0 · North Carolina

Residential HVAC and Supply : MFG-Charlotte (CCOE), NC-USA

Charlotte, NC · ~149 workers · 3 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
0.9
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Residential HVAC and Supply : MFG-Charlotte (CCOE), NC-USA runs at 27% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical 0 workplace, earning a grade A.

Residential HVAC and Supply : MFG-Charlotte (CCOE), NC-USA: 0.9 TCR = 27% of 0 BLS 3.3 · 3y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Residential HVAC and Supply : MFG-Charlotte (CCOE), NC-USA safety composite

Residential HVAC and Supply : MFG-Charlotte (CCOE), NC-USA scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 86% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 50%), 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

69/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 0.9 per 100 workers

Safer than 86% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0.68 per 100 workers

Safer than 62% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 50% 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

Residential HVAC and Supply : MFG-Charlotte (CCOE), NC-USA: 0.0 → 0.7 TCR

Peak year 2018 @ 2.0 TCR · DART/TCR 0.76× in 2019

Residential HVAC and Supply : MFG-Charlotte (CCOE), NC-USA's TCR rose 0.7 from 0.0 in 2017 to 0.7 in 2019. Peak filing year was 2018 at 2.0 TCR. In 2019, DART was 0.76× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 333415 · Charlotte, NC AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 0.9 · 27% of ind

  • DART 0.7 DART
  • RANK #4/17
  • PHOTO Johnson Controls- Wi…
  • BOOK 3y book
  • INJ 4 inj
  • SIZE ~149 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Johnson Controls- Wichita Site (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Residential HVAC and Supply : MFG-Charlotte (CCOE), NC-USA in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Residential HVAC and Supply : MFG-Charlotte (CCOE), NC-USA averages 0.9 TCR (27% of the 0 BLS benchmark).

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

Residential HVAC and Supply : MFG-Charlotte (CCOE), NC-USA TCR series: 2017=0 · 2018=2 · 2019=0.7 · BLS 3.3

Where Residential HVAC and Supply : MFG-Charlotte (CCOE), NC-USA falls in its industry

461 0 establishments

Safer than 86% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 2.8.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to North Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #4 safest of 17 0 employers in North Carolina.

Residential HVAC and Supply : MFG-Charlotte (CCOE), NC-USA (149 employees, TCR 0.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 164 employees and a TCR of 2.8 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 05001,0001,5002,0002,500 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate Residential HVAC and Supply : MFG-Charlotte (CCOE), NC-USA
Residential HVAC and Supply : MFG-Charlotte (CCOE), NC-USA (149 employees, TCR 0.9) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 164 employees and a TCR of 2.8

Residential HVAC and Supply : MFG-Charlotte (CCOE), NC-USA has fewer employees than the 0 median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 2.8. 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
2019 0.7 0.7 1 0 0
2018 2.0 2.0 3 0 0
2017 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

333415 · NC · Charlotte

461 0 employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 16,981 rated employers in North Carolina with headcount on file · 2,058 employers in Charlotte, 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 Johnson Controls- Wichita Site 0.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR DWD International 0.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR 2326_4368 0.9 TCR
NAICS-TCR Drake Refrigeration 0.9 TCR
STATE-SIZE Samet Corporation - Greensboro 149 FTE
STATE-SIZE Johnson Modern Electric Company, INC 149 FTE
STATE-SIZE Industrial Air Inc. 149 FTE
STATE-SIZE Domino's Supply Chain Center- North Carolina 149 FTE
CITY-NEAR 1101-Carolinas Medical Center (1101) 8,444 FTE
CITY-NEAR 0001-Carolinas Medical Center 8,032 FTE
CITY-NEAR 4795-AA-CLT-CHARLOTTE-CLT-TRML 7,295 FTE
CITY-NEAR Novant Health Presbyterian Medical Center 4,973 FTE
NAT-TCR Capay Canyon Ranch 0.9 TCR
NAT-TCR US PA Pittsburgh Plant 0.9 TCR
NAT-TCR KWF GA Kennesaw HomeStore 0.9 TCR
NAT-TCR Fabrica 0.9 TCR
NAT-SIZE Compression Technologies and Services : MFG-West Chester, PA-USA 149 FTE
NAT-SIZE The Little Potato Company Deforest Wisconsin 149 FTE
NAT-SIZE Bonduelle USA 149 FTE
NAT-SIZE Aspen Trace Health & Living 149 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: 2019, 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.