Utility line (i.e., communication, electric power), construction · Georgia

Byers Engineering Company

Atlanta, GA · ~947 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
0.2
Avg TCR
2.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Byers Engineering Company runs at 6% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Utility line (i.e., communication, electric power), construction workplace, earning a grade A.

Byers Engineering Company: 0.2 TCR = 6% of Utility line (i.e., communication, electric power), construction BLS 2.8 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Byers Engineering Company safety composite

Byers Engineering Company scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 98% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 52%), 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).

B

80/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
A 0.17 per 100 workers

Safer than 98% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 78% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 52% 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

−0.5

2021→2024

Byers Engineering Company injury rate improved

Byers Engineering Company's TCR fell 0.5 from 0.5 in 2021 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2021 at 0.5 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2021=0.5 · 2022=0.0 · 2023=0.2 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 237130 · Atlanta, GA AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 0.2 · 6% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #1/71
  • PHOTO Sky Climber Renewables
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 5 inj
  • SIZE ~947 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Sky Climber Renewables (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Byers Engineering Company in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Byers Engineering Company averages 0.2 TCR (6% of the Utility line (i.e., communication, electric power), construction BLS benchmark).

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

Byers Engineering Company TCR series: 2021=0.5 · 2022=0 · 2023=0.2 · 2024=0 · BLS 2.8

Where Byers Engineering Company falls in its industry

1,605 Utility line (i.e., communicat establishments

Safer than 98% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.0.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Georgia alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #1 safest of 71 Utility line (i.e., communicat employers in Georgia.

Byers Engineering Company (947 employees, TCR 0.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 74 employees and a TCR of 2.0 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 02004006008001,000 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Byers Engineering Company
Byers Engineering Company (947 employees, TCR 0.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 74 employees and a TCR of 2.0

Byers Engineering Company has more employees than the Utility line (i.e., communication, elect median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.0. 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 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2023 0.2 0.0 1 0 0
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2021 0.5 0.5 4 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

237130 · GA · Atlanta

1,605 Utility line (i.e., communication, electric power), construction employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 14,941 rated employers in Georgia with headcount on file · 1,907 employers in Atlanta, 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 Sky Climber Renewables 0.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Kaltz Excavating 0.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Raymondville 0.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR On-Shore Wind - NAM - Projects 0.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE ATLCGAMVH01 - AT&T Mobility Services LLC 951 FTE
STATE-SIZE Amazon.com Services LLC - PGA1 940 FTE
STATE-SIZE North America Fulfillment Centers (FCs) : MGE3 954 FTE
STATE-SIZE Golden Gate America East LLC. 954 FTE
CITY-NEAR Insight Global 20,586 FTE
CITY-NEAR Delta Air Lines - ATL Airport 19,423 FTE
CITY-NEAR Delta Air Lines - ATL- Airport 18,018 FTE
CITY-NEAR Northside 13,761 FTE
NAT-TCR Equipment Division Baton Rouge LA 0.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Olin Chlor Alkali Products Plaquemine LA 0.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Killeen Svc Ctr 0.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Abbvie Inc. Irvine 0.2 TCR
NAT-SIZE Amazon.com Services LLC - ORD9 947 FTE
NAT-SIZE Therma Tru 947 FTE
NAT-SIZE Blue Grass Chem. Demil. 947 FTE
NAT-SIZE Pfizer Peapack (0908) 947 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.