Electric Power Distribution · North Carolina

Kannapolis Operations Center

Concord, NC · ~21 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
2.0
Avg TCR
1.2
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Kannapolis Operations Center runs at 168% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Electric Power Distribution workplace, earning a grade D.

Kannapolis Operations Center: 2.0 TCR = 168% of Electric Power Distribution BLS 1.2 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Kannapolis Operations Center safety composite

Kannapolis Operations Center scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 59% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 13%), 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

41/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 2.02 per 100 workers

Safer than 59% of industry peers

DART rate
F 4.51 per 100 workers

Safer than 13% 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

−5.1

2016→2024

Kannapolis Operations Center injury rate improved

Kannapolis Operations Center's TCR fell 5.1 from 9.6 in 2016 to 4.5 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2016 at 9.6 TCR. In 2024, DART was 2.23× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=9.6 · 2017=0.0 · 2018=0.0 · 2021=0.0 · 2022=0.0 · 2023=0.0 · 2024=4.5

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 221122 · Concord, NC ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 2.0 · 168% of ind

  • DART 4.5 DART
  • RANK #54/107
  • PHOTO BLMSC Bloomsburg Ser…
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 3 inj
  • SIZE ~21 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: BLMSC Bloomsburg Service Center (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Kannapolis Operations Center in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Kannapolis Operations Center averages 2.0 TCR (168% of the Electric Power Distribution BLS benchmark).

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

Kannapolis Operations Center TCR series: 2016=9.6 · 2017=0 · 2018=0 · 2021=0 · 2022=0 · 2023=0 · 2024=4.5 · BLS 1.2

Where Kannapolis Operations Center falls in its industry

2,958 Electric Power Distribution establishments

Safer than 59% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to North Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #54 safest of 107 Electric Power Distribution employers in North Carolina.

Kannapolis Operations Center (21 employees, TCR 2.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 56 employees and a TCR of 2.5 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 05001,0001,5002,000 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Kannapolis Operations Center
Kannapolis Operations Center (21 employees, TCR 2.0) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 56 employees and a TCR of 2.5

Kannapolis Operations Center has fewer employees than the Electric Power Distribution median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.5. 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 4.5 4.5 1 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
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2017 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2016 9.6 4.8 2 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

221122 · NC · Concord

2,958 Electric Power Distribution employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,981 rated employers in North Carolina with headcount on file · 338 employers in Concord, 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 BLMSC Bloomsburg Service Center 2.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Aurora 2.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR NACOGDOCHES 2.0 TCR
NAICS-TCR Marion Operations Center 2.0 TCR
STATE-SIZE Timothy Yarbrough 21 FTE
STATE-SIZE Liberty NC Breeders 21 FTE
STATE-SIZE NCJA1-SEL-JASON 1' 21 FTE
STATE-SIZE Sunburst Trout Farms 21 FTE
CITY-NEAR 1114-Atrium Health Cabarrus (1114) 3,087 FTE
CITY-NEAR 0070-CHS NorthEast 2,949 FTE
CITY-NEAR 0070-Atrium Health Cabarrus 2,870 FTE
CITY-NEAR North America Fulfillment Centers (FCs) : CLT3 1,263 FTE
NAT-TCR Faye Wright Senior Living 2.0 TCR
NAT-TCR AT T EECC Rooms Dep 2.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Union St 2.0 TCR
NAT-TCR Safford 2.0 TCR
NAT-SIZE Store 26 21 FTE
NAT-SIZE Store 87 21 FTE
NAT-SIZE Rockford 21 FTE
NAT-SIZE Rain CII Carbon - Norco 21 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, 2018, 2017, 2016. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.

Read our methodology - how this data is sourced, computed, and verified.

Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.