Utility line (i.e., communication, electric power), construction · Texas

Denbow Company, INC

Dripping Springs, TX · ~240 workers · 6 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
0.9
Avg TCR
2.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Denbow Company, INC runs at 33% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Utility line (i.e., communication, electric power), construction workplace, earning a grade A.

Denbow Company, INC: 0.9 TCR = 33% of Utility line (i.e., communication, electric power), construction BLS 2.8 · 6y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Denbow Company, INC safety composite

Denbow Company, INC scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 76% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 50%), 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

61/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 0.93 per 100 workers

Safer than 76% of industry peers

DART rate
D 0.44 per 100 workers

Safer than 50% 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

−1.3

2017→2024

Denbow Company, INC injury rate improved

Denbow Company, INC's TCR fell 1.3 from 1.9 in 2017 to 0.7 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2017 at 1.9 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.47× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=1.9 · 2018=0.6 · 2019=1.7 · 2022=0.5 · 2023=0.2 · 2024=0.7

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 237130 · Dripping Springs, TX AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 0.9 · 33% of ind

  • DART 0.4 DART
  • RANK #53/161
  • PHOTO HMI Utilities - Belt…
  • BOOK 6y book
  • INJ 14 inj
  • SIZE ~240 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: HMI Utilities - Belton, TX (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Denbow Company, INC in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Denbow Company, INC averages 0.9 TCR (33% of the Utility line (i.e., communication, electric power), construction BLS benchmark).

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

Denbow Company, INC TCR series: 2017=1.9 · 2018=0.6 · 2019=1.7 · 2022=0.5 · 2023=0.2 · 2024=0.7 · BLS 2.8

Where Denbow Company, INC falls in its industry

1,605 Utility line (i.e., communicat establishments

Safer than 76% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.0.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Texas alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #53 safest of 161 Utility line (i.e., communicat employers in Texas.

Denbow Company, INC (240 employees, TCR 0.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 74 employees and a TCR of 2.0 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 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Denbow Company, INC
Denbow Company, INC (240 employees, TCR 0.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 74 employees and a TCR of 2.0

Denbow Company, INC has more employees than the Utility line (i.e., communication, elect median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.0. 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 0.7 0.4 3 0 0
2023 0.2 0.0 1 0 0
2022 0.5 0.0 2 0 0
2019 1.7 0.4 4 0 0
2018 0.6 0.0 1 0 0
2017 1.9 1.3 3 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

237130 · TX · Dripping Springs

1,605 Utility line (i.e., communication, electric power), construction employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 38,394 rated employers in Texas with headcount on file · 17 employers in Dripping Springs, TX · 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 HMI Utilities - Belton, TX 0.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Hargrave Power, Inc 0.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Tower Inspection, Inc. 0.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Henkels & McCoy West, LLC - Portland, OR 0.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE 6325 Hwy 380 240 FTE
STATE-SIZE Empire Roofing Inc. 240 FTE
STATE-SIZE Evergreen Innovation Group - Dallas 240 FTE
STATE-SIZE TCS Mechanical, LLC 240 FTE
CITY-NEAR Patriot Erectors 486 FTE
CITY-NEAR Whim Hospitality - Corporate 219 FTE
CITY-NEAR Whim Hospitality - Camp Lucy 173 FTE
CITY-NEAR Whim Hospitality - Rentals and Tents 129 FTE
NAT-TCR Branch 7072 - WP Charles St 0.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Corporate 0.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Technics 2000 Inc. 0.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Komatsu America Corp. 0.9 TCR
NAT-SIZE Marimn Health 240 FTE
NAT-SIZE 1063 - Carmel East 151st Street 240 FTE
NAT-SIZE 2613 - Chicago Gold Coast 240 FTE
NAT-SIZE Delta Air Lines - AGS 240 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, 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.