Employer · California

S03191 - Anderson Cottonwood Disposal

Redding, CA · ~43 workers · 9 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

D
Poor Safety Record
3.6
Avg TCR
2.6
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

S03191 - Anderson Cottonwood Disposal runs at 138% of its industry's injury rate - more dangerous than the typical industry workplace, earning a grade D.

S03191 - Anderson Cottonwood Disposal: 3.6 TCR = 138% of industry BLS 2.6 · 9y Form 300A (see methodology below)

S03191 - Anderson Cottonwood Disposal safety composite

S03191 - Anderson Cottonwood Disposal scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 67% of same-industry peers) and weakest on fatalities (safer than 52%), 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

61/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 3.6 per 100 workers

Safer than 67% of industry peers

DART rate
C 2.38 per 100 workers

Safer than 61% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 52% 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

S03191 - Anderson Cottonwood Disposal: 2.5 → 4.8 TCR

Peak year 2021 @ 9.9 TCR · DART/TCR 0.66× in 2024

S03191 - Anderson Cottonwood Disposal's TCR rose 2.2 from 2.5 in 2016 to 4.8 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2021 at 9.9 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0.66× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 562111 · Redding, CA ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade D · TCR 3.6 · 138% of ind

  • DART 2.4 DART
  • RANK #50/247
  • PHOTO S04058 - WM of Lake …
  • BOOK 9y book
  • INJ 10 inj
  • SIZE ~43 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: S04058 - WM of Lake Charles (0.0 TCR gap)

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

S03191 - Anderson Cottonwood Disposal in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows S03191 - Anderson Cottonwood Disposal averages 3.6 TCR (138% of the industry BLS benchmark).

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

S03191 - Anderson Cottonwood Disposal TCR series: 2016=2.5 · 2017=0 · 2018=7.7 · 2019=0 · 2020=2.5 · 2021=9.9 · 2022=2.5 · 2023=2.5 · 2024=4.8 · BLS 2.6

Where S03191 - Anderson Cottonwood Disposal falls in its industry

2,322 industry establishments

Safer than 67% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 5.1.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to California alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #50 safest of 247 industry employers in California.

S03191 - Anderson Cottonwood Disposal (43 employees, TCR 3.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 55 employees and a TCR of 5.1 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 0100200300400 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate S03191 - Anderson Cottonwood Disposal
S03191 - Anderson Cottonwood Disposal (43 employees, TCR 3.6) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 55 employees and a TCR of 5.1

S03191 - Anderson Cottonwood Disposal has fewer employees than the industry median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 5.1. 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 4.8 2.4 2 0 0
2023 2.5 0.0 1 0 0
2022 2.5 2.5 1 0 0
2021 9.9 5.0 4 0 0
2020 2.5 0.0 1 0 0
2019 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2018 7.7 0.0 0 3 0
2017 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2016 2.5 2.5 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

562111 · CA · Redding

2,322 industry employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 51,834 rated employers in California with headcount on file · 207 employers in Redding, CA · 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 S04058 - WM of Lake Charles 3.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR S04420 - East Oak Landfill 3.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR GFL Solid Waste Midwest LLC-Viroqua HC 3.6 TCR
NAICS-TCR Waste Pro 108 - Putnam 3.6 TCR
STATE-SIZE Robert & Sandra Garcia Farming Partnership 43 FTE
STATE-SIZE ARVIN ADMINISTRATION 43 FTE
STATE-SIZE Donald W Beeman 43 FTE
STATE-SIZE KG Vineyard Management, LLC 43 FTE
CITY-NEAR 6403-64030151 1,894 FTE
CITY-NEAR Mercy Medical Center Redding 1,789 FTE
CITY-NEAR 64030151-151001 MERCY MEDICAL CENTER REDDING 1,704 FTE
CITY-NEAR 2643-64030151-151001 1,662 FTE
NAT-TCR S04058 - WM of Lake Charles 3.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Waco 3.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Sodexo at Memorial Health System North 3.6 TCR
NAT-TCR Yale Mechanical 3.6 TCR
NAT-SIZE S04915 - WM of Pharr 43 FTE
NAT-SIZE S04011 - WI Fond du Lac 43 FTE
NAT-SIZE SFR Industries 43 FTE
NAT-SIZE WMC Inc 43 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.