Utility line (i.e., sewer, water), construction · Pennsylvania

Costa Contracting, Inc.

Cheswick, PA · ~72 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
3.7
Avg TCR
2.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Costa Contracting, Inc. runs at 131% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Utility line (i.e., sewer, water), construction workplace, earning a grade D.

Costa Contracting, Inc.: 3.7 TCR = 131% of Utility line (i.e., sewer, water), construction BLS 2.8 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Costa Contracting, Inc. safety composite

Costa Contracting, Inc. scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 52% 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

42/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 3.67 per 100 workers

Safer than 41% of industry peers

DART rate
D 2 per 100 workers

Safer than 36% 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

−4.1

2017→2024

Costa Contracting, Inc. injury rate improved

Costa Contracting, Inc.'s TCR fell 4.1 from 6.1 in 2017 to 2.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2018 at 6.3 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.54× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=6.1 · 2018=6.3 · 2019=4.4 · 2020=3.9 · 2021=1.5 · 2022=2.1 · 2023=3.0 · 2024=2.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 237110 · Cheswick, PA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 3.7 · 131% of ind

  • DART 2.0 DART
  • RANK #36/54
  • PHOTO 1390_2746
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 15 inj
  • SIZE ~72 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: 1390_2746 (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Costa Contracting, Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Costa Contracting, Inc. averages 3.7 TCR (131% of the Utility line (i.e., sewer, water), construction BLS benchmark).

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

Costa Contracting, Inc. TCR series: 2017=6.1 · 2018=6.3 · 2019=4.4 · 2020=3.9 · 2021=1.5 · 2022=2.1 · 2023=3 · 2024=2 · BLS 2.8

Where Costa Contracting, Inc. falls in its industry

1,614 Utility line (i.e., sewer, wat establishments

Safer than 41% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.0.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Pennsylvania alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #36 safest of 54 Utility line (i.e., sewer, wat employers in Pennsylvania.

Costa Contracting, Inc. (72 employees, TCR 3.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 54 employees and a TCR of 3.0 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 0100200300400500 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Costa Contracting, Inc.
Costa Contracting, Inc. (72 employees, TCR 3.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 54 employees and a TCR of 3.0

Costa Contracting, Inc. has more employees than the Utility line (i.e., sewer, water), const median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.0. 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 2.0 2.0 2 0 0
2023 3.0 1.0 3 0 0
2022 2.1 0.0 1 1 0
2021 1.5 0.0 1 0 0
2020 3.9 2.0 1 1 0
2019 4.4 0.0 2 0 0
2018 6.3 2.1 3 0 0
2017 6.1 0.0 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

237110 · PA · Cheswick

1,614 Utility line (i.e., sewer, water), construction employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,692 rated employers in Pennsylvania with headcount on file · 30 employers in Cheswick, PA · 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 1390_2746 3.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR ParkUSA Ferris 3.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR TLC Diversified Inc 3.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Ruby-Collins, Inc. 3.7 TCR
STATE-SIZE Esbenshade Mount Joy 72 FTE
STATE-SIZE Maple Lawn Associates 72 FTE
STATE-SIZE Kreider Farms - Middletown Egg 72 FTE
STATE-SIZE Ken Davis Mushroom Farms 72 FTE
CITY-NEAR Curtiss Wright - Cheswick Facility 721 FTE
CITY-NEAR HarmarVillage Care Center 229 FTE
CITY-NEAR Glass Technology Center 219 FTE
CITY-NEAR Harmar Village Care Center 187 FTE
NAT-TCR Legacy Express, LLC 3.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Timberlake Supportive Living 3.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Abbott Tool, Inc. 3.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Certified Alloy Products Inc 3.7 TCR
NAT-SIZE Engineered Services Inc. 72 FTE
NAT-SIZE Grand Ely Lodge 72 FTE
NAT-SIZE LCB Senior Living LLC 72 FTE
NAT-SIZE Custom Chemical Formulators 72 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, 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.