Utility line (i.e., sewer, water), construction · Kentucky

Scott & Ritter, Inc.

Bowling Green, KY · ~73 workers · 6 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
4.6
Avg TCR
2.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Scott & Ritter, Inc. runs at 163% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Utility line (i.e., sewer, water), construction workplace, earning a grade D.

Scott & Ritter, Inc.: 4.6 TCR = 163% of Utility line (i.e., sewer, water), construction BLS 2.8 · 6y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Scott & Ritter, Inc. safety composite

Scott & Ritter, Inc. scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 52% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 29%), 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 4.56 per 100 workers

Safer than 29% of industry peers

DART rate
D 2.09 per 100 workers

Safer than 36% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 52% 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

−0.7

2016→2023

Scott & Ritter, Inc. injury rate improved

Scott & Ritter, Inc.'s TCR fell 0.7 from 4.8 in 2016 to 4.2 in 2023. Peak filing year was 2018 at 7.3 TCR. In 2023, DART was 0.46× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=4.8 · 2018=7.3 · 2020=4.2 · 2021=4.2 · 2022=2.7 · 2023=4.2

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 237110 · Bowling Green, KY ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 4.6 · 163% of ind

  • DART 2.1 DART
  • RANK #22/29
  • PHOTO 1400 JAMESVILLE AVE
  • BOOK 6y book
  • INJ 19 inj
  • SIZE ~73 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: 1400 JAMESVILLE AVE (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Scott & Ritter, Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Scott & Ritter, Inc. averages 4.6 TCR (163% of the Utility line (i.e., sewer, water), construction BLS benchmark).

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

Scott & Ritter, Inc. TCR series: 2016=4.8 · 2018=7.3 · 2020=4.2 · 2021=4.2 · 2022=2.7 · 2023=4.2 · BLS 2.8

Where Scott & Ritter, Inc. falls in its industry

1,614 Utility line (i.e., sewer, wat establishments

Safer than 29% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.0.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Kentucky alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #22 safest of 29 Utility line (i.e., sewer, wat employers in Kentucky.

Scott & Ritter, Inc. (73 employees, TCR 4.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 54 employees and a TCR of 3.0 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 0100200300400500 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Scott & Ritter, Inc.
Scott & Ritter, Inc. (73 employees, TCR 4.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 54 employees and a TCR of 3.0

Scott & Ritter, Inc. has more employees than the Utility line (i.e., sewer, water), const median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.0. 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
2023 4.2 2.1 4 0 0
2022 2.7 2.7 2 0 0
2021 4.2 2.8 3 0 0
2020 4.2 1.4 3 0 0
2018 7.3 7.3 4 0 0
2016 4.8 4.8 3 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

237110 · KY · Bowling Green

1,614 Utility line (i.e., sewer, water), construction employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 7,805 rated employers in Kentucky with headcount on file · 331 employers in Bowling Green, KY · 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 1400 JAMESVILLE AVE 4.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR AGL Construction Company 4.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Municipal & Contractors Sealing Products 4.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR McGuirk Sand-Gravel, Inc. 4.5 TCR
STATE-SIZE LGE-KU, Electric System Control, Simpsonville 73 FTE
STATE-SIZE Power Truss 73 FTE
STATE-SIZE Interplastic Corporation Fort Wright 73 FTE
STATE-SIZE FP- Hopkinsville 73 FTE
CITY-NEAR Western Kentucky University-Bowling Green 2,237 FTE
CITY-NEAR The Medical Center at Bowling Green 1,872 FTE
CITY-NEAR Magna Bowling Green Metalforming 1,441 FTE
CITY-NEAR Bowling Green Metalforming 1,344 FTE
NAT-TCR Southeastern Commercial Tire 4.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Fiesta # 81 4.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Crenlo Engineered Cabs 4.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Ted'S Trash Service Inc. 4.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Sodexo at Thornton Township Hs Dist 205 73 FTE
NAT-SIZE Mass Maritime Academ_* 73 FTE
NAT-SIZE Pendergast El Sch * 73 FTE
NAT-SIZE UMBC Campus* 73 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: 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2018, 2016. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.