Silica, amorphous, manufacturing · North Carolina

Fuji Silysia Chemical USA, Ltd.

Greenville, NC · ~30 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
3.8
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Fuji Silysia Chemical USA, Ltd. runs at 114% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Silica, amorphous, manufacturing workplace, earning a grade C.

Fuji Silysia Chemical USA, Ltd.: 3.8 TCR = 114% of Silica, amorphous, manufacturing BLS 3.3 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Fuji Silysia Chemical USA, Ltd. safety composite

Fuji Silysia Chemical USA, Ltd. scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 75% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 23%), 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

48/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 3.77 per 100 workers

Safer than 23% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 75% 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

−3.9

2018→2024

Fuji Silysia Chemical USA, Ltd. injury rate improved

Fuji Silysia Chemical USA, Ltd.'s TCR fell 3.9 from 3.9 in 2018 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2022 at 10.8 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2018=3.9 · 2019=4.1 · 2020=0.0 · 2021=0.0 · 2022=10.8 · 2023=7.6 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 325180 · Greenville, NC ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade C · TCR 3.8 · 114% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #8/10
  • PHOTO Centralia OPS
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 7 inj
  • SIZE ~30 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Centralia OPS (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Fuji Silysia Chemical USA, Ltd. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Fuji Silysia Chemical USA, Ltd. averages 3.8 TCR (114% of the Silica, amorphous, manufacturing BLS benchmark).

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

Fuji Silysia Chemical USA, Ltd. TCR series: 2018=3.9 · 2019=4.1 · 2020=0 · 2021=0 · 2022=10.8 · 2023=7.6 · 2024=0 · BLS 3.3

Where Fuji Silysia Chemical USA, Ltd. falls in its industry

418 Silica, amorphous, manufacturi establishments

Safer than 23% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.9.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to North Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #8 safest of 10 Silica, amorphous, manufacturi employers in North Carolina.

Fuji Silysia Chemical USA, Ltd. (30 employees, TCR 3.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 61 employees and a TCR of 1.9 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 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate Fuji Silysia Chemical USA, Ltd.
Fuji Silysia Chemical USA, Ltd. (30 employees, TCR 3.8) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 61 employees and a TCR of 1.9

Fuji Silysia Chemical USA, Ltd. has fewer employees than the Silica, amorphous, manufacturing median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.9. 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 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2023 7.6 3.8 2 0 0
2022 10.8 10.8 3 0 0
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 4.1 4.1 1 0 0
2018 3.9 3.9 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

325180 · NC · Greenville

418 Silica, amorphous, manufacturing employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,981 rated employers in North Carolina with headcount on file · 203 employers in Greenville, NC · 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 Centralia OPS 3.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Alorton Plant 3.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Thatcher Company of California Inc. 3.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Carbonfree Chemicals SPE I Holdings, LLC 3.7 TCR
STATE-SIZE Shugart Farm 30 FTE
STATE-SIZE Hays Hatchery 30 FTE
STATE-SIZE Hight Family Farms LLC 30 FTE
STATE-SIZE High Point Operations Center 30 FTE
CITY-NEAR Vidant Medical Center 6,615 FTE
CITY-NEAR East Carolina Univeristy Core Campus 6,489 FTE
CITY-NEAR ECU Health Medical Center 6,070 FTE
CITY-NEAR Pitt County Schools 3,499 FTE
NAT-TCR LAX Ready Mix Plant 3.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Edge Tech Inc. 3.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Oahu Port of Honolulu, Pier 21 3.8 TCR
NAT-TCR Custom Eyes 3.8 TCR
NAT-SIZE Little Dixie Construction 30 FTE
NAT-SIZE Unique Homes Lumber 30 FTE
NAT-SIZE Weir's Furniture Village, Inc. - Plano 30 FTE
NAT-SIZE MBAF 30 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.