Fence installation (except electronic containment fencing for pets) · Tennessee

Rio Grande Fence Co. of Nashville

Nashville, TN · ~48 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.2
Avg TCR
2.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Rio Grande Fence Co. of Nashville runs at 44% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Fence installation (except electronic containment fencing for pets) workplace, earning a grade A.

Rio Grande Fence Co. of Nashville: 1.2 TCR = 44% of Fence installation (except electronic containment fencing for pets) BLS 2.8 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Rio Grande Fence Co. of Nashville safety composite

Rio Grande Fence Co. of Nashville scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 73% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 51%), 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).

C

64/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 1.22 per 100 workers

Safer than 64% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 73% 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

−2.4

2017→2020

Rio Grande Fence Co. of Nashville injury rate improved

Rio Grande Fence Co. of Nashville's TCR fell 2.4 from 2.4 in 2017 to 0.0 in 2020. Peak filing year was 2017 at 2.4 TCR. In 2020, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=2.4 · 2020=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 238990 · Nashville, TN AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade A · TCR 1.2 · 44% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #17/37
  • PHOTO Encore Pavement LLC
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 1 inj
  • SIZE ~48 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Encore Pavement LLC (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Rio Grande Fence Co. of Nashville in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Rio Grande Fence Co. of Nashville averages 1.2 TCR (44% of the Fence installation (except electronic containment fencing for pets) BLS benchmark).

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

Rio Grande Fence Co. of Nashville TCR series: 2017=2.4 · 2020=0 · BLS 2.8

Where Rio Grande Fence Co. of Nashville falls in its industry

1,634 Fence installation (except ele establishments

Safer than 64% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Tennessee alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #17 safest of 37 Fence installation (except ele employers in Tennessee.

Rio Grande Fence Co. of Nashville (48 employees, TCR 1.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 52 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 05001,0001,500 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate Rio Grande Fence Co. of Nashville
Rio Grande Fence Co. of Nashville (48 employees, TCR 1.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 52 employees and a TCR of 1.9

Rio Grande Fence Co. of Nashville has fewer employees than the Fence installation (except electronic co median and a lower 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
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2017 2.4 0.0 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

238990 · TN · Nashville

1,634 Fence installation (except electronic containment fencing for pets) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 10,743 rated employers in Tennessee with headcount on file · 1,187 employers in Nashville, TN · 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 Encore Pavement LLC 1.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Alexander Sealcoating & Striping, Inc 1.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Concrete Coring Co. DBA A&B Concrete Coring Co., Inc 1.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR F&S Aluma Systems - TAMPA 1.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE Bolivar Energy Authority 48 FTE
STATE-SIZE Electric Department 48 FTE
STATE-SIZE Jefferson Cocke County Utility District 48 FTE
STATE-SIZE Chattanooga Service Center 48 FTE
CITY-NEAR Parallon Enterprises, LLC 15,267 FTE
CITY-NEAR METROPOLITAN GOVT. OF NASHVILLE,& DAVIDSON COUNTY 10,278 FTE
CITY-NEAR METRO NASHVILLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS 9,049 FTE
CITY-NEAR TriStar Centennial Medical Center 3,106 FTE
NAT-TCR Minerva Tube Plant 1.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Michels Power- MN 1.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Roche Molecular Solutions (Warehouse) 1.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Phillips and Jordan, Inc./ Lower Bois D'Arc Dam Project 1.2 TCR
NAT-SIZE HI.HONOL.2 - Ricoh Usa, Inc. 48 FTE
NAT-SIZE GA.LAWRE.12 - Ricoh Usa, Inc. 48 FTE
NAT-SIZE Lafayette Elementary School 48 FTE
NAT-SIZE DSA Phototech 48 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: 2020, 2017. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.

Read our methodology - how this data is sourced, computed, and verified.

Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.