Cargill Meat Solutions: Non-Compliance to Humane Livestock Handling in 2021 (USDA)

313.2

On September 8, 2021, at approximately 0548, while performing Antemortem and HATS Task Category III – Water and Feed Availability, SCSI REDACTED observed the water tank between pens 10 and 9 and 8 and 7 were empty. Cattle were present in all pens. Red Hat REDACTED was present, shown the findings, immediately went to the hide room to turn on the water, and was notified a noncompliance would be issued. None of these animals appeared to be affected by dehydration, but cattle from pens 7 and 8 were seen with their nose in the tank once water was replenished. It is unknown how long the water tanks were empty. However, the cattle from pens 9 (156 steers) and 10 (146 steers) arrived at the establishment between the hours of 0214 – 0300. The cattle from pens 7 and 8 (211 steers) were held overnight as they were not killed the previous production day (September 7, 2021). These cattle passed antemortem inspection at 2313 by SPHV Dr. REDACTED and the water tanks were full at that time. This establishment was noncompliant with 9 CFR 313.2 (e). In last ninety days one noncompliance record showed a similar or same root cause DNM4714081012/N.

313.2

On August 12, 2020, at approximately 0550, while performing Antemortem, SCSI REDACTED observed the water tank between pens 15 and 16 was empty. Cattle were present in pens 15 and 16 (roughly 200 heifers). Pen 15 and 16 were being removed from the pen to be knocked first. SCSI REDACTED called me, Dr. REDACTED, concerning the event. I talked with Yards Harvest Supervisor REDACTED about the situation. REDACTED said he is taking the pens out of service by locking the gates to the pen. I arrived to find pen 15 was empty, but pen 16 still had cattle in the pen and the water tank was empty. I called REDACTED and First Shift Harvest Superintendent REDACTED. They arrived, were shown the findings, moved the cattle to pen 14, and notified I would be writing a noncompliance for the failure to meet regulation 9 CFR 313.2(e). In the last 90 days, two MOIs (3714081712G and 4214083012G) have been written concerning this issue.

313.15(a)(1)

At approximately 1:46pm on Monday, May 10, 2021 while observing stunning effectiveness; I, Dr. REDACTED, SPHV, observed the following non-compliance: A plant employee, using a pneumatic captive bolt was observed applying the initial stun on a beef steer or heifer (Carcass: 1004). Following the first stun attempt, the animal remained with its head upright, conscious, and tossed its head up and down violently. The animal was alert with both ears upright, rhythmic breathing, and eye tracking/blinking. The employee immediately stopped the conveyer, tried to calm the animal, and realigned the pneumatic captive bolt. The employee successfully applied the second stun, which was effective at rendering the animal unconscious. An additional safety knock was also applied. The animal remained unconscious during shackling, sticking, and bleeding. General Foreman Supervisor REDACTED, and FSQR Manager REDACTED were made aware of the non-compliance. The head was retained with tag B-45411809, which exhibited the initial stun attempt along the left nasal cavity, and two appropriately placed knock holes in the middle of the forehead. Upon video review, with both FSQR Manager REDACTED, and Slaughter Floor Superintendent REDACTED, the duration between the first and second stun attempt measured at 13 seconds. Per Slaughter Floor Superintendent REDACTED, the employee will be retrained on how to properly grip the pneumatic captive bolt. Only when the appropriate shot can be taken should the second trigger be applied to alleviate any future ineffective stuns. This is not in compliance with regulation 313.15(a)(1): Immediate unconsciousness by captive bolt, in which animals shall be stunned in such a manner that they will be rendered unconscious with minimum excitement and discomfort. A similar noncompliance was documented on 5/4/21, NR: EHN2819054205N. Previous preventative measures included retraining of employees, adding a visual barrier for cattle, and moving flaps back in the knock box to allow for adequate space for employees to perform their job. Front Line Supervisor, Mr. REDACTED has also been made aware of the forth coming non-compliance, with Denver District management contacted through supervisory channels.

313.15(a)(1)

Humane Handling Routine Task: HATS Category VIII: Stunning Effectiveness At approximately 8:55pm on Tuesday, May 4, 2021 while observing stunning effectiveness, I, REDACTED, DVM, SPHV, observed the following noncompliance. The plant employee was using the pneumatic captive bolt as the primary stunning device. I observed the employee apply the first stun attempt on a beef heifer or steer. Following the first stun attempt, the animal remained with its head upright and conscious, vocalized, and was tossing its head, blinking, breathing in a rapid rhythmic breathing, and tracking with its eyes. The employee immediately stopped the conveyer and repeatedly attempted to carefully realign the pneumatic captive bolt until the animal calmed and he was able to successfully apply the second stun attempt, which was effective at rendering the animal unconscious. The animal remained unconscious during shackling, sticking, and bleeding. This is not in compliance with regulation 313.15(a)(1): Immediate unconsciousness by captive bolt. This was initially judged to not be an egregious noncompliance due quick and effective corrective actions to render the animal unconscious, therefore no regulatory control actions were taken. Plant Slaughter Floor Superintendents REDACTED and REDACTED as well as QA supervisor REDACTED were verbally notified of the noncompliance as was Mr. REDACTED, FLS for FSIS. Denver District management was contacted through supervisory channels. This noncompliance is associated with NR#EHN5921030208N-1 from 3/8/21.