Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, cold-drawn stainless steel, made from purchased steel · New Jersey

Prysmian Downhole Technology - NJ

Bridgewater, NJ · ~79 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
3.0
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Prysmian Downhole Technology - NJ runs at 90% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, cold-drawn stainless steel, made from purchased steel workplace, earning a grade C.

Prysmian Downhole Technology - NJ: 3.0 TCR = 90% of Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, cold-drawn stainless steel, made from purchased steel BLS 3.3 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Prysmian Downhole Technology - NJ safety composite

Prysmian Downhole Technology - NJ scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 66% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 36%), 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

52/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 2.96 per 100 workers

Safer than 66% of industry peers

DART rate
D 2.8 per 100 workers

Safer than 36% 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

Prysmian Downhole Technology - NJ: 2.2 → 3.7 TCR

Peak year 2018 @ 3.7 TCR · DART/TCR 0.95× in 2018

Prysmian Downhole Technology - NJ's TCR rose 1.5 from 2.2 in 2017 to 3.7 in 2018. In 2018, DART was 0.95× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 331210 · Bridgewater, NJ AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade C · TCR 3.0 · 90% of ind

  • DART 2.8 DART
  • RANK #2/6
  • PHOTO Northwest Pipe Compa…
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 6 inj
  • SIZE ~79 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Northwest Pipe Company - Portland (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Prysmian Downhole Technology - NJ in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Prysmian Downhole Technology - NJ averages 3.0 TCR (90% of the Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, cold-drawn stainless steel, made from purchased steel BLS benchmark).

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

Prysmian Downhole Technology - NJ TCR series: 2017=2.2 · 2018=3.7 · BLS 3.3

Where Prysmian Downhole Technology - NJ falls in its industry

329 Tubing, mechanical and hypoder establishments

Safer than 66% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.3.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to New Jersey alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #2 safest of 6 Tubing, mechanical and hypoder employers in New Jersey.

Prysmian Downhole Technology - NJ (79 employees, TCR 3.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 99 employees and a TCR of 4.3 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 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Prysmian Downhole Technology - NJ
Prysmian Downhole Technology - NJ (79 employees, TCR 3.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 99 employees and a TCR of 4.3

Prysmian Downhole Technology - NJ has fewer employees than the Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.3. 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
2018 3.7 2.8 4 0 0
2017 2.2 1.1 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

331210 · NJ · Bridgewater

329 Tubing, mechanical and hypodermic sizes, cold-drawn stainless steel, made from purchased steel employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 11,201 rated employers in New Jersey with headcount on file · 101 employers in Bridgewater, NJ · 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 Northwest Pipe Company - Portland 2.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Plymouth Tube Company- Eupora 3.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Ascent Tubular Products NC 2.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Skyline Steel 2.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE Ivy Acres - NJ 79 FTE
STATE-SIZE North Jersey Warehouse 79 FTE
STATE-SIZE DeSesa Engineering Company, Inc 79 FTE
STATE-SIZE Headquarters 79 FTE
CITY-NEAR Sanofi Bridgewater Office 3,173 FTE
CITY-NEAR Sanofi Sales 2,300 FTE
CITY-NEAR Sanofi US Services Inc. 2,233 FTE
CITY-NEAR Bridgewater - Bausch Health 1,569 FTE
NAT-TCR Microtyping Systems 3.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Murfreeesboro MUR 3.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Kearney - 30 3.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Edge Sports & Entertainment 3.0 TCR
NAT-SIZE Shopko Store #130 (River Falls, WI) 79 FTE
NAT-SIZE Shopko Store #17 (St Cloud, MN (West)) 79 FTE
NAT-SIZE Shopko Store #177 (Green Bay, WI (Suamico)) 79 FTE
NAT-SIZE RCX North Carolina 79 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: 2018, 2017. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.