Employer · Texas

S04521 - Covel Gardens RDF

San Antonio, TX · ~41 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
0.5
Avg TCR
2.6
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

S04521 - Covel Gardens RDF runs at 20% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical industry workplace, earning a grade A.

S04521 - Covel Gardens RDF: 0.5 TCR = 20% of industry BLS 2.6 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

S04521 - Covel Gardens RDF safety composite

S04521 - Covel Gardens RDF scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 98% 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).

B

79/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
A 0.53 per 100 workers

Safer than 98% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 78% 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%).

S04521 - Covel Gardens RDF held a steady TCR band

S04521 - Covel Gardens RDF's TCR held near 0.0 from 0.0 in 2016 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2018 at 4.8 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=0.0 · 2017=0.0 · 2018=4.8 · 2019=0.0 · 2020=0.0 · 2021=0.0 · 2022=0.0 · 2023=0.0 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 562212 · San Antonio, TX AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade A · TCR 0.5 · 20% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #2/30
  • PHOTO S03043 - Azusa Landf…
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 0 inj
  • SIZE ~41 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: S03043 - Azusa Landfill (0.0 TCR gap)

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

S04521 - Covel Gardens RDF in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows S04521 - Covel Gardens RDF averages 0.5 TCR (20% of the industry BLS benchmark).

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

S04521 - Covel Gardens RDF TCR series: 2016=0 · 2017=0 · 2018=4.8 · 2019=0 · 2020=0 · 2021=0 · 2022=0 · 2023=0 · 2024=0 · BLS 2.6

Where S04521 - Covel Gardens RDF falls in its industry

288 industry establishments

Safer than 98% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Texas alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #2 safest of 30 industry employers in Texas.

S04521 - Covel Gardens RDF (41 employees, TCR 0.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 32 employees and a TCR of 3.9 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 050100150200 0510152025 Average employees Total Case Rate S04521 - Covel Gardens RDF
S04521 - Covel Gardens RDF (41 employees, TCR 0.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 32 employees and a TCR of 3.9

S04521 - Covel Gardens RDF has more employees than the industry median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.9. 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 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2018 4.8 0.0 0 2 0
2017 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2016 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

562212 · TX · San Antonio

288 industry employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 38,394 rated employers in Texas with headcount on file · 2,207 employers in San Antonio, 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 S03043 - Azusa Landfill 0.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Newton County Development Landfill 0.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR BFI Waste Services 0.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR Ridge Recyclers Incorporated 0.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE Val Verde Vegetable Co., Inc. 41 FTE
STATE-SIZE LS QUIEN SABE LLC 41 FTE
STATE-SIZE BREEDER / BROILER DEPARTMENT 41 FTE
STATE-SIZE Expo12 41 FTE
CITY-NEAR Bexar County Hospital District 8,703 FTE
CITY-NEAR Legend Oaks Health & Rehabilitation West San Antonio 6,953 FTE
CITY-NEAR ISS Facility Services Inc. 6,177 FTE
CITY-NEAR Buena Vida of San Antonio 5,262 FTE
NAT-TCR Hyundai Motor America - NHQ 0.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Walterboro District Office 0.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Parker Hannifin Control Systems Division - Ogden 0.5 TCR
NAT-TCR R29EL - Hibbing Minerals Office 0.5 TCR
NAT-SIZE S04550 - Pine Bluff Hauling 41 FTE
NAT-SIZE Liberty Arms Assisted Living 41 FTE
NAT-SIZE Armstrong Memory Care Assisted Living 41 FTE
NAT-SIZE 737 Jackson - Blanchard 41 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, 2017, 2016. 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.