Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation · North Carolina

Mayo Fossil Plant

Roxboro, NC · ~65 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
0.6
Avg TCR
1.2
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Mayo Fossil Plant runs at 47% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation workplace, earning a grade A.

Mayo Fossil Plant: 0.6 TCR = 47% of Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation BLS 1.2 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Mayo Fossil Plant safety composite

Mayo Fossil Plant scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 86% 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

72/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 0.56 per 100 workers

Safer than 86% 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

−1.2

2016→2024

Mayo Fossil Plant injury rate improved

Mayo Fossil Plant's TCR fell 1.2 from 1.2 in 2016 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2017 at 2.3 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=1.2 · 2017=2.3 · 2018=0.0 · 2019=1.6 · 2020=0.0 · 2021=0.0 · 2022=0.0 · 2023=0.0 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 221112 · Roxboro, NC AT/BELOW-IND · SMALL

Grade A · TCR 0.6 · 47% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #7/20
  • PHOTO Major Oak Power
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 4 inj
  • SIZE ~65 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Major Oak Power (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Mayo Fossil Plant in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Mayo Fossil Plant averages 0.6 TCR (47% of the Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation BLS benchmark).

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

Mayo Fossil Plant TCR series: 2016=1.2 · 2017=2.3 · 2018=0 · 2019=1.6 · 2020=0 · 2021=0 · 2022=0 · 2023=0 · 2024=0 · BLS 1.2

Where Mayo Fossil Plant falls in its industry

846 Fossil Fuel Electric Power Gen establishments

Safer than 86% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to North Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #7 safest of 20 Fossil Fuel Electric Power Gen employers in North Carolina.

Mayo Fossil Plant (65 employees, TCR 0.6) 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 Mayo Fossil Plant
Mayo Fossil Plant (65 employees, TCR 0.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 59 employees and a TCR of 1.5

Mayo Fossil Plant has more employees than the Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation median and a lower 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
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 1.6 1.6 1 0 0
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2017 2.3 1.2 2 0 0
2016 1.2 0.0 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

221112 · NC · Roxboro

846 Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,981 rated employers in North Carolina with headcount on file · 46 employers in Roxboro, 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 Major Oak Power 0.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR EthosEnergy, Cosumnes Power Plant 0.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Regulated Fossil Support 0.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR NRG Will County Generating Station 0.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE AgMart Produce, Inc. LELAND, NC 65 FTE
STATE-SIZE Sanderson Farms Kinston Hatchery 65 FTE
STATE-SIZE Newell Operations Center 65 FTE
STATE-SIZE Guaranteed Supply Company 65 FTE
CITY-NEAR POLYWOOD North Carolina 452 FTE
CITY-NEAR WM 1288 282 FTE
CITY-NEAR 1288 267 FTE
CITY-NEAR Person Memorial Hospital 262 FTE
NAT-TCR Oasis Materials Company 0.6 TCR
NAT-TCR BrandSafway Solutions LLC - Denver CO Branch 0.6 TCR
NAT-TCR EMO Trans ATL 0.6 TCR
NAT-TCR GM Cable Contractors, Inc. 0.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE Mulberry Gardens Memory Care 65 FTE
NAT-SIZE Kerr Management Company 65 FTE
NAT-SIZE Active Transportation Services 65 FTE
NAT-SIZE Bowlin Group LLC 65 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.

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

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