Engineering services · Minnesota

Tetra Pak Processing Equipment Inc - Champlin

Champlin, MN · ~37 workers · 5 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
2.1
Avg TCR
0.5
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Tetra Pak Processing Equipment Inc - Champlin runs at 428% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Engineering services workplace, earning a grade F.

Tetra Pak Processing Equipment Inc - Champlin: 2.1 TCR = 428% of Engineering services BLS 0.5 · 5y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Tetra Pak Processing Equipment Inc - Champlin safety composite

Tetra Pak Processing Equipment Inc - Champlin scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 70% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 25%), 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

47/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 2.14 per 100 workers

Safer than 25% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 70% 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

−2.2

2017→2022

Tetra Pak Processing Equipment Inc - Champlin injury rate improved

Tetra Pak Processing Equipment Inc - Champlin's TCR fell 2.2 from 2.2 in 2017 to 0.0 in 2022. Peak filing year was 2019 at 6.2 TCR. In 2022, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=2.2 · 2018=2.3 · 2019=6.2 · 2021=0.0 · 2022=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 541330 · Champlin, MN ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 2.1 · 428% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #26/33
  • PHOTO American Engineering…
  • BOOK 5y book
  • INJ 4 inj
  • SIZE ~37 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: American Engineering Testing (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Tetra Pak Processing Equipment Inc - Champlin in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Tetra Pak Processing Equipment Inc - Champlin averages 2.1 TCR (428% of the Engineering services BLS benchmark).

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

Tetra Pak Processing Equipment Inc - Champlin TCR series: 2017=2.2 · 2018=2.3 · 2019=6.2 · 2021=0 · 2022=0 · BLS 0.5

Where Tetra Pak Processing Equipment Inc - Champlin falls in its industry

690 Engineering services establishments

Safer than 25% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 0.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Minnesota alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #26 safest of 33 Engineering services employers in Minnesota.

Tetra Pak Processing Equipment Inc - Champlin (37 employees, TCR 2.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 112 employees and a TCR of 0.9 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 01,0002,0003,0004,000 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Tetra Pak Processing Equipment Inc - Champlin
Tetra Pak Processing Equipment Inc - Champlin (37 employees, TCR 2.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 112 employees and a TCR of 0.9

Tetra Pak Processing Equipment Inc - Champlin has fewer employees than the Engineering services median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 0.9. 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
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 6.2 0.0 2 0 0
2018 2.3 2.3 1 0 0
2017 2.2 0.0 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

541330 · MN · Champlin

690 Engineering services employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 15,828 rated employers in Minnesota with headcount on file · 36 employers in Champlin, MN · 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 American Engineering Testing 2.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Retiina LLC 2.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR FMS Aerospace 2.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Technical Professionals Group - Greenville 2.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE Betaseed Inc - Shakopee 37 FTE
STATE-SIZE Pals 37 FTE
STATE-SIZE Supply Support 37 FTE
STATE-SIZE Grand Rapids Public Utilities Commission 37 FTE
CITY-NEAR Egan Company 802 FTE
CITY-NEAR 1831 - Champlin 360 FTE
CITY-NEAR Champlin Park High 266 FTE
CITY-NEAR Jackson Middle 209 FTE
NAT-TCR ASNY 2.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Chicago Central 38760 2.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Williams Food Works and Distribution 2.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Sodexo at Southwestern Univ-Board 2.1 TCR
NAT-SIZE Corporate Office and Warehouse 37 FTE
NAT-SIZE Vista Ca Depot 37 FTE
NAT-SIZE Loveland Co Depot 37 FTE
NAT-SIZE Garland Tx Depot 37 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: 2022, 2021, 2019, 2018, 2017. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.