Envelopes (i.e., mailing, stationery) made from any material · Texas

Plant 06 - FW

Fort Worth, TX · ~84 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
3.7
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Plant 06 - FW runs at 112% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Envelopes (i.e., mailing, stationery) made from any material workplace, earning a grade C.

Plant 06 - FW: 3.7 TCR = 112% of Envelopes (i.e., mailing, stationery) made from any material BLS 3.3 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Plant 06 - FW safety composite

Plant 06 - FW scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 55% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 35%), 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

46/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 3.68 per 100 workers

Safer than 35% of industry peers

DART rate
C 1.23 per 100 workers

Safer than 55% 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

−4.6

2018→2024

Plant 06 - FW injury rate improved

Plant 06 - FW's TCR fell 4.6 from 7.0 in 2018 to 2.5 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2018 at 7.0 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.33× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2018=7.0 · 2019=7.0 · 2020=2.3 · 2021=4.5 · 2022=1.2 · 2023=1.2 · 2024=2.5

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 322230 · Fort Worth, TX ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade C · TCR 3.7 · 112% of ind

  • DART 1.2 DART
  • RANK #5/6
  • PHOTO Louisiana Associatio…
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 24 inj
  • SIZE ~84 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Louisiana Association for the Blind - Copy Paper Division (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Plant 06 - FW in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Plant 06 - FW averages 3.7 TCR (112% of the Envelopes (i.e., mailing, stationery) made from any material BLS benchmark).

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

Plant 06 - FW TCR series: 2018=7 · 2019=7 · 2020=2.3 · 2021=4.5 · 2022=1.2 · 2023=1.2 · 2024=2.5 · BLS 3.3

Where Plant 06 - FW falls in its industry

122 Envelopes (i.e., mailing, stat establishments

Safer than 35% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Texas alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #5 safest of 6 Envelopes (i.e., mailing, stat employers in Texas.

Plant 06 - FW (84 employees, TCR 3.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 99 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 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Plant 06 - FW
Plant 06 - FW (84 employees, TCR 3.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 99 employees and a TCR of 2.6

Plant 06 - FW has fewer employees than the Envelopes (i.e., mailing, stationery) ma median and a higher 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 2.5 1.2 2 0 0
2023 1.2 1.2 1 0 0
2022 1.2 0.0 1 0 0
2021 4.5 3.4 4 0 0
2020 2.3 1.1 2 0 0
2019 7.0 6.0 7 0 0
2018 7.0 6.0 7 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

322230 · TX · Fort Worth

122 Envelopes (i.e., mailing, stationery) made from any material employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 38,394 rated employers in Texas with headcount on file · 1,346 employers in Fort Worth, 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 Louisiana Association for the Blind - Copy Paper Division 3.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR NATIONAL CHECKING CO. - LOTHENBACH 3.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Iconex, LLC Liverpool 3.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Forest Envelope 3.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE RGJC 84 FTE
STATE-SIZE Burnett Ranches 84 FTE
STATE-SIZE USA Feedyard LP 84 FTE
STATE-SIZE FARMERS BRANCH OFFICE 84 FTE
CITY-NEAR Lockheed Martin Corporation US TX Fort Worth Lockheed Blvd (1093) 16,547 FTE
CITY-NEAR Lockheed Martin Corporation Fort Worth Campus (1093) 13,805 FTE
CITY-NEAR Cook Children's Medical Center 4,998 FTE
CITY-NEAR TX- Fort Worth 4,667 FTE
NAT-TCR AAON, Inc. 3.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Protective Coatings 3.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Susquehanna Physician Services 3.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Home Care Specialists Inc Concord 3.7 TCR
NAT-SIZE East Coast Electric, Inc. 84 FTE
NAT-SIZE Sodexo at Bethel University 84 FTE
NAT-SIZE Forest Distribution Center 84 FTE
NAT-SIZE Sodexo at Queen Annes County School 84 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, 2020, 2019, 2018. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.