Toners, electrostatic and photographic, manufacturing · Georgia

Ricoh Electronics. Inc. Toner

Lawrenceville, GA · ~305 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
2.6
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Ricoh Electronics. Inc. Toner runs at 80% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Toners, electrostatic and photographic, manufacturing workplace, earning a grade B.

Ricoh Electronics. Inc. Toner: 2.6 TCR = 80% of Toners, electrostatic and photographic, manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Ricoh Electronics. Inc. Toner safety composite

Ricoh Electronics. Inc. Toner scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 28%), 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

37/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 2.63 per 100 workers

Safer than 28% of industry peers

DART rate
D 1.24 per 100 workers

Safer than 39% 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

−0.6

2021→2024

Ricoh Electronics. Inc. Toner injury rate improved

Ricoh Electronics. Inc. Toner's TCR fell 0.6 from 1.8 in 2021 to 1.2 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2023 at 3.8 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.47× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2021=1.8 · 2022=3.6 · 2023=3.8 · 2024=1.2

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 325992 · Lawrenceville, GA AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade B · TCR 2.6 · 80% of ind

  • DART 1.2 DART
  • RANK #4/5
  • PHOTO Tacoma Mill
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 38 inj
  • SIZE ~305 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Tacoma Mill (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Ricoh Electronics. Inc. Toner in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Ricoh Electronics. Inc. Toner averages 2.6 TCR (80% of the Toners, electrostatic and photographic, manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Ricoh Electronics. Inc. Toner TCR series: 2021=1.8 · 2022=3.6 · 2023=3.8 · 2024=1.2 · BLS 3.3

Where Ricoh Electronics. Inc. Toner falls in its industry

68 Toners, electrostatic and phot establishments

Safer than 28% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Georgia alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #4 safest of 5 Toners, electrostatic and phot employers in Georgia.

Ricoh Electronics. Inc. Toner (305 employees, TCR 2.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 138 employees and a TCR of 1.9 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 0200400600 0246 Average employees Total Case Rate Ricoh Electronics. Inc. Toner
Ricoh Electronics. Inc. Toner (305 employees, TCR 2.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 138 employees and a TCR of 1.9

Ricoh Electronics. Inc. Toner has more employees than the Toners, electrostatic and photographic, median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.9. 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 1.2 1.2 6 0 0
2023 3.8 3.8 16 0 0
2022 3.6 3.6 11 0 0
2021 1.8 1.8 5 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

325992 · GA · Lawrenceville

68 Toners, electrostatic and photographic, manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 14,941 rated employers in Georgia with headcount on file · 253 employers in Lawrenceville, 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 Tacoma Mill 2.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Eastman Business Park 2.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Kayaku Advanced Materials, Inc 2.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Eastman Kodak Company- Eastman Business Park 2.5 TCR
STATE-SIZE Overhead Door Company of Atlanta 305 FTE
STATE-SIZE Rogers Mechanical Contractors, LLC 305 FTE
STATE-SIZE VALDOSTA GA 305 FTE
STATE-SIZE Corporate 305 FTE
CITY-NEAR Northside Hospital Gwinnett 5,762 FTE
CITY-NEAR Gwinnett Medical Center Lawrenceville 3,363 FTE
CITY-NEAR Gwinnett Medical Center - Lawrenceville 3,250 FTE
CITY-NEAR W.A. Kendall and Co., LLC 1,075 FTE
NAT-TCR Rio Bravo Rocklin 2.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Kwik Trip Bread and Bun Bakery 979 2.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Team Industries, Inc. 2.6 TCR
NAT-TCR GR-Oliver Healthcare Packaging 2.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Rochester Mustard St 305 FTE
NAT-SIZE Univ of Kentucky Hospital 305 FTE
NAT-SIZE 101 -West Los Angeles Animal Hospital 305 FTE
NAT-SIZE 1770 - Cityview 305 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.