Engines, internal combustion (except aircraft, automotive), merchant wholesalers · Oregon

Peterson Power Eugene

Eugene, OR · ~43 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
4.7
Avg TCR
2.2
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Peterson Power Eugene runs at 214% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Engines, internal combustion (except aircraft, automotive), merchant wholesalers workplace, earning a grade F.

Peterson Power Eugene: 4.7 TCR = 214% of Engines, internal combustion (except aircraft, automotive), merchant wholesalers BLS 2.2 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Peterson Power Eugene safety composite

Peterson Power Eugene scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 75% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 21%), 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

47/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 4.7 per 100 workers

Safer than 21% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 75% 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%).

TCR Δ

−3.9

2021→2024

Peterson Power Eugene injury rate improved

Peterson Power Eugene's TCR fell 3.9 from 3.9 in 2021 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2022 at 14.9 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2021=3.9 · 2022=14.9 · 2023=0.0 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 423830 · Eugene, OR ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 4.7 · 214% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #13/15
  • PHOTO ToyotaLift NE - PHX
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 5 inj
  • SIZE ~43 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: ToyotaLift NE - PHX (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Peterson Power Eugene in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Peterson Power Eugene averages 4.7 TCR (214% of the Engines, internal combustion (except aircraft, automotive), merchant wholesalers BLS benchmark).

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

Peterson Power Eugene TCR series: 2021=3.9 · 2022=14.9 · 2023=0 · 2024=0 · BLS 2.2

Where Peterson Power Eugene falls in its industry

911 Engines, internal combustion ( establishments

Safer than 21% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Oregon alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #13 safest of 15 Engines, internal combustion ( employers in Oregon.

Peterson Power Eugene (43 employees, TCR 4.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 45 employees and a TCR of 2.5 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 0200400600800 02468 Average employees Total Case Rate Peterson Power Eugene
Peterson Power Eugene (43 employees, TCR 4.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 45 employees and a TCR of 2.5

Peterson Power Eugene has fewer employees than the Engines, internal combustion (except air median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.5. 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
2024 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 14.9 11.2 4 0 0
2021 3.9 3.9 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

423830 · OR · Eugene

911 Engines, internal combustion (except aircraft, automotive), merchant wholesalers employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 8,031 rated employers in Oregon with headcount on file · 466 employers in Eugene, OR · 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 ToyotaLift NE - PHX 4.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Alta Enterprises LLC-Ronkonkoma 4.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Gosiger Machine Tools, LLC, Plymouth, MI 4.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Methods Machine Tools, Inc - Illinois 4.7 TCR
STATE-SIZE Dahle Orchards LLC 43 FTE
STATE-SIZE Creekside Valley Farms LLC 43 FTE
STATE-SIZE Slegers, Inc 43 FTE
STATE-SIZE L&B Reforestation, INC. 43 FTE
CITY-NEAR MATT KNIGHT ARENA 863 FTE
CITY-NEAR Hult Center for the Performing Arts 861 FTE
CITY-NEAR PHMG PHOR Clinics 848 FTE
CITY-NEAR SHMC at University District 564 FTE
NAT-TCR Eastern Region WSDOT 4.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Roland Lucky 4.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Columbia Athletic Clubs - JBC 4.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Hoffman Bros., Inc. 4.7 TCR
NAT-SIZE Silver Angels- Montgomery 43 FTE
NAT-SIZE The Shelly Company - Northwest Division HMA 43 FTE
NAT-SIZE Melgar Mechanical Inc 43 FTE
NAT-SIZE 70250 Capstone - Albertsons Sp Lancaster Pa 43 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.