Water treatment and distribution · California

Inland Empire Utilites Agency

Chino, CA · ~316 workers · 8 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
2.3
Avg TCR
1.2
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Inland Empire Utilites Agency runs at 189% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Water treatment and distribution workplace, earning a grade D.

Inland Empire Utilites Agency: 2.3 TCR = 189% of Water treatment and distribution BLS 1.2 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Inland Empire Utilites Agency safety composite

Inland Empire Utilites Agency scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 73% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 51%), 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

64/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 2.27 per 100 workers

Safer than 73% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0.95 per 100 workers

Safer than 63% 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

−1.0

2017→2024

Inland Empire Utilites Agency injury rate improved

Inland Empire Utilites Agency's TCR fell 1.0 from 2.3 in 2017 to 1.3 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2018 at 3.4 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.42× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=2.3 · 2018=3.4 · 2019=3.0 · 2020=3.0 · 2021=3.0 · 2022=1.1 · 2023=1.0 · 2024=1.3

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 221310 · Chino, CA ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade D · TCR 2.3 · 189% of ind

  • DART 0.9 DART
  • RANK #37/176
  • PHOTO Main Office
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 47 inj
  • SIZE ~316 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Main Office (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Inland Empire Utilites Agency in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Inland Empire Utilites Agency averages 2.3 TCR (189% of the Water treatment and distribution BLS benchmark).

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

Inland Empire Utilites Agency TCR series: 2017=2.3 · 2018=3.4 · 2019=3 · 2020=3 · 2021=3 · 2022=1.1 · 2023=1 · 2024=1.3 · BLS 1.2

Where Inland Empire Utilites Agency falls in its industry

727 Water treatment and distributi establishments

Safer than 73% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 4.2.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #37 safest of 176 Water treatment and distributi employers in California.

Inland Empire Utilites Agency (316 employees, TCR 2.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 53 employees and a TCR of 4.2 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 0100200300400 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Inland Empire Utilites Agency
Inland Empire Utilites Agency (316 employees, TCR 2.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 53 employees and a TCR of 4.2

Inland Empire Utilites Agency has more employees than the Water treatment and distribution median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 4.2. 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 1.3 0.9 4 0 0
2023 1.0 0.7 3 0 0
2022 1.1 1.1 3 0 0
2021 3.0 2.7 8 0 0
2020 3.0 1.9 8 0 0
2019 3.0 3.0 7 1 0
2018 3.4 3.4 9 0 0
2017 2.3 1.5 5 1 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

221310 · CA · Chino

727 Water treatment and distribution employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 268 employers in Chino, 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 Main Office 2.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Joint Base San Antonio (JBSA) 2.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Champlain Water District 2.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR DWM-Sawyer Water Purification Plant SWPP | 3300 E. Cheltenham Place 2.3 TCR
STATE-SIZE San Diego Farms LLC 316 FTE
STATE-SIZE Borrego Solar Systems, Inc. 316 FTE
STATE-SIZE Brady SoCal Inc 316 FTE
STATE-SIZE Korbel Champagne Cellars 316 FTE
CITY-NEAR 4078 2,902 FTE
CITY-NEAR 8103 2,259 FTE
CITY-NEAR WM 4078 1,732 FTE
CITY-NEAR California Institution for Men 1,680 FTE
NAT-TCR Cape Fear Valley Health System/Hoke County 2.3 TCR
NAT-TCR CF Rail Services Meridian, Mississippi 2.3 TCR
NAT-TCR 4-County Electric Power Association 2.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Avflight Rochester Corporation 2.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE Del Monte Foods, Inc. Yakima Plant 316 FTE
NAT-SIZE United Group Services 316 FTE
NAT-SIZE Kewadin Shores Casino 316 FTE
NAT-SIZE Houston Office 316 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, 2017. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.