Natural Gas Distribution · Minnesota

CenterPoint Energy - Golden Valley Bldg C and A

Minneapolis, MN · ~136 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
2.7
Avg TCR
1.2
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

CenterPoint Energy - Golden Valley Bldg C and A runs at 228% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Natural Gas Distribution workplace, earning a grade F.

CenterPoint Energy - Golden Valley Bldg C and A: 2.7 TCR = 228% of Natural Gas Distribution BLS 1.2 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

CenterPoint Energy - Golden Valley Bldg C and A safety composite

CenterPoint Energy - Golden Valley Bldg C and A scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 36%), 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).

D

44/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 2.74 per 100 workers

Safer than 47% of industry peers

DART rate
D 2.33 per 100 workers

Safer than 36% 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%).

TCR Δ

−0.8

2023→2024

CenterPoint Energy - Golden Valley Bldg C and A injury rate improved

CenterPoint Energy - Golden Valley Bldg C and A's TCR fell 0.8 from 3.1 in 2023 to 2.3 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2023 at 3.1 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.85× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2023=3.1 · 2024=2.3

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 221210 · Minneapolis, MN ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade F · TCR 2.7 · 228% of ind

  • DART 2.3 DART
  • RANK #10/19
  • PHOTO SEMCO Energy Gas Com…
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 7 inj
  • SIZE ~136 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: SEMCO Energy Gas Company - BC (0.0 TCR gap)

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

CenterPoint Energy - Golden Valley Bldg C and A in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows CenterPoint Energy - Golden Valley Bldg C and A averages 2.7 TCR (228% of the Natural Gas Distribution BLS benchmark).

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

CenterPoint Energy - Golden Valley Bldg C and A TCR series: 2023=3.1 · 2024=2.3 · BLS 1.2

Where CenterPoint Energy - Golden Valley Bldg C and A falls in its industry

1,153 Natural Gas Distribution establishments

Safer than 47% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Minnesota alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #10 safest of 19 Natural Gas Distribution employers in Minnesota.

CenterPoint Energy - Golden Valley Bldg C and A (136 employees, TCR 2.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 56 employees and a TCR of 2.6 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 CenterPoint Energy - Golden Valley Bldg C and A
CenterPoint Energy - Golden Valley Bldg C and A (136 employees, TCR 2.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 56 employees and a TCR of 2.6

CenterPoint Energy - Golden Valley Bldg C and A has more employees than the Natural Gas Distribution median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.6. 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 2.3 2.3 3 0 0
2023 3.1 3.1 4 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

221210 · MN · Minneapolis

1,153 Natural Gas Distribution employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 15,828 rated employers in Minnesota with headcount on file · 1,321 employers in Minneapolis, MN · 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 SEMCO Energy Gas Company - BC 2.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Vectren Corporation - Fairborn 2.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Gwinnett RBC 2.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR 277-NiSource-Winchester KY-Shoppers Dr 2.8 TCR
STATE-SIZE North Central Service, Inc 136 FTE
STATE-SIZE AHO Operations 136 FTE
STATE-SIZE McDowall Company 136 FTE
STATE-SIZE Kraft Mechanical, LLC 136 FTE
CITY-NEAR University of Minnesota Twin Cities 22,522 FTE
CITY-NEAR MN950 MN TELECOMMUTER 12,021 FTE
CITY-NEAR 0501 - City Center 8,459 FTE
CITY-NEAR Hennepin County Medical Center 7,030 FTE
NAT-TCR Stonhard 2.7 TCR
NAT-TCR 03 - Columbus 2.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Broooks Running Company 2.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Great Lakes Dental Technologies 2.7 TCR
NAT-SIZE Lake Orion Nursing and Rehab Center 136 FTE
NAT-SIZE 180 - Salt Lake City 136 FTE
NAT-SIZE 216 - Greenville 136 FTE
NAT-SIZE ES Pullman WA 136 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.