Industrial building (except warehouses) construction · Washington

Waste Treatment Plant (WTP)

Richland, WA · ~673 workers · 7 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

A
Excellent Safety Record
0.1
Avg TCR
2.9
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) runs at 2% of its industry's injury rate - far safer than the typical Industrial building (except warehouses) construction workplace, earning a grade A.

Waste Treatment Plant (WTP): 0.1 TCR = 2% of Industrial building (except warehouses) construction BLS 2.9 · 7y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) safety composite

Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) scores strongest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 99% 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).

B

78/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
A 0.06 per 100 workers

Safer than 99% of industry peers

DART rate
C 0 per 100 workers

Safer than 73% 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%).

Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) held a steady TCR band

Waste Treatment Plant (WTP)'s TCR held near 0.0 from 0.0 in 2018 to 0.0 in 2024. Peak filing year was 2019 at 0.4 TCR. In 2024, DART was 0× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

2018=0.0 · 2019=0.4 · 2020=0.0 · 2021=0.0 · 2022=0.0 · 2023=0.0 · 2024=0.0

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 236210 · Richland, WA AT/BELOW-IND · MID

Grade A · TCR 0.1 · 2% of ind

  • DART 0.0 DART
  • RANK #1/20
  • PHOTO Greenville Office
  • BOOK 7y book
  • INJ 3 inj
  • SIZE ~673 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: Greenville Office (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) averages 0.1 TCR (2% of the Industrial building (except warehouses) construction BLS benchmark).

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

Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) TCR series: 2018=0 · 2019=0.4 · 2020=0 · 2021=0 · 2022=0 · 2023=0 · 2024=0 · BLS 2.9

Where Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) falls in its industry

924 Industrial building (except wa establishments

Safer than 99% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.6.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Washington alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #1 safest of 20 Industrial building (except wa employers in Washington.

Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) (673 employees, TCR 0.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 71 employees and a TCR of 1.6 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 05001,0001,500 05101520 Average employees Total Case Rate Waste Treatment Plant (WTP)
Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) (673 employees, TCR 0.1) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 71 employees and a TCR of 1.6

Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) has more employees than the Industrial building (except warehouses) median and a lower injury rate than the industry's median TCR of 1.6. 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 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2023 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2022 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2021 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2020 0.0 0.0 0 0 0
2019 0.4 0.1 3 0 0
2018 0.0 0.0 0 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

236210 · WA · Richland

924 Industrial building (except warehouses) construction employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 10,147 rated employers in Washington with headcount on file · 83 employers in Richland, WA · 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 Greenville Office 0.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR Infrastructure Reston Office 0.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR 8836-CPChem Sweeny 0.1 TCR
NAICS-TCR 4168-Bayer Luling 0.1 TCR
STATE-SIZE SELLEN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC. 674 FTE
STATE-SIZE Moses Lake, WA 672 FTE
STATE-SIZE Vancouver (VCS) 677 FTE
STATE-SIZE Coho Distributing LLC - Kent 669 FTE
CITY-NEAR 2252-00000320 4,577 FTE
CITY-NEAR WA566 KADLEC REGIONAL MEDICAL CTR-RICHLAND HR 2,150 FTE
CITY-NEAR Waste Treatment Completion Company (WTCC) 1,978 FTE
CITY-NEAR WTCC LLC US WA Richland WA WA989 609 FTE
NAT-TCR Dto Logistics LLC 0.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Swinerton Inc 0.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Sesco Wilma 0.1 TCR
NAT-TCR Greenville Office 0.1 TCR
NAT-SIZE Procter and Gamble WCMC 673 FTE
NAT-SIZE double kwik Phelps 673 FTE
NAT-SIZE double kwik Hindman 2 673 FTE
NAT-SIZE double kwik Pound 673 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. This is publicly available government data - not a legal determination of workplace conditions.
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details.