Ultrasonic scanning devices, medical, manufacturing · Georgia

Theragenics Corporation

Buford, GA · ~125 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
3.6
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Theragenics Corporation runs at 110% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Ultrasonic scanning devices, medical, manufacturing workplace, earning a grade C.

Theragenics Corporation: 3.6 TCR = 110% of Ultrasonic scanning devices, medical, manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Theragenics Corporation safety composite

Theragenics Corporation scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 81% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 12%), 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

46/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 3.62 per 100 workers

Safer than 12% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 81% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 50% 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

−3.1

2016→2023

Theragenics Corporation injury rate improved

Theragenics Corporation's TCR fell 3.1 from 4.9 in 2016 to 1.8 in 2023. Peak filing year was 2021 at 5.5 TCR. In 2023, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=4.9 · 2017=2.0 · 2018=4.5 · 2019=4.7 · 2020=4.2 · 2021=5.5 · 2022=1.4 · 2023=1.8

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 334510 · Buford, GA ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade C · TCR 3.6 · 110% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #6/7
  • PHOTO Sound Technology, Inc.
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 29 inj
  • SIZE ~125 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Sound Technology, Inc. (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Theragenics Corporation in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Theragenics Corporation averages 3.6 TCR (110% of the Ultrasonic scanning devices, medical, manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Theragenics Corporation TCR series: 2016=4.9 · 2017=2 · 2018=4.5 · 2019=4.7 · 2020=4.2 · 2021=5.5 · 2022=1.4 · 2023=1.8 · BLS 3.3

Where Theragenics Corporation falls in its industry

242 Ultrasonic scanning devices, m establishments

Safer than 12% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.1.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Georgia alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #6 safest of 7 Ultrasonic scanning devices, m employers in Georgia.

Theragenics Corporation (125 employees, TCR 3.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 186 employees and a TCR of 1.1 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 05001,0001,5002,0002,500 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Theragenics Corporation
Theragenics Corporation (125 employees, TCR 3.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 186 employees and a TCR of 1.1

Theragenics Corporation has fewer employees than the Ultrasonic scanning devices, medical, ma median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.1. 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 1.8 0.0 2 0 0
2022 1.4 1.4 1 0 0
2021 5.5 4.5 6 0 0
2020 4.2 0.8 5 0 0
2019 4.7 3.1 5 1 0
2018 4.5 2.3 5 1 0
2017 2.0 2.0 1 2 0
2016 4.9 1.6 4 2 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

334510 · GA · Buford

242 Ultrasonic scanning devices, medical, manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 14,941 rated employers in Georgia with headcount on file · 164 employers in Buford, GA · 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 Sound Technology, Inc. 3.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR NKA 3.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Carlsbad Location 3.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Electronic Waveform Lab, Inc 3.5 TCR
STATE-SIZE Lady Moon Farms, Inc. Georgia 125 FTE
STATE-SIZE SMITH DOUGLAS REALTY 125 FTE
STATE-SIZE Williams Erection Company, Inc. 125 FTE
STATE-SIZE Civil Site Services, Inc. 125 FTE
CITY-NEAR Tech Systems, Inc 478 FTE
CITY-NEAR Elringklinger USA, Inc. 473 FTE
CITY-NEAR GAORD - BUFORD CENTER 447 FTE
CITY-NEAR Georgia Branch 428 FTE
NAT-TCR Tulsa Brick Plant 3.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Borton LC 3.6 TCR
NAT-TCR DIAKON-CUMBERLAND 3.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Manned Space Flight Education Foundation, Inc 3.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Ontario, CA (Samsung) 170 125 FTE
NAT-SIZE International Flooring 125 FTE
NAT-SIZE 4223-M5500 125 FTE
NAT-SIZE National Corvette Museum 125 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.