Paperboard and paperboard products (except office supplies) merchant wholesalers · South Carolina

Charleston, SC

Charleston, SC · ~74 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
9.2
Avg TCR
2.2
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Charleston, SC runs at 419% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Paperboard and paperboard products (except office supplies) merchant wholesalers workplace, earning a grade F.

Charleston, SC: 9.2 TCR = 419% of Paperboard and paperboard products (except office supplies) merchant wholesalers BLS 2.2 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Charleston, SC safety composite

Charleston, SC scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 4%), 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

31/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 9.22 per 100 workers

Safer than 4% of industry peers

DART rate
D 1.97 per 100 workers

Safer than 48% 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

−13.5

2016→2024

Charleston, SC injury rate improved

Charleston, SC's TCR fell 13.5 from 15.5 in 2016 to 2.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2016 at 15.5 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.21× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=15.5 · 2017=6.9 · 2018=12.9 · 2019=9.0 · 2020=8.3 · 2021=10.1 · 2024=2.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 424130 · Charleston, SC ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 9.2 · 419% of ind

  • DART 2.0 DART
  • RANK #5/6
  • PHOTO Joshen Paper & Packa…
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 54 inj
  • SIZE ~74 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Joshen Paper & Packaging of PA (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Charleston, SC in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Charleston, SC averages 9.2 TCR (419% of the Paperboard and paperboard products (except office supplies) merchant wholesalers BLS benchmark).

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

Charleston, SC TCR series: 2016=15.5 · 2017=6.9 · 2018=12.9 · 2019=9 · 2020=8.3 · 2021=10.1 · 2024=2 · BLS 2.2

Where Charleston, SC falls in its industry

290 Paperboard and paperboard prod establishments

Safer than 4% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to South Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #5 safest of 6 Paperboard and paperboard prod employers in South Carolina.

Charleston, SC (74 employees, TCR 9.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 2.9 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 0100200300400 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Charleston, SC
Charleston, SC (74 employees, TCR 9.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 49 employees and a TCR of 2.9

Charleston, SC has more employees than the Paperboard and paperboard products (exce median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.9. 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 2.0 2.0 1 0 0
2021 10.1 9.0 9 0 0
2020 8.3 5.9 7 0 0
2019 9.0 7.7 7 0 0
2018 12.9 9.3 11 0 0
2017 6.9 6.9 6 0 0
2016 15.5 9.5 13 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

424130 · SC · Charleston

290 Paperboard and paperboard products (except office supplies) merchant wholesalers employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 7,610 rated employers in South Carolina with headcount on file · 341 employers in Charleston, SC · 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 Joshen Paper & Packaging of PA 9.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR EPC Lubbock 9.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Bunzl Retail Services, LLC (Greenville) 9.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Bunzl Retail Services, LLC (Bensalem) 8.7 TCR
STATE-SIZE Thompson Construction Group Inc GE 74 FTE
STATE-SIZE J. Davis Construction 74 FTE
STATE-SIZE Spann Roofing & Sheet Metal, Inc. 74 FTE
STATE-SIZE Charleston Branch 74 FTE
CITY-NEAR Medical University Hospital Authority 8,204 FTE
CITY-NEAR Medical University of South Carolina 5,881 FTE
CITY-NEAR SC-03 4,525 FTE
CITY-NEAR SAFETY MANAGEMENT DIVISION 1,790 FTE
NAT-TCR McPherson Health and Rehab 9.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Washington Dulles Marriott Suites 9.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Elcor Nursing & Rehabilitation Center 9.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Community Hospital of Huntington Park 9.2 TCR
NAT-SIZE Marc Glassman Inc 07FL 74 FTE
NAT-SIZE UFP Schertz,LLC 74 FTE
NAT-SIZE Rome Ga 74 FTE
NAT-SIZE United Premium Foods 74 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, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.