Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing · Washington

Triumph Integrated Systems - Yakima

Yakima, WA · ~277 workers · 2 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

Triumph Integrated Systems - Yakima runs at 110% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing workplace, earning a grade C.

Triumph Integrated Systems - Yakima: 3.6 TCR = 110% of Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Triumph Integrated Systems - Yakima safety composite

Triumph Integrated Systems - Yakima scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 21%), 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).

F

29/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 3.62 per 100 workers

Safer than 22% of industry peers

DART rate
F 2.17 per 100 workers

Safer than 21% 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%).

Rising injury rate

Triumph Integrated Systems - Yakima: 3.3 → 4.0 TCR

Peak year 2017 @ 4.0 TCR · DART/TCR 0.6× in 2017

Triumph Integrated Systems - Yakima's TCR rose 0.7 from 3.3 in 2016 to 4.0 in 2017. In 2017, DART was 0.6× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 336413 · Yakima, WA ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade C · TCR 3.6 · 110% of ind

  • DART 2.2 DART
  • RANK #34/47
  • PHOTO PPG Texas Operations…
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 13 inj
  • SIZE ~277 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: PPG Texas Operations (Texstars) (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Triumph Integrated Systems - Yakima in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Triumph Integrated Systems - Yakima averages 3.6 TCR (110% of the Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Triumph Integrated Systems - Yakima TCR series: 2016=3.3 · 2017=4 · BLS 3.3

Where Triumph Integrated Systems - Yakima falls in its industry

650 Aircraft assemblies, subassemb establishments

Safer than 22% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Washington alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #34 safest of 47 Aircraft assemblies, subassemb employers in Washington.

Triumph Integrated Systems - Yakima (277 employees, TCR 3.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 130 employees and a TCR of 1.9 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 05001,0001,5002,000 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate Triumph Integrated Systems - Yakima
Triumph Integrated Systems - Yakima (277 employees, TCR 3.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 130 employees and a TCR of 1.9

Triumph Integrated Systems - Yakima has more employees than the Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.9. 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
2017 4.0 2.2 7 4 0
2016 3.3 2.2 6 3 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

336413 · WA · Yakima

650 Aircraft assemblies, subassemblies, and parts (except engines) manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 10,147 rated employers in Washington with headcount on file · 192 employers in Yakima, WA · 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 PPG Texas Operations (Texstars) 3.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR STEICO Industries 3.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Sanders Composites 3.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR New England Airfoil Products 3.7 TCR
STATE-SIZE 46190001-461901 FRANCISCAN HEALTH ST ELIZABETH HOSPITAL 277 FTE
STATE-SIZE Rockwood South Hill 277 FTE
STATE-SIZE Maberry Packing LLC 278 FTE
STATE-SIZE Enfield Farms Inc 276 FTE
CITY-NEAR Yakima Valley Hospital WA 2,748 FTE
CITY-NEAR Borton Fruit 1,473 FTE
CITY-NEAR Yakima County 997 FTE
CITY-NEAR Borton Orchards 918 FTE
NAT-TCR Keystone Automotive Ind Alcoa 3.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Fort Wayne (Infye) 3.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Ambassador Services, LLC @ Fbc-Tuscaloosa 3.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Ripley's Believe It Or Not - San Antonio, TX 3.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Rayovac - Fennimore 277 FTE
NAT-SIZE Kammer/Mitchell 277 FTE
NAT-SIZE United Helpers Nursing Home, Inc. dba RiverLedge Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center 277 FTE
NAT-SIZE MidSouth Food 277 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: 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.