its industry

248 Shot peening metal and metal p establishments

Safer than 13% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Georgia alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #3 safest of 4 Shot peening metal and metal p employers in Georgia.

Peening Technologies of Georgia, Inc. (28 employees, TCR 8.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 38 employees and a TCR of 4.2 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 05001,0001,5002,000 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Peening Technologies of Georgia, Inc.
Peening Technologies of Georgia, Inc. (28 employees, TCR 8.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 38 employees and a TCR of 4.2

Peening Technologies of Georgia, Inc. has fewer employees than the Shot peening metal and metal products fo median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.2. 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
2022 11.3 3.8 3 0 0
2020 6.5 0.0 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

332811 · GA · Austell

248 Shot peening metal and metal products for the trade employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 14,941 rated employers in Georgia with headcount on file · 113 employers in Austell, GA · 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 Bodycote Thermal Processing Inc Covington Division 8.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR HTI 8.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Technical Metal Finishing 9.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Amac Enterprises, Inc. 9.1 TCR
STATE-SIZE Unlimited Contract Services Blackshear AEP 28 FTE
STATE-SIZE Unlimited Contract Services - Waelder, TX 28 FTE
STATE-SIZE Hatchery 28 FTE
STATE-SIZE Georgia Forest Products, Inc 28 FTE
CITY-NEAR WellStar Cobb Hospital 2,856 FTE
CITY-NEAR Six Flags Over Georgia 1,044 FTE
CITY-NEAR ATLANTA OPERA WAREHOUSE 863 FTE
CITY-NEAR Plateau Excavation, Inc 762 FTE
NAT-TCR Tartan Terminals 8.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Christensen Mills, Inc. 8.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Atria Southpoint Walk 8.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Draper Place 8.9 TCR
NAT-SIZE Vineyard Place 28 FTE
NAT-SIZE Vista De La Montana 28 FTE
NAT-SIZE Treat All Metals 28 FTE
NAT-SIZE Enterprise Rent-A-Car - 51CT 28 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: 2022, 2020. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.