Safety Incidents OSHA Severe Injury Reports · 2015–2025
5,197,124Inspections Most recent open 2026-08-25 Last loaded 2026-08-28

OSHA Inspection: WATERTOWN RENDERING CO.

Accident-driven inspection · Safety discipline

On , OSHA opened an accident-driven safety inspection of WATERTOWN RENDERING CO. in RR 3, 2 MILES SOUTH, WATERTOWN, SD 57201 (NAICS 000000). OSHA activity number 643478.

What this inspection record means

OSHA opens inspections for many reasons: routine scheduling under a national or local emphasis program, an employee complaint or referral, or a follow-up after a reported injury. Opening or conducting an inspection is not itself an allegation or a finding that this employer broke any rule; any findings appear as the citations listed below, and citations can be contested, reduced, or withdrawn.

Watch Watertown Rendering CO. for free Get an email when a new federal OSHA severe-injury report for Watertown Rendering CO. is published. One employer, no account, unsubscribe in one click.
Site address
RR 3, 2 MILES SOUTH
City
WATERTOWN
State
SD
ZIP
57201
Mailing
P. O. BOX 146, WATERTOWN, SD 57201
Inspection type
Accident-driven (A)
Scope
Complete (A)
Discipline
Safety
Advance notice
No
Union status
Non-union (B)
Opened
Closing conference
Case closed
Data loaded
NAICS code
000000
SIC code (legacy)
2077
Employees
13
Ownership type
Private (A)
Industry flags
Manufacturing safety.

12 citations on file for this inspection.

5(a)(1)

Serious 7 instances 13 exposed
Issued
Jan 14, 1986
Abate by
Feb 18, 1986
Penalty
Initial $640 · Current $640
Section 5(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health ACt of 1970:  The
employer did not furnish employment and a place of employment which were
free from recognized hazards that were causing or likely to cause death
or serious physical harm to employees in that employees were exposed to:
a) Where emloyee(s)  were operating a freight elevator which was not
provided with hoistway enclosures on all accessible sides at the
basement level, exposing employees to the hazard of being crushed by
the freight elevator platform. One feasible and acceptable abatement
method of correcting the hazard, among other methods, would be to
install a hoistway enclosure extending from the landing to a height
of not less than 6 feet above the landing.
b) Where employee(s) were operating a freight elevator and the hoistway
door at the first floor landing was not equipped with combination
hoistway door mechanical locks and electrical contractsor interlocks
exposing employees to a fall hazard in excess of 4 feet. One feasible
and acceptable abatement method, among others in correcting the
hazard, would be to install hoistway doors with combination locks and
electrical contacts or interlocks which would prevent the freight
elevator car from moving when the hoistway door is not closed and
would prevent the hoistway door from being opened when the freight
elevator is not at the landing.
c) Where no sign reading, "THIS ELEVATOR DESIGNED FOR GENERAL FREIGHT
LOADING" was not permanently attached to the freight elevator
exposing employees to the hazard of riding on a freight elevator.
One feasible and acceptable abatement method would be to provide an
approved sign attached to the elevator.
d) Where employee(s) were operating a freight elevator which was not
provided with a car enclosure around the elevator platform exposing
employees to the hazard of falling materials. One feasible and
acceptable abatement method of correcting this hazard would be to
install a car enclosure on the freight elevator platform.
e) Where no capacity and data plates were on the freight elevator being
used by employees, exposing them to the hazard of overloading the
freight elevator, causing serious injury. One feasible and acceptable
abatement method would be to provide a capacity plate and data plate
permanently fastened to the freight elevator.
f) Where the freight elevator and associated hoistway mechanisms were
not tested and inspected periodically for worn or rusted parts,
exposing employees to serious hazards.  One feasible and acceptable
abatement method of correcting this hazard, among others, would be to
have regular periodic tests and inspections on this equipment.
g) The freight elevator and its associated hoisting mechanisms were not
equipped with any means of a safety car holding device exposing
employees to serious hazards. One feasible and acceptable method of
correcting this hazard, among others, would be to install an
overspeed governor that would activate a car safety device in the
event of overspeed of the elevator in a downward position.

1910.212 A01

Serious 4 instances 2 exposed
Issued
Jan 14, 1986
Abate by
Feb 18, 1986
Penalty
Initial $210 · Current $210

1910.219 C02 I

Serious 6 instances 3 exposed
Issued
Jan 14, 1986
Abate by
Feb 18, 1986

1910.219 D01

Serious 2 instances 1 exposed
Issued
Jan 14, 1986
Abate by
Feb 18, 1986

1910.219 E03 I

Serious 4 instances 2 exposed
Issued
Jan 14, 1986
Abate by
Feb 18, 1986

1910.219 I02

Serious 6 instances 2 exposed
Issued
Jan 14, 1986
Abate by
Feb 18, 1986

1910.304 F05 V

Serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jan 14, 1986
Abate by
Feb 18, 1986
Penalty
Initial $210 · Current $210

1910.305 B02

Serious 2 instances 2 exposed
Issued
Jan 14, 1986
Abate by
Jan 18, 1986

1910.27 F

Other-than-serious 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Jan 14, 1986
Abate by
Feb 18, 1986

1910.303 F

Other-than-serious 10 instances 2 exposed
Issued
Jan 14, 1986
Abate by
Feb 18, 1986

1910.304 A02

Other-than-serious 1 instance 1 exposed
Issued
Jan 14, 1986
Abate by
Feb 18, 1986

1910.305 B02

Other-than-serious 1 instance 2 exposed
Issued
Jan 14, 1986
Abate by
Jan 18, 1986

View Watertown Rendering CO.'s full OSHA safety record →

This record is reproduced from the U.S. Department of Labor Open Data API (OSHA inspection dataset). OSHA's own view of this case can be found through its Establishment Search.

Look up any company's OSHA accident reports by company, or browse severe injury reports by year, state, and company.