Transmission of electric power · South Dakota

East River Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.

Madison, SD · ~148 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
3.5
Avg TCR
1.2
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

East River Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. runs at 292% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Transmission of electric power workplace, earning a grade F.

East River Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.: 3.5 TCR = 292% of Transmission of electric power BLS 1.2 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

East River Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. safety composite

East River Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 52% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 25%), 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)
F 3.5 per 100 workers

Safer than 25% of industry peers

DART rate
D 0.65 per 100 workers

Safer than 45% 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%).

Rising injury rate

East River Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.: 5.4 → 5.8 TCR

Peak year 2024 @ 5.8 TCR · DART/TCR 0.19× in 2024

East River Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.'s TCR rose 0.4 from 5.4 in 2016 to 5.8 in 2024. In 2024, DART was 0.19× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 221121 · Madison, SD ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade F · TCR 3.5 · 292% of ind

  • DART 0.7 DART
  • RANK P25
  • PHOTO Indiana Municipal Po…
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 31 inj
  • SIZE ~148 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Indiana Municipal Power Agency (0.0 TCR gap)

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

East River Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows East River Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. averages 3.5 TCR (292% of the Transmission of electric power BLS benchmark).

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

East River Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. TCR series: 2016=5.4 · 2018=1.6 · 2019=4.3 · 2020=2.1 · 2021=0.7 · 2022=5.4 · 2023=2.7 · 2024=5.8 · BLS 1.2

Where East River Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. falls in its industry

263 Transmission of electric power establishments

Safer than 25% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers
East River Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. (148 employees, TCR 3.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 71 employees and a TCR of 2.2 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 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate East River Electric Power Cooperative, Inc.
East River Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. (148 employees, TCR 3.5) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 71 employees and a TCR of 2.2

East River Electric Power Cooperative, Inc. has more employees than the Transmission of electric power median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.2. 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 5.8 0.7 6 3 0
2023 2.7 0.0 4 0 0
2022 5.4 0.7 4 4 0
2021 0.7 0.0 1 0 0
2020 2.1 1.4 3 0 0
2019 4.3 3.6 6 0 0
2018 1.6 1.6 2 0 0
2016 5.4 3.1 5 2 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

221121 · SD · Madison

263 Transmission of electric power employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 1,778 rated employers in South Dakota with headcount on file · 26 employers in Madison, SD · 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 Indiana Municipal Power Agency 3.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR CA-Palm Springs S/C 3.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR CA-Central Orange County S/C 3.5 TCR
NAICS-TCR CA-South Bay S/C 3.5 TCR
STATE-SIZE Marshall 148 FTE
STATE-SIZE Tech Ord 148 FTE
STATE-SIZE Touchmark - TAAS 148 FTE
STATE-SIZE Masaba Inc. 149 FTE
CITY-NEAR Manitou Equipment America LLC - Madison 274 FTE
CITY-NEAR Madison Community Hospital d/b/a/ Madison Regional Health System 261 FTE
CITY-NEAR Madison Community Hospital d/b/a Madison Regional Health System 256 FTE
CITY-NEAR Manitou Group Madison SD 247 FTE
NAT-TCR Linamar North Carolina 3.5 TCR
NAT-TCR CMC Rebar Albuquerque 3.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Front Range Tooling Inc 3.5 TCR
NAT-TCR Ralph and Paul Adams Inc. 3.5 TCR
NAT-SIZE Sterling 148 FTE
NAT-SIZE CW Suter 148 FTE
NAT-SIZE Rick Case Hyundai (Davie) 148 FTE
NAT-SIZE Giaquinto Masonry 148 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, 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.