Hazardous waste treatment facilities combined with collection and/or local hauling of hazardous waste · Massachusetts

Charlestown

Charlestown, MA · ~60 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
2.2
Avg TCR
2.6
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Charlestown runs at 85% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Hazardous waste treatment facilities combined with collection and/or local hauling of hazardous waste workplace, earning a grade C.

Charlestown: 2.2 TCR = 85% of Hazardous waste treatment facilities combined with collection and/or local hauling of hazardous waste BLS 2.6 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Charlestown safety composite

Charlestown scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 31%), 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

39/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 2.21 per 100 workers

Safer than 39% of industry peers

DART rate
F 1.38 per 100 workers

Safer than 31% 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

−2.3

2016→2022

Charlestown injury rate improved

Charlestown's TCR fell 2.3 from 3.7 in 2016 to 1.4 in 2022. Peak filing year was 2019 at 3.8 TCR. In 2022, DART was 0.62× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=3.7 · 2017=1.7 · 2018=3.1 · 2019=3.8 · 2020=1.7 · 2021=0.0 · 2022=1.4

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 562211 · Charlestown, MA AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade C · TCR 2.2 · 85% of ind

  • DART 1.4 DART
  • RANK #5/7
  • PHOTO Clean Harbors Wilmin…
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 9 inj
  • SIZE ~60 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Clean Harbors Wilmington LLC 67WI (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Charlestown in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Charlestown averages 2.2 TCR (85% of the Hazardous waste treatment facilities combined with collection and/or local hauling of hazardous waste BLS benchmark).

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

Charlestown TCR series: 2016=3.7 · 2017=1.7 · 2018=3.1 · 2019=3.8 · 2020=1.7 · 2021=0 · 2022=1.4 · BLS 2.6

Where Charlestown falls in its industry

211 Hazardous waste treatment faci establishments

Safer than 39% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.8.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Massachusetts alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #5 safest of 7 Hazardous waste treatment faci employers in Massachusetts.

Charlestown (60 employees, TCR 2.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 50 employees and a TCR of 1.8 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 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Charlestown
Charlestown (60 employees, TCR 2.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 50 employees and a TCR of 1.8

Charlestown has more employees than the Hazardous waste treatment facilities com median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.8. 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
2022 1.4 1.4 1 0 0
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 1.7 1.7 1 0 0
2019 3.8 3.8 2 0 0
2018 3.1 1.6 2 0 0
2017 1.7 0.0 1 0 0
2016 3.7 1.9 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

562211 · MA · Charlestown

211 Hazardous waste treatment facilities combined with collection and/or local hauling of hazardous waste employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 10,108 rated employers in Massachusetts with headcount on file · 19 employers in Charlestown, MA · 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 Clean Harbors Wilmington LLC 67WI 2.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Clean Earth of North Jersey, Inc. 2.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR TES Bridgeport Facility 2.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Middlesex Plant 2.3 TCR
STATE-SIZE Alternative Compassion Services 60 FTE
STATE-SIZE Holistic Industries, Inc 60 FTE
STATE-SIZE Keyes North Atlantic 60 FTE
STATE-SIZE HWE Woburn HVAC 60 FTE
CITY-NEAR Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital Boston 1,637 FTE
CITY-NEAR Diversified Automotive Inc 360 FTE
CITY-NEAR Gentle Giant Moving Company Charlestown 211 FTE
CITY-NEAR Costa Fruit and Produce Company 180 FTE
NAT-TCR 103914 - City of Largo WWRF Biological Treatment 2.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Century Gaming Technologies - Billings 2.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Olmsted Medical Center NW Clinic 2.2 TCR
NAT-TCR 3793 Supermercado Nuestra Familia (Q St, Omaha, Ne) 2.2 TCR
NAT-SIZE BURTON 60 FTE
NAT-SIZE Perth Amboy Plant 60 FTE
NAT-SIZE Coolsys Richmond REF 60 FTE
NAT-SIZE Auberge at Higland Park 60 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: 2022, 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.