Construction machinery and equipment repair and maintenance services · Tennessee

SMC-Chatt

Chattanooga, TN · ~52 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
3.1
Avg TCR
2.1
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

SMC-Chatt runs at 150% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Construction machinery and equipment repair and maintenance services workplace, earning a grade D.

SMC-Chatt: 3.1 TCR = 150% of Construction machinery and equipment repair and maintenance services BLS 2.1 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

SMC-Chatt safety composite

SMC-Chatt scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 76% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 43%), 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

57/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 3.15 per 100 workers

Safer than 43% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 76% 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

−2.0

2016→2023

SMC-Chatt injury rate improved

SMC-Chatt's TCR fell 2.0 from 3.5 in 2016 to 1.6 in 2023. Peak filing year was 2019 at 6.8 TCR. In 2023, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=3.5 · 2017=1.8 · 2018=3.6 · 2019=6.8 · 2020=3.2 · 2021=1.6 · 2022=3.3 · 2023=1.6

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 811310 · Chattanooga, TN ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 3.1 · 150% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #37/67
  • PHOTO Hussmann Services Co…
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 15 inj
  • SIZE ~52 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Hussmann Services Corporation - Denver (0.0 TCR gap)

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

SMC-Chatt in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows SMC-Chatt averages 3.1 TCR (150% of the Construction machinery and equipment repair and maintenance services BLS benchmark).

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

SMC-Chatt TCR series: 2016=3.5 · 2017=1.8 · 2018=3.6 · 2019=6.8 · 2020=3.2 · 2021=1.6 · 2022=3.3 · 2023=1.6 · BLS 2.1

Where SMC-Chatt falls in its industry

2,560 Construction machinery and equ establishments

Safer than 43% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.7.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Tennessee alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #37 safest of 67 Construction machinery and equ employers in Tennessee.

SMC-Chatt (52 employees, TCR 3.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 45 employees and a TCR of 2.7 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 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate SMC-Chatt
SMC-Chatt (52 employees, TCR 3.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 45 employees and a TCR of 2.7

SMC-Chatt has more employees than the Construction machinery and equipment rep median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.7. 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 1.6 0.0 1 0 0
2022 3.3 1.7 2 0 0
2021 1.6 1.6 1 0 0
2020 3.2 3.2 2 0 0
2019 6.8 5.1 4 0 0
2018 3.6 1.8 2 0 0
2017 1.8 1.8 1 0 0
2016 3.5 3.5 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

811310 · TN · Chattanooga

2,560 Construction machinery and equipment repair and maintenance services employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 10,743 rated employers in Tennessee with headcount on file · 695 employers in Chattanooga, 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 Hussmann Services Corporation - Denver 3.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR SPATCO Energy Solutions, LLC - Raleigh Branch 3.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Alfa Laval Inc. Houston (loc code: TXHOUS) 3.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR WACO-HCT-WACO 3.1 TCR
STATE-SIZE Etowah Utilities 52 FTE
STATE-SIZE Powell Valley Electric Cooperative New Tazewell 52 FTE
STATE-SIZE Oak Ridge Utility District 52 FTE
STATE-SIZE TDK Construction Company 52 FTE
CITY-NEAR CHATTANOOGA COKE 8,650 FTE
CITY-NEAR CHATTANOOGA FOOD 8,650 FTE
CITY-NEAR USXpress 7,385 FTE
CITY-NEAR Cardiology GB 6,606 FTE
NAT-TCR JBM Underground 3.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Crothall Laundry Services, Rome, GA 3.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Hampton Inn & Suites Clearwater Beach FL 3.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Blager Concrete 3.1 TCR
NAT-SIZE Facility 2 52 FTE
NAT-SIZE Thomas Pump & Machinery, Inc. 52 FTE
NAT-SIZE Edge Construction Specialties 52 FTE
NAT-SIZE Tema Isenmann, Inc. 52 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, 2019, 2018, 2017, 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.