Cable laying (e.g., cable television, electricity, marine, telephone), including underground · Georgia

Fortis Engineering Solutions

Chamblee, GA · ~20 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
6.9
Avg TCR
2.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Fortis Engineering Solutions runs at 245% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Cable laying (e.g., cable television, electricity, marine, telephone), including underground workplace, earning a grade F.

Fortis Engineering Solutions: 6.9 TCR = 245% of Cable laying (e.g., cable television, electricity, marine, telephone), including underground BLS 2.8 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Fortis Engineering Solutions safety composite

Fortis Engineering Solutions scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 52% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 12%), 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

23/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 6.86 per 100 workers

Safer than 12% of industry peers

DART rate
F 4.32 per 100 workers

Safer than 14% 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

−5.1

2019→2021

Fortis Engineering Solutions injury rate improved

Fortis Engineering Solutions's TCR fell 5.1 from 9.4 in 2019 to 4.3 in 2021. Peak filing year was 2019 at 9.4 TCR. In 2021, DART was 0.63× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2019=9.4 · 2021=4.3

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 237130 · Chamblee, GA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 6.9 · 245% of ind

  • DART 4.3 DART
  • RANK #69/71
  • PHOTO Aerial Electric
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 3 inj
  • SIZE ~20 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Aerial Electric (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Fortis Engineering Solutions in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Fortis Engineering Solutions averages 6.9 TCR (245% of the Cable laying (e.g., cable television, electricity, marine, telephone), including underground BLS benchmark).

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

Fortis Engineering Solutions TCR series: 2019=9.4 · 2021=4.3 · BLS 2.8

Where Fortis Engineering Solutions falls in its industry

1,605 Cable laying (e.g., cable tele establishments

Safer than 12% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.0.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Georgia alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #69 safest of 71 Cable laying (e.g., cable tele employers in Georgia.

Fortis Engineering Solutions (20 employees, TCR 6.9) 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 Fortis Engineering Solutions
Fortis Engineering Solutions (20 employees, TCR 6.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 74 employees and a TCR of 2.0

Fortis Engineering Solutions has fewer employees than the Cable laying (e.g., cable television, el median and a higher 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
2021 4.3 4.3 2 0 0
2019 9.4 9.4 1 1 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

237130 · GA · Chamblee

1,605 Cable laying (e.g., cable television, electricity, marine, telephone), including underground employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 14,941 rated employers in Georgia with headcount on file · 34 employers in Chamblee, GA · 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 Aerial Electric 6.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR NFOG0 - Ogden UT 6.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Ground Support Group 6.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Rylie Equipment & Contracting 6.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE Cal-Maine foods St George 20 FTE
STATE-SIZE Lab 20 FTE
STATE-SIZE FUNSTON GIN 20 FTE
STATE-SIZE Pennington Seed - Seed Production Division (SPI) 20 FTE
CITY-NEAR WM 3621 376 FTE
CITY-NEAR 3621 338 FTE
CITY-NEAR GA 3425 Malone Drive 227 FTE
CITY-NEAR L492-Curry Honda 178 FTE
NAT-TCR GDS Plymouth 6.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Axel Royal TX 6.9 TCR
NAT-TCR La Habra Convalescent Hospital 6.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Pacific Coast Calf Ranch, LLC 6.9 TCR
NAT-SIZE Regal Cast, Inc. 20 FTE
NAT-SIZE CRI - West Ohio 20 FTE
NAT-SIZE Guard Construction and Contracting Corporation 20 FTE
NAT-SIZE Guard Contracting Corporation 20 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: 2021, 2019. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.