Power generation, fossil fuel (e.g., coal, gas, oil), electric · Arizona

Sundt Generating Station (TPP)

Tucson, AZ · ~80 workers · 4 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

C
Average Safety Record
1.3
Avg TCR
1.2
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Sundt Generating Station (TPP) runs at 109% of its industry's injury rate - about level with the typical Power generation, fossil fuel (e.g., coal, gas, oil), electric workplace, earning a grade C.

Sundt Generating Station (TPP): 1.3 TCR = 109% of Power generation, fossil fuel (e.g., coal, gas, oil), electric BLS 1.2 · 4y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Sundt Generating Station (TPP) safety composite

Sundt Generating Station (TPP) scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 55% of same-industry peers) and weakest on dart rate (safer than 27%), 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).

D

44/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
C 1.31 per 100 workers

Safer than 55% of industry peers

DART rate
F 1.3 per 100 workers

Safer than 27% 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%).

Sundt Generating Station (TPP) held a steady TCR band

Sundt Generating Station (TPP)'s TCR held near 0.0 from 1.3 in 2016 to 1.3 in 2019. Peak filing year was 2018 at 2.7 TCR. In 2019, DART was 0.99× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2016=1.3 · 2017=0.0 · 2018=2.7 · 2019=1.3

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 221112 · Tucson, AZ ABOVE-IND · SMALL

Grade C · TCR 1.3 · 109% of ind

  • DART 1.3 DART
  • RANK #5/13
  • PHOTO Coyote Springs
  • BOOK 4y book
  • INJ 4 inj
  • SIZE ~80 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Coyote Springs (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Sundt Generating Station (TPP) in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Sundt Generating Station (TPP) averages 1.3 TCR (109% of the Power generation, fossil fuel (e.g., coal, gas, oil), electric BLS benchmark).

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

Sundt Generating Station (TPP) TCR series: 2016=1.3 · 2017=0 · 2018=2.7 · 2019=1.3 · BLS 1.2

Where Sundt Generating Station (TPP) falls in its industry

846 Power generation, fossil fuel establishments

Safer than 55% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Arizona alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #5 safest of 13 Power generation, fossil fuel employers in Arizona.

Sundt Generating Station (TPP) (80 employees, TCR 1.3) 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 Sundt Generating Station (TPP)
Sundt Generating Station (TPP) (80 employees, TCR 1.3) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 59 employees and a TCR of 1.5

Sundt Generating Station (TPP) has more employees than the Power generation, fossil fuel (e.g., coa 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
2019 1.3 1.3 1 0 0
2018 2.7 1.3 2 0 0
2017 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2016 1.3 1.3 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

221112 · AZ · Tucson

846 Power generation, fossil fuel (e.g., coal, gas, oil), electric employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 9,594 rated employers in Arizona with headcount on file · 1,150 employers in Tucson, AZ · 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 Coyote Springs 1.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Nucla Generating Station 1.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Fort Myers Plant 1.3 TCR
NAICS-TCR Deer Park Energy Center 1.3 TCR
STATE-SIZE Ancala Country Club 80 FTE
STATE-SIZE Bjerk Builders, LLC 80 FTE
STATE-SIZE OZ Directional Drilling 80 FTE
STATE-SIZE Pitzer Air Conditioning 80 FTE
CITY-NEAR University of Arizona 18,951 FTE
CITY-NEAR Raytheon_Tucson_AZ_Airport Site 9,878 FTE
CITY-NEAR Tucson Medical Center 4,407 FTE
CITY-NEAR U.S. Border Patrol Sector - Tucson 3,989 FTE
NAT-TCR API Osgood 1.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Wegmans Harrisburg West 045 1.3 TCR
NAT-TCR International Paper-Newport Mill 1.3 TCR
NAT-TCR Silgan Plastics Penn Yan 1.3 TCR
NAT-SIZE Arcos Industries LLC 80 FTE
NAT-SIZE Center for Advanced Orthopedics & Sports Medicine 80 FTE
NAT-SIZE Genesis Hospitality Corporation 80 FTE
NAT-SIZE The Arc of Hilo 80 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, 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.