Sheet metal work (except stampings) manufacturing · North Carolina

ASCO Power Technologies

Lexington, NC · ~639 workers · 6 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.4
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

ASCO Power Technologies runs at 44% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Sheet metal work (except stampings) manufacturing workplace, earning a grade A.

ASCO Power Technologies: 1.4 TCR = 44% of Sheet metal work (except stampings) manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 6y Form 300A (see methodology below)

ASCO Power Technologies safety composite

ASCO Power Technologies scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 91% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 51%), 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

70/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
A 1.44 per 100 workers

Safer than 91% of industry peers

DART rate
C 1.2 per 100 workers

Safer than 59% 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%).

ASCO Power Technologies held a steady TCR band

ASCO Power Technologies's TCR held near 0.2 from 1.5 in 2017 to 1.3 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2022 at 2.1 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.83× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=1.5 · 2020=0.4 · 2021=2.1 · 2022=2.1 · 2023=1.2 · 2024=1.3

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 332322 · Lexington, NC AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 1.4 · 44% of ind

  • DART 1.2 DART
  • RANK #3/37
  • PHOTO Southwark Metal Phil…
  • BOOK 6y book
  • INJ 46 inj
  • SIZE ~639 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Southwark Metal Philadelphia Division (0.0 TCR gap)

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

ASCO Power Technologies in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows ASCO Power Technologies averages 1.4 TCR (44% of the Sheet metal work (except stampings) manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

ASCO Power Technologies TCR series: 2017=1.5 · 2020=0.4 · 2021=2.1 · 2022=2.1 · 2023=1.2 · 2024=1.3 · BLS 3.3

Where ASCO Power Technologies falls in its industry

1,158 Sheet metal work (except stamp establishments

Safer than 91% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to North Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #3 safest of 37 Sheet metal work (except stamp employers in North Carolina.

ASCO Power Technologies (639 employees, TCR 1.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 58 employees and a TCR of 4.5 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 0200400600800 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate ASCO Power Technologies
ASCO Power Technologies (639 employees, TCR 1.4) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 58 employees and a TCR of 4.5

ASCO Power Technologies has more employees than the Sheet metal work (except stampings) manu median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.5. 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 1.3 1.2 10 0 0
2023 1.2 0.4 5 3 0
2022 2.1 1.7 12 2 0
2021 2.1 0.5 9 4 0
2020 0.4 0.2 2 0 0
2017 1.5 0.9 8 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

332322 · NC · Lexington

1,158 Sheet metal work (except stampings) manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,981 rated employers in North Carolina with headcount on file · 120 employers in Lexington, NC · 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 Southwark Metal Philadelphia Division 1.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR RA Lalli 1.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Lanzen, Inc. 1.4 TCR
NAICS-TCR Oak Ridge Industries, LLC 1.4 TCR
STATE-SIZE Marsh Furniture Company 638 FTE
STATE-SIZE Charlotte Manufacturing Operations 641 FTE
STATE-SIZE 4021-500184600 637 FTE
STATE-SIZE County of Currituck 637 FTE
CITY-NEAR Davidson County Schools 3,351 FTE
CITY-NEAR Davidson County Government 1,237 FTE
CITY-NEAR Atrium Windows & Door 910 FTE
CITY-NEAR WFBMC - Lexington Medical Center 627 FTE
NAT-TCR Santa Fe Springs Grid 1.4 TCR
NAT-TCR MBM-2 Los Angeles 1.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Vortex Industries - SFV 1.4 TCR
NAT-TCR Gestamp North American R&D Center 1.4 TCR
NAT-SIZE Charles County Sheriff's Office 639 FTE
NAT-SIZE Kingston Technology, Inc. 639 FTE
NAT-SIZE Greenwich Terminals LLC 639 FTE
NAT-SIZE Titanium Metals Corporation - TIMET 639 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, 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.