Aircraft auxiliary parts (e.g., crop dusting, external fuel tanks, inflight refueling equipment) manufacturing · California

WATSON

Lakewood, CA · ~105 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
5.3
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

WATSON runs at 162% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Aircraft auxiliary parts (e.g., crop dusting, external fuel tanks, inflight refueling equipment) manufacturing workplace, earning a grade D.

WATSON: 5.3 TCR = 162% of Aircraft auxiliary parts (e.g., crop dusting, external fuel tanks, inflight refueling equipment) manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

WATSON safety composite

WATSON scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 11%), 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

27/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 5.35 per 100 workers

Safer than 11% of industry peers

DART rate
F 1.57 per 100 workers

Safer than 28% 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

WATSON: 1.3 → 4.7 TCR

Peak year 2022 @ 10.0 TCR · DART/TCR 0.29× in 2024

WATSON's TCR rose 3.4 from 1.3 in 2018 to 4.7 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2022 at 10.0 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.29× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 336413 · Lakewood, CA ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade D · TCR 5.3 · 162% of ind

  • DART 1.6 DART
  • RANK #87/104
  • PHOTO AeroQuest, Inc.
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 24 inj
  • SIZE ~105 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: AeroQuest, Inc. (0.0 TCR gap)

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

WATSON in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows WATSON averages 5.3 TCR (162% of the Aircraft auxiliary parts (e.g., crop dusting, external fuel tanks, inflight refueling equipment) manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

WATSON TCR series: 2018=1.3 · 2019=1.6 · 2020=4.5 · 2021=9.7 · 2022=10 · 2023=5.6 · 2024=4.7 · BLS 3.3

Where WATSON falls in its industry

650 Aircraft auxiliary parts (e.g. establishments

Safer than 11% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #87 safest of 104 Aircraft auxiliary parts (e.g. employers in California.

WATSON (105 employees, TCR 5.3) 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 WATSON
WATSON (105 employees, TCR 5.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 130 employees and a TCR of 1.9

WATSON has fewer employees than the Aircraft auxiliary parts (e.g., crop dus 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
2024 4.7 1.6 3 0 0
2023 5.6 1.9 3 0 0
2022 10.0 5.7 7 0 0
2021 9.7 8.1 5 1 0
2020 4.5 4.5 2 1 0
2019 1.6 1.1 2 1 0
2018 1.3 0.7 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

336413 · CA · Lakewood

650 Aircraft auxiliary parts (e.g., crop dusting, external fuel tanks, inflight refueling equipment) manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 63 employers in Lakewood, CA · 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 AeroQuest, Inc. 5.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Bell - BHT Broussard Blades 5.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Global Tooling Systems 5.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Triumph Aerospace Structures Stuart Site 5.4 TCR
STATE-SIZE Villa Park Riverside 105 FTE
STATE-SIZE Zion Harvest 105 FTE
STATE-SIZE Fowler Packing Farm Management 105 FTE
STATE-SIZE SATICOY BASE - 15 105 FTE
CITY-NEAR 4701-012 935 FTE
CITY-NEAR Lakewood Regional Office 469 FTE
CITY-NEAR South County Lakewood 458 FTE
CITY-NEAR WM 2609 408 FTE
NAT-TCR Encompass Health Rehabilitation Hospital of Kingsport 5.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Viking SupplyNet & Fabrication Services - Phoenix 5.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Northwest Construction 5.3 TCR
NAT-TCR HTI Spartnaburg 3 5.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE RJE Middle School 105 FTE
NAT-SIZE Hardy Corporation 105 FTE
NAT-SIZE Westgate New York 105 FTE
NAT-SIZE Arna marketing 105 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: 2024, 2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.