Electric power distribution systems · North Carolina

Cape Hatteras Electric Cooperative

Buxton, NC · ~25 workers · 5 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
1.7
Avg TCR
1.2
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Cape Hatteras Electric Cooperative runs at 144% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Electric power distribution systems workplace, earning a grade D.

Cape Hatteras Electric Cooperative: 1.7 TCR = 144% of Electric power distribution systems BLS 1.2 · 5y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Cape Hatteras Electric Cooperative safety composite

Cape Hatteras Electric Cooperative scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 79% 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

67/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 1.73 per 100 workers

Safer than 66% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 79% 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%).

TCR Δ

−4.3

2017→2021

Cape Hatteras Electric Cooperative injury rate improved

Cape Hatteras Electric Cooperative's TCR fell 4.3 from 4.3 in 2017 to 0.0 in 2021. Peak filing year was 2018 at 4.4 TCR. In 2021, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=4.3 · 2018=4.4 · 2019=0.0 · 2020=0.0 · 2021=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 221122 · Buxton, NC ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 1.7 · 144% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #47/107
  • PHOTO Glenbard
  • BOOK 5y book
  • INJ 2 inj
  • SIZE ~25 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Glenbard (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Cape Hatteras Electric Cooperative in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Cape Hatteras Electric Cooperative averages 1.7 TCR (144% of the Electric power distribution systems BLS benchmark).

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

Cape Hatteras Electric Cooperative TCR series: 2017=4.3 · 2018=4.4 · 2019=0 · 2020=0 · 2021=0 · BLS 1.2

Where Cape Hatteras Electric Cooperative falls in its industry

2,958 Electric power distribution sy establishments

Safer than 66% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to North Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #47 safest of 107 Electric power distribution sy employers in North Carolina.

Cape Hatteras Electric Cooperative (25 employees, TCR 1.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 56 employees and a TCR of 2.5 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 05001,0001,5002,000 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Cape Hatteras Electric Cooperative
Cape Hatteras Electric Cooperative (25 employees, TCR 1.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 56 employees and a TCR of 2.5

Cape Hatteras Electric Cooperative has fewer employees than the Electric power distribution systems median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.5. 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
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2018 4.4 0.0 1 0 0
2017 4.3 4.3 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

221122 · NC · Buxton

2,958 Electric power distribution systems employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,981 rated employers in North Carolina with headcount on file · 4 employers in Buxton, 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 Glenbard 1.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Port Washington Service Center 1.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Airport Operating - 112 Lake Mirror Road Forest Park 1.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company 1.7 TCR
STATE-SIZE Fair View Nursery, Inc. 25 FTE
STATE-SIZE John William Carter III 25 FTE
STATE-SIZE Hill of Berry's 25 FTE
STATE-SIZE Andrew Tyson Farms 25 FTE
CITY-NEAR CAPE HATTERAS SECONDARY 65 FTE
CITY-NEAR CAPE HATTERAS ELEMENTARY 62 FTE
CITY-NEAR Cape Hatteras Electric Membership Corporation 27 FTE
NAT-TCR I-25 North 061802 1.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Nestle USA, Freedom Facility 1.7 TCR
NAT-TCR R.J. Lalonde, Inc. 1.7 TCR
NAT-TCR S04162 - Irvine Transfer Station and MRF 1.7 TCR
NAT-SIZE Coke Capital Kresson St. 25 FTE
NAT-SIZE Shanes graing and paving Inc 25 FTE
NAT-SIZE Eagle Transport Corporation - Nashville 25 FTE
NAT-SIZE Covington Aircraft Radial Division 25 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: 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 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.