Electric Power Distribution · North Carolina

Matthews Operations Center

Matthews, NC · ~49 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

B
Good Safety Record
0.7
Avg TCR
1.2
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Matthews Operations Center runs at 61% of its industry's injury rate - safer than the typical Electric Power Distribution workplace, earning a grade B.

Matthews Operations Center: 0.7 TCR = 61% of Electric Power Distribution BLS 1.2 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Matthews Operations Center safety composite

Matthews Operations Center scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 89% 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).

B

76/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 0.73 per 100 workers

Safer than 89% of industry peers

DART rate
B 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 79% 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→2024

Matthews Operations Center injury rate improved

Matthews Operations Center's TCR fell 2.3 from 2.3 in 2016 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2016 at 2.3 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=2.3 · 2017=2.0 · 2018=0.0 · 2019=2.3 · 2020=0.0 · 2021=0.0 · 2022=0.0 · 2023=0.0 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 221122 · Matthews, NC AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade B · TCR 0.7 · 61% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #17/107
  • PHOTO TEMPLE TRANSMISSION
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 3 inj
  • SIZE ~49 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: TEMPLE TRANSMISSION (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Matthews Operations Center in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Matthews Operations Center averages 0.7 TCR (61% of the Electric Power Distribution BLS benchmark).

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

Matthews Operations Center TCR series: 2016=2.3 · 2017=2 · 2018=0 · 2019=2.3 · 2020=0 · 2021=0 · 2022=0 · 2023=0 · 2024=0 · BLS 1.2

Where Matthews Operations Center falls in its industry

2,958 Electric Power Distribution establishments

Safer than 89% 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 #17 safest of 107 Electric Power Distribution employers in North Carolina.

Matthews Operations Center (49 employees, TCR 0.7) 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 Matthews Operations Center
Matthews Operations Center (49 employees, TCR 0.7) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 56 employees and a TCR of 2.5

Matthews 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 0.0 0.0 0 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 2.3 2.3 1 0 0
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2017 2.0 0.0 1 0 0
2016 2.3 2.3 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

221122 · NC · Matthews

2,958 Electric Power Distribution employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,981 rated employers in North Carolina with headcount on file · 94 employers in Matthews, 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 TEMPLE TRANSMISSION 0.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Entergy West Monroe 0.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR IRWIN ELECTRIC MEMBERSHIP CORPORATION 0.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR Attala Power Plant 0.7 TCR
STATE-SIZE Zackly Rite Farms 49 FTE
STATE-SIZE Taylor's Nursery-Raleigh 49 FTE
STATE-SIZE Butterball Hatchery # 3 49 FTE
STATE-SIZE Tri-County Electric Membership Corp 49 FTE
CITY-NEAR Novant Health Matthews Medical Center 1,070 FTE
CITY-NEAR 6921-06000 688 FTE
CITY-NEAR DC201 DC201 MATTHEWS NC 518 FTE
CITY-NEAR 4186-DC201 353 FTE
NAT-TCR Grady Crawford Construction Co., Inc. 0.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Rain CII Carbon - Gramercy 0.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Government Services 0.7 TCR
NAT-TCR Vopak Terminal Los Angeles Inc 0.7 TCR
NAT-SIZE Brookstone Alz 49 FTE
NAT-SIZE Cedar Ridge Alz 49 FTE
NAT-SIZE BrandSafway LLC - P66 Ferndale 49 FTE
NAT-SIZE Exotech, Inc. 49 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, 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.