Electric power generation, fossil fuel (e.g., coal, oil, gas) · Pennsylvania

Martins Creek Generating Station

Bangor, PA · ~72 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
3.6
Avg TCR
1.2
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Martins Creek Generating Station runs at 300% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Electric power generation, fossil fuel (e.g., coal, oil, gas) workplace, earning a grade F.

Martins Creek Generating Station: 3.6 TCR = 300% of Electric power generation, fossil fuel (e.g., coal, oil, gas) BLS 1.2 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Martins Creek Generating Station safety composite

Martins Creek Generating Station scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 71% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (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

43/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 3.6 per 100 workers

Safer than 13% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 71% 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

−2.3

2016→2018

Martins Creek Generating Station injury rate improved

Martins Creek Generating Station's TCR fell 2.3 from 5.1 in 2016 to 2.8 in 2018. Peak filing year was 2016 at 5.1 TCR. In 2018, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=5.1 · 2017=2.9 · 2018=2.8

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 221112 · Bangor, PA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade F · TCR 3.6 · 300% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #38/46
  • PHOTO Newington Station
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 8 inj
  • SIZE ~72 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Newington Station (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Martins Creek Generating Station in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Martins Creek Generating Station averages 3.6 TCR (300% of the Electric power generation, fossil fuel (e.g., coal, oil, gas) BLS benchmark).

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

Martins Creek Generating Station TCR series: 2016=5.1 · 2017=2.9 · 2018=2.8 · BLS 1.2

Where Martins Creek Generating Station falls in its industry

846 Electric power generation, fos establishments

Safer than 13% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Pennsylvania alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #38 safest of 46 Electric power generation, fos employers in Pennsylvania.

Martins Creek Generating Station (72 employees, TCR 3.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 59 employees and a TCR of 1.5 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 0200400600800 051015 Average employees Total Case Rate Martins Creek Generating Station
Martins Creek Generating Station (72 employees, TCR 3.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 59 employees and a TCR of 1.5

Martins Creek Generating Station has more employees than the Electric power generation, fossil fuel ( median and a higher injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.5. 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
2018 2.8 0.0 2 0 0
2017 2.9 0.0 2 0 0
2016 5.1 1.3 4 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

221112 · PA · Bangor

846 Electric power generation, fossil fuel (e.g., coal, oil, gas) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 22,692 rated employers in Pennsylvania with headcount on file · 12 employers in Bangor, PA · 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 Newington Station 3.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Southwestern 3.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Northeastern Power Company 3.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Genoa #3 3.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE Esbenshade Mount Joy 72 FTE
STATE-SIZE Maple Lawn Associates 72 FTE
STATE-SIZE Kreider Farms - Middletown Egg 72 FTE
STATE-SIZE Ken Davis Mushroom Farms 72 FTE
CITY-NEAR BioSpectra Bangor Facility 144 FTE
CITY-NEAR Slate Belt Health & rehab Center 123 FTE
CITY-NEAR MC OpCo, LLC 67 FTE
CITY-NEAR 483015-Bangor | PA | KBS-200 64 FTE
NAT-TCR Michels Civil- Brownsville 3.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Building 1 3.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Courtyard Austin N 3.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Valence Surface Technologies Eastman Operations 3.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Senior Care Beltline 72 FTE
NAT-SIZE South Shore Nursing and Rehab 72 FTE
NAT-SIZE Des Moines Two Rivers Gas 72 FTE
NAT-SIZE Lexington Sheet Plant 72 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: 2018, 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.