Industry profile · NAICS 924110

Water control and quality program administration

Workplace injury rates across 150 OSHA-reporting establishments in this industry, 2016–2024.

150
Employers
5.3
Avg TCR
3.2
BLS benchmark
4,821
Injuries

The industry picture

Employers in Water control and quality program administration average 5.3 recordable injuries per 100 workers, 1.6 times the BLS national benchmark of 3.2.

5.3
avg TCR · reporting employers
3.2
BLS national benchmark
150
employers reporting
4,821
recordable injuries

OSHA-reporting establishments skew toward larger, higher-hazard sites, so the reporting average runs above the BLS all-establishment benchmark.

What Water control and quality program administration Safety Data Reveals

The Water control and quality program administration sector (NAICS 924110) encompasses 150 distinct employer establishments currently reporting to OSHA's Injury Tracking Application. Across this cohort, workers have logged 4,821 recordable injuries during the 2016–2024 reporting window, producing an industry-weighted average Total Case Rate (TCR) of 5.3 injuries per 100 full-time workers per year. Because OSHA's ITA mandates submission from establishments with 250+ employees plus all high-hazard industries at 20+ employees, this dataset represents a structural slice of U.S. workplace risk rather than a voluntary sample.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes a separate national benchmark TCR of 3.2 for this NAICS code, derived from the BLS Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses. Comparing the two, the ITA-reported rate of 5.3 is higher than the BLS benchmark, a gap that typically widens when the industry contains many large, high-exposure establishments required to file ITA reports. Employers in the table below are sorted so you can see how far individual establishments deviate from both the industry average and the national benchmark.

The practical value of industry-level safety data is threefold. First, jobseekers can gauge whether a prospective employer is better or worse than its industry peers, not just absolute injury counts, which tilt toward larger payrolls. Second, insurers and workers' compensation carriers use sector TCR as a baseline for experience-modification adjustments. Third, safety professionals benchmark their own programs against the cohort median. Use the grade-sorted employer list below to identify specific establishments within Water control and quality program administration that outperform or underperform the sector average, and click through to each record for year-by-year injury, illness, and fatality breakdowns.

Employers in this industry, by injury rate

Page 3 of 4
Employer LocationGradeAvg TCR
Dept. of Environmental Conservation (2) Anchorage, AK A 0.8
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency Springfield, IL A 0.8
Division of Integrated Science and Engineering West Sacramento, CA A 0.7
ERO Spokane, WA A 0.7
Puget Sound Clean Air Agency Seattle, WA A 0.7
Division of Environmental Services West Sacramento, CA A 0.7
O&M Headquarters Sacramento, CA A 0.7
Sanitary District of Decatur Il Decatur Il, IL A 0.7
MPCA-St. Paul Saint Paul, MN A 0.6
Public Affairs Office Sacramento, CA A 0.6
Division of Statewide Integrated Water Management Sacramento, CA A 0.6
Air Management Bureau Hartford, CT A 0.6
EECSOWER Frankfort, KY A 0.6
Division of Business Services Sacramento, CA A 0.6
MN Pollution Control Agency St. Paul, MN A 0.6
Division of Engineering Sacramento, CA A 0.5
Bay-Delta Office Sacramento, CA A 0.5
Bureau of Central Services Hartford, CT A 0.5
Central Valley Flood Protection Board (CVFPB) Sacramento, CA A 0.5
Executive Division Sacramento, CA A 0.4
Business Services Office Sacramento, CA A 0.4
Division of Fiscal Services Sacramento, CA A 0.4
Bureau of Materials Management & Compliance Assurance Hartford, CT A 0.4
Bureau of Water Protection & Land Reuse Hartford, CT A 0.4
Sims/Aycock Columbia, SC A 0.4
Central Office Richmond, VA A 0.3
Division of Safety Of Dams Sacramento, CA A 0.3
O&M - Engineering Services (ADC 1) Sacramento, CA A 0.3
Dept. of Environmental Conservation (1) Anchorage, AK A 0.2
Division of Technology Services Sacramento, CA A 0.1
MassDEP Boston Boston, MA A 0.1
Division of Regional Assistance Sacramento, CA C 0.0
Division of Planning Sacramento, CA C 0.0
Division of Regional Assistance - South Central Region Office - SCRO Fresno, CA C 0.0
Office of the General Counsel Sacramento, CA C 0.0
O&M - Engineering Services (ADM 1) Sacramento, CA C 0.0
City of Altoona- Utilities Altoona, IA C 0.0
Minnehaha Creek Watershed District Minnetonka, MN C 0.0
BFO Bellingham, WA C 0.0
Isotek Systems LLC Oak Ridge, TN C 0.0
MassDEP SERO Lakeville, MA C 0.0
SWP Power and Risk Office Sacramento, CA C 0.0
Dept. of Environmental Conservation (5) Fairbanks, AK C 0.0
Dept. of Environmental Conservation (7) Juneau, AK C 0.0
Dept. of Environmental Conservation (10) Soldotna, AK C 0.0
Dept. of Environmental Conservation (12) Wasilla, AK C 0.0
Air Pollution Control District Auburn, CA C 0.0
Acoma Office Denver, CO C 0.0
Office of the Chief Counsel Sacramento, CA C 0.0
Office of The Commisssioner Hartford, CT C 0.0
← Prev Page 3 of 4 Next →
Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details. Retrieved and formatted by PlainSafetyScore Editorial

Verify with BLS →

Verify with OSHA →

Working in Water control and quality program administration?

This sector averages 5.3 against a BLS benchmark of 3.2 - but individual employers span the full A-to-F range.

Sector figures use the credible-subset mean across reporting employers; a benchmark is not any single establishment's measured rate.

Every figure and grade on PlainSafetyScore is computed directly from OSHA's published Injury Tracking Application data and BLS industry benchmarks, no number is typed in by an editor. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these safety grades, or report a data error. Data current as of 2016-2024 OSHA ITA release.