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

Graycliff Enterprises

Greensboro, NC · ~151 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
8.3
Avg TCR
2.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Graycliff Enterprises runs at 296% 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.

Graycliff Enterprises: 8.3 TCR = 296% of Cable laying (e.g., cable television, electricity, marine, telephone), including underground BLS 2.8 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Graycliff Enterprises safety composite

Graycliff Enterprises scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 52% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 9%), 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 8.29 per 100 workers

Safer than 9% of industry peers

DART rate
F 3.36 per 100 workers

Safer than 19% 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

Graycliff Enterprises: 7.2 → 9.4 TCR

Peak year 2017 @ 9.4 TCR · DART/TCR 0.41× in 2017

Graycliff Enterprises's TCR rose 2.2 from 7.2 in 2016 to 9.4 in 2017. In 2017, DART was 0.41× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 237130 · Greensboro, NC ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade F · TCR 8.3 · 296% of ind

  • DART 3.4 DART
  • RANK #74/79
  • PHOTO Underground Services
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 25 inj
  • SIZE ~151 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Underground Services (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Graycliff Enterprises in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Graycliff Enterprises averages 8.3 TCR (296% 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

Graycliff Enterprises TCR series: 2016=7.2 · 2017=9.4 · BLS 2.8

Where Graycliff Enterprises falls in its industry

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

Safer than 9% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.0.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to North Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #74 safest of 79 Cable laying (e.g., cable tele employers in North Carolina.

Graycliff Enterprises (151 employees, TCR 8.3) 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 Graycliff Enterprises
Graycliff Enterprises (151 employees, TCR 8.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 74 employees and a TCR of 2.0

Graycliff Enterprises has more 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
2017 9.4 3.4 14 0 0
2016 7.2 3.9 11 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

237130 · NC · Greensboro

1,605 Cable laying (e.g., cable television, electricity, marine, telephone), including underground employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,981 rated employers in North Carolina with headcount on file · 920 employers in Greensboro, 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 Underground Services 8.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Smith Denison Construction Company 8.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Washington Branch 8.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Mililani, HI Office CS 8.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE Aquafil OMara 151 FTE
STATE-SIZE Louisiana-Pacific Roxboro 151 FTE
STATE-SIZE Poppelmann Plastics USA LLC 151 FTE
STATE-SIZE Absolute Plastics 151 FTE
CITY-NEAR MHCMH-Cone-Moses H Cone Memorial Hospital 3,806 FTE
CITY-NEAR Guilford County Local Government - All Employees 3,270 FTE
CITY-NEAR Guilford County Local Government 3,194 FTE
CITY-NEAR NCGRE - GREENSBORO HUB 2,447 FTE
NAT-TCR Wellington at NRH 8.3 TCR
NAT-TCR 8350 Lyra Drive,LLC 8.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Poff Carting Services LLC 8.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Underground Services 8.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE N and R of Farmington LLC 151 FTE
NAT-SIZE Uniek, Inc 151 FTE
NAT-SIZE 5472-Swy 0035 3304 151 FTE
NAT-SIZE State College (Pasta) 151 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: 2017, 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.