Fire sprinkler system installation · North Carolina

US150: Charlotte 260 - SG

Charlotte, NC · ~132 workers · 6 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
1.2
Avg TCR
2.8
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

US150: Charlotte 260 - SG runs at 44% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Fire sprinkler system installation workplace, earning a grade A.

US150: Charlotte 260 - SG: 1.2 TCR = 44% of Fire sprinkler system installation BLS 2.8 · 6y Form 300A (see methodology below)

US150: Charlotte 260 - SG safety composite

US150: Charlotte 260 - SG scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 82% 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

65/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
B 1.24 per 100 workers

Safer than 82% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0.8 per 100 workers

Safer than 55% 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

US150: Charlotte 260 - SG: 0.7 → 1.6 TCR

Peak year 2018 @ 2.3 TCR · DART/TCR 0.65× in 2021

US150: Charlotte 260 - SG's TCR rose 0.9 from 0.7 in 2016 to 1.6 in 2021. Peak filing year was 2018 at 2.3 TCR. In 2021, DART was 0.65× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 238220 · Charlotte, NC AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 1.2 · 44% of ind

  • DART 0.8 DART
  • RANK #44/212
  • PHOTO Lawton Mechanical Co…
  • BOOK 6y book
  • INJ 9 inj
  • SIZE ~132 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Lawton Mechanical Contractors (0.0 TCR gap)

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

US150: Charlotte 260 - SG in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows US150: Charlotte 260 - SG averages 1.2 TCR (44% of the Fire sprinkler system installation BLS benchmark).

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

US150: Charlotte 260 - SG TCR series: 2016=0.7 · 2017=1.2 · 2018=2.3 · 2019=0.8 · 2020=0.8 · 2021=1.6 · BLS 2.8

Where US150: Charlotte 260 - SG falls in its industry

5,793 Fire sprinkler system installa establishments

Safer than 82% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 3.3.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to North Carolina alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #44 safest of 212 Fire sprinkler system installa employers in North Carolina.

US150: Charlotte 260 - SG (132 employees, TCR 1.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 60 employees and a TCR of 3.3 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 050100150200250 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate US150: Charlotte 260 - SG
US150: Charlotte 260 - SG (132 employees, TCR 1.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 60 employees and a TCR of 3.3

US150: Charlotte 260 - SG has more employees than the Fire sprinkler system installation median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 3.3. 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
2021 1.6 0.8 2 0 0
2020 0.8 0.8 0 1 0
2019 0.8 0.0 1 0 0
2018 2.3 1.5 3 0 0
2017 1.2 0.6 2 0 0
2016 0.7 0.7 1 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

238220 · NC · Charlotte

5,793 Fire sprinkler system installation 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 Lawton Mechanical Contractors 1.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Melgar Mechanical Inc 1.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR DeBra-Kuempel Inc 1.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Wood Air Conditioning, LLC 1.2 TCR
STATE-SIZE Charlotte, NC Office 132 FTE
STATE-SIZE Lenoir Site 132 FTE
STATE-SIZE Iron Horse Contractors 132 FTE
STATE-SIZE Mexichem Specialty Compounds Pineville 132 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 Salisbury/Wilmington HVAC 1.2 TCR
NAT-TCR US128: Omaha 362 - SG 1.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Azria Health Broadwell 1.2 TCR
NAT-TCR A Finishing Touch 1.2 TCR
NAT-SIZE Cayuse Technologies, LLC 132 FTE
NAT-SIZE Arbor Material Handling, Inc. 132 FTE
NAT-SIZE Gate Precast 132 FTE
NAT-SIZE Pike Lumber Company- Akron 132 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: 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.