Surgical Instrument Reprocessor · Oregon

Surgical Instruments Services & Savings - RNW

Redmond, OR · ~209 workers · 2 years of OSHA Injury Tracking Application data.

F
Failing Safety Record
9.2
Avg TCR
3.3
Industry avg
0
Fatalities
Subscribe to safety-record updates (RSS)

The verdict

Surgical Instruments Services & Savings - RNW runs at 278% of its industry's injury rate - far more dangerous than the typical Surgical Instrument Reprocessor workplace, earning a grade F.

Surgical Instruments Services & Savings - RNW: 9.2 TCR = 278% of Surgical Instrument Reprocessor BLS 3.3 · 2y Form 300A (see methodology below)

Surgical Instruments Services & Savings - RNW safety composite

Surgical Instruments Services & Savings - RNW scores strongest on fatalities (safer than 50% of same-industry peers) and weakest on total case rate (tcr) (safer than 2%), 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).

F

25/100

Percentile-weighted across 3 of 3 measures

Total Case Rate (TCR)
F 9.18 per 100 workers

Safer than 2% of industry peers

DART rate
F 1.17 per 100 workers

Safer than 32% of industry peers

Fatalities
D 0

Safer than 50% 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

Surgical Instruments Services & Savings - RNW: 8.4 → 9.9 TCR

Peak year 2017 @ 9.9 TCR · DART/TCR 0.13× in 2017

Surgical Instruments Services & Savings - RNW's TCR rose 1.5 from 8.4 in 2016 to 9.9 in 2017. In 2017, DART was 0.13× this establishment's average TCR (severity share of cases).

OSHA ITA Form 300A scorecard

Establishment book 339112 · Redmond, OR ABOVE-IND · MID

Grade F · TCR 9.2 · 278% of ind

  • DART 1.2 DART
  • RANK #3/4
  • PHOTO K-Tube Technologies
  • BOOK 2y book
  • INJ 34 inj
  • SIZE ~209 FTE

Nearest TCR peer: K-Tube Technologies (0.0 TCR gap)

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

Surgical Instruments Services & Savings - RNW in the TCR neighbourhood

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

TCR

What this shows Surgical Instruments Services & Savings - RNW averages 9.2 TCR (278% of the Surgical Instrument Reprocessor BLS benchmark).

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

Surgical Instruments Services & Savings - RNW TCR series: 2016=8.4 · 2017=9.9 · BLS 3.3

Where Surgical Instruments Services & Savings - RNW falls in its industry

741 Surgical Instrument Reprocesso establishments

Safer than 2% of graded establishments in this industry, whose median TCR is 1.5.

More dangerous than peersSafer than peers

Narrower to Oregon alone (the establishments it most directly competes with for workers and contracts): ranked #3 safest of 4 Surgical Instrument Reprocesso employers in Oregon.

Surgical Instruments Services & Savings - RNW (209 employees, TCR 9.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 174 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 02,0004,0006,0008,000 0246810 Average employees Total Case Rate Surgical Instruments Services & Savings - RNW
Surgical Instruments Services & Savings - RNW (209 employees, TCR 9.2) among 29 same-industry peers, split at the industry median of 174 employees and a TCR of 1.5

Surgical Instruments Services & Savings - RNW has more employees than the Surgical Instrument Reprocessor median and a higher 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
2017 9.9 1.2 17 0 0
2016 8.4 1.5 17 0 0

OSHA ITA peer cross-reference

Establishment peer ledger

339112 · OR · Redmond

741 Surgical Instrument Reprocessor employers nationwide with a credible TCR · 8,031 rated employers in Oregon with headcount on file · 90 employers in Redmond, OR · 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 K-Tube Technologies 9.2 TCR
NAICS-TCR Preferred Medical Products- Centennial 8.8 TCR
NAICS-TCR Biofilm, Inc 8.7 TCR
NAICS-TCR DEXCOM RDC 8.7 TCR
STATE-SIZE PETERSON PACIFIC CORPORATION 209 FTE
STATE-SIZE 1920 209 FTE
STATE-SIZE 5440 209 FTE
STATE-SIZE Curry Health Network - Hospital Gold Beach 209 FTE
CITY-NEAR Redmond School District 975 FTE
CITY-NEAR High Desert Education Services 737 FTE
CITY-NEAR St Charles Health System Redmond 495 FTE
CITY-NEAR BasX Solutions 483 FTE
NAT-TCR wli-Work Leads to Independence 9.2 TCR
NAT-TCR Susquehanna Nursing & Rehabilitation Center 9.2 TCR
NAT-TCR In-N-Out Lathrop Warehouse 9.2 TCR
NAT-TCR 5069 - CA Kings County Jail 9.2 TCR
NAT-SIZE Hydro - Elkhart 209 FTE
NAT-SIZE Industrial Solutions : IS - FS - Northern USA 209 FTE
NAT-SIZE Sales - Section 41 - Frisco, TX 209 FTE
NAT-SIZE Bradley Airsort 85-171 (Ctbra) 209 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: 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.