Electric Power Distribution · South Carolina

Metro Columbia Crew Quarters

Cayce, SC · ~44 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

Metro Columbia Crew Quarters runs at 190% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical Electric Power Distribution workplace, earning a grade D.

Metro Columbia Crew Quarters: 2.3 TCR = 190% of Electric Power Distribution BLS 1.2 · 8y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Metro Columbia Crew Quarters safety composite

Metro Columbia Crew Quarters scores strongest on dart rate (safer than 79% 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

62/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
D 2.28 per 100 workers

Safer than 54% 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

−6.5

2017→2024

Metro Columbia Crew Quarters injury rate improved

Metro Columbia Crew Quarters's TCR fell 6.5 from 6.5 in 2017 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2017 at 6.5 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2017=6.5 · 2018=4.3 · 2019=2.1 · 2020=0.0 · 2021=3.0 · 2022=0.0 · 2023=2.3 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 221122 · Cayce, SC ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 2.3 · 190% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #62/86
  • PHOTO Shelbyville DREMC
  • BOOK 8y book
  • INJ 8 inj
  • SIZE ~44 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Shelbyville DREMC (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Metro Columbia Crew Quarters in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Metro Columbia Crew Quarters averages 2.3 TCR (190% of the Electric Power Distribution BLS benchmark).

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

Metro Columbia Crew Quarters TCR series: 2017=6.5 · 2018=4.3 · 2019=2.1 · 2020=0 · 2021=3 · 2022=0 · 2023=2.3 · 2024=0 · BLS 1.2

Where Metro Columbia Crew Quarters falls in its industry

2,958 Electric Power Distribution establishments

Safer than 54% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to South Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #62 safest of 86 Electric Power Distribution employers in South Carolina.

Metro Columbia Crew Quarters (44 employees, TCR 2.3) 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 Metro Columbia Crew Quarters
Metro Columbia Crew Quarters (44 employees, TCR 2.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 56 employees and a TCR of 2.5

Metro Columbia Crew Quarters 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 2.3 2.3 1 0 0
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2021 3.0 3.0 1 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 2.1 0.0 1 0 0
2018 4.3 4.3 2 0 0
2017 6.5 2.2 3 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

221122 · SC · Cayce

2,958 Electric Power Distribution employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 7,610 rated employers in South Carolina with headcount on file · 46 employers in Cayce, SC · 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 Shelbyville DREMC 2.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR SS5 Clark Service Center 2.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Reidsville Operations Center 2.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Western Division Demopolis Crew Headquarters 2.3 TCR
STATE-SIZE 6728-00030023-26 44 FTE
STATE-SIZE Lee Steam Station 44 FTE
STATE-SIZE Lake Marion Maintenance 44 FTE
STATE-SIZE North 44 FTE
CITY-NEAR HISTORIC COLUMBIA SPEEDWAY 863 FTE
CITY-NEAR Corporate Headquarters 606 FTE
CITY-NEAR CMC Steel South Carolina 418 FTE
CITY-NEAR OPERATIONS SUPPORT CENTER 293 FTE
NAT-TCR Salt Lake 2.3 TCR
NAT-TCR DeRock Electric Company 2.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Kelly Paving Inc. 2.3 TCR
NAT-TCR S03329 - Tucson Hauling 2.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE Lubing System, LP 44 FTE
NAT-SIZE Stanton Plant 44 FTE
NAT-SIZE Winsupply Dayton RDC 44 FTE
NAT-SIZE Phoenix Branch 44 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.

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

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