Alternative energy (e.g., geothermal, ocean wave, solar, wind) structure construction · California

Hanwha Q Cells USA Corp.

Irvine, CA · ~145 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
0.0
Avg TCR
2.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Hanwha Q Cells USA Corp. runs at 1% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Alternative energy (e.g., geothermal, ocean wave, solar, wind) structure construction workplace, earning a grade A.

Hanwha Q Cells USA Corp.: 0.0 TCR = 1% of Alternative energy (e.g., geothermal, ocean wave, solar, wind) structure construction BLS 2.8 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Hanwha Q Cells USA Corp. safety composite

Hanwha Q Cells USA Corp. scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 100% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 52%), 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

72/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
A 0.03 per 100 workers

Safer than 100% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0.21 per 100 workers

Safer than 55% 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%).

Hanwha Q Cells USA Corp. held a steady TCR band

Hanwha Q Cells USA Corp.'s TCR held near 0.2 from 0.0 in 2018 to 0.2 in 2024. In 2024, DART was 7× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2018=0.0 · 2019=0.0 · 2020=0.0 · 2021=0.0 · 2022=0.0 · 2023=0.0 · 2024=0.2

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 237130 · Irvine, CA AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 0.0 · 1% of ind

  • DART 0.2 DART
  • RANK #1/147
  • PHOTO 15-100 IN
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 2 inj
  • SIZE ~145 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: 15-100 IN (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Hanwha Q Cells USA Corp. in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Hanwha Q Cells USA Corp. averages 0.0 TCR (1% of the Alternative energy (e.g., geothermal, ocean wave, solar, wind) structure construction BLS benchmark).

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

Hanwha Q Cells USA Corp. TCR series: 2018=0 · 2019=0 · 2020=0 · 2021=0 · 2022=0 · 2023=0 · 2024=0.2 · BLS 2.8

Where Hanwha Q Cells USA Corp. falls in its industry

1,605 Alternative energy (e.g., geot establishments

Safer than 100% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.0.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #1 safest of 147 Alternative energy (e.g., geot employers in California.

Hanwha Q Cells USA Corp. (145 employees, TCR 0.0) 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 Hanwha Q Cells USA Corp.
Hanwha Q Cells USA Corp. (145 employees, TCR 0.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 74 employees and a TCR of 2.0

Hanwha Q Cells USA Corp. has more employees than the Alternative energy (e.g., geothermal, oc 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 0.2 0.2 2 0 0
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

237130 · CA · Irvine

1,605 Alternative energy (e.g., geothermal, ocean wave, solar, wind) structure construction employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 622 employers in Irvine, CA · 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 15-100 IN 0.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR 105185 - IPP Repowering- 840MW 2x2x1 CC 0.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR 103171 - Huntington Beach Energy Project 0.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR 103258 - Birdsboro Power Project 0.1 TCR
STATE-SIZE CADY - 02 145 FTE
STATE-SIZE R&T Farm Management, Inc. 145 FTE
STATE-SIZE Ocean Mist Farms - Castroville 145 FTE
STATE-SIZE SANTA ROSA OFFICES 145 FTE
CITY-NEAR UC Irvine 16,029 FTE
CITY-NEAR CA-10 4,926 FTE
CITY-NEAR Edwards Lifesciences 4,189 FTE
CITY-NEAR Johnson and Johnson MDD CSS Irvine 3,775 FTE
NAT-TCR RKA Petroleum Inc 0.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Location 45018 0.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Throgs Neck Rehabilitation & Nursing Center 0.0 TCR
NAT-TCR 12758 - Canton 0.0 TCR
NAT-SIZE 3385 - Times Square 42nd Street 145 FTE
NAT-SIZE Steiner Real Estate Services, LLC 145 FTE
NAT-SIZE 1077 - Winston-Salem Hanes Mall 145 FTE
NAT-SIZE Alkegen HQ Tonawanda 145 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.