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

Pleasant Prarie Power Plant

Pleasant Prairie, WI · ~116 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
3.1
Avg TCR
1.2
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Pleasant Prarie Power Plant runs at 258% 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.

Pleasant Prarie Power Plant: 3.1 TCR = 258% of Electric power generation, fossil fuel (e.g., coal, oil, gas) BLS 1.2 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Pleasant Prarie Power Plant safety composite

Pleasant Prarie Power Plant scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 51% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 7%), 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).

F

23/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 3.09 per 100 workers

Safer than 19% of industry peers

DART rate
F 3.83 per 100 workers

Safer than 7% 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%).

Rising injury rate

Pleasant Prarie Power Plant: 2.4 → 3.8 TCR

Peak year 2018 @ 3.8 TCR · DART/TCR 1.24× in 2018

Pleasant Prarie Power Plant's TCR rose 1.5 from 2.4 in 2017 to 3.8 in 2018. In 2018, DART was 1.24× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 221112 · Pleasant Prairie, WI ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade F · TCR 3.1 · 258% of ind

  • DART 3.8 DART
  • RANK #6/11
  • PHOTO Owensboro Municipal …
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 6 inj
  • SIZE ~116 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Owensboro Municipal Utilities (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Pleasant Prarie Power Plant in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Pleasant Prarie Power Plant averages 3.1 TCR (258% 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

Pleasant Prarie Power Plant TCR series: 2017=2.4 · 2018=3.8 · BLS 1.2

Where Pleasant Prarie Power Plant falls in its industry

846 Electric power generation, fos establishments

Safer than 19% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Wisconsin alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #6 safest of 11 Electric power generation, fos employers in Wisconsin.

Pleasant Prarie Power Plant (116 employees, TCR 3.1) 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 Pleasant Prarie Power Plant
Pleasant Prarie Power Plant (116 employees, TCR 3.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 59 employees and a TCR of 1.5

Pleasant Prarie Power Plant 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 3.8 3.8 2 0 0
2017 2.4 1.2 4 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

221112 · WI · Pleasant Prairie

846 Electric power generation, fossil fuel (e.g., coal, oil, gas) employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 12,834 rated employers in Wisconsin with headcount on file · 97 employers in Pleasant Prairie, WI · 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 Owensboro Municipal Utilities 3.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Oklaunion Plant 3.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR SALT RIVER PROJECT CORONADO GENERATING STATION 3.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR KCP&L - Sedalia Service Center 3.1 TCR
STATE-SIZE Utility Traffic & Restoration, LLC 116 FTE
STATE-SIZE Cleary Building Corporation 116 FTE
STATE-SIZE Tomah Processing 116 FTE
STATE-SIZE BelGioioso Cheese - Corporate Office 116 FTE
CITY-NEAR Corporate Office - H1 1,607 FTE
CITY-NEAR 9555 - 76th Street 1,154 FTE
CITY-NEAR Corporate (H2) 784 FTE
CITY-NEAR Corporate (H1) 757 FTE
NAT-TCR TX-Dallas-Operating Center 3.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Global Services Supply Chain Operations : Kansas City, MO 3.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Giant Eagle #3165 3.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Swainsboro (Gaswa) 3.1 TCR
NAT-SIZE Assisted Transportation Services - Kansas City 116 FTE
NAT-SIZE CC019 - Snohomish Office 116 FTE
NAT-SIZE Gastonia (Ncgas) 116 FTE
NAT-SIZE Heritage Health - Danville 116 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.