Charlie DiMaria & Son Inc: Non-Compliance to Humane Livestock Handling in 2022 (USDA)

313.2

HATS Category IV: Antemortem Inspection, Handling of Livestock At approximately 0600 hours on July 21, 2022, while performing ante-mortem inspection, I, Dr. REDACTED observed the following noncompliance in cattle holding pen 2. In pen 2, I observed overcrowding of cattle. The cattle were occupying approximately 90% of the space in the pen, were all standing, and packed tightly together with no space between them. The only empty space in the pen was an approximately two to three-foot gap between the packed cattle and the back wall of the pen. Overcrowding creates a situation where the animals do not have enough room to lie down or freely walk around the pen to gain access to the water trough. Per 9 CFR 313.2(e), animals shall have access to water in all holding pens and, if held longer than 24 hours, access to feed. There shall be sufficient room in the holding pen for animals held overnight to lie down. Plant Manager REDACTED, Consultant REDACTED and Establishment Owner REDACTED were notified of the noncompliance. Within thirty minutes of the notification, some of the animals from pen 2 were moved to a different pen. I observed the cattle after they were moved, and confirmed they had adequate space.

313.1

HATS Category IV: Antemortem Inspection, Facilities At approximately 0615 hours on July 1, 2022, while performing antemortem inspection as part of HATS Category IV, I, SPHV Dr. REDACTED observed the following noncompliance at the cattle truck unloading ramp. Pieces of the metal grid on the floor of the truck unloading ramp were missing, thus exposing sharp metal edges which could cause injury to the cattle’s feet. I immediately placed U.S. Rejected Tag NO.B-45951900 to the gate of the unloading ramp and notified QA Supervisor REDACTED Livestock pens, driveways and ramps shall be maintained in good repair. They shall be free from sharp or protruding objects which may, in the opinion of the inspector, cause injury or pain to the animals in accordance with 9 CFR 313.1(a). This noncompliance report (NR) is linked to NR #VMH0416044819N on April 19, 2022.

313.2

HATS Category IV: Antemortem Inspection, Handling of Livestock At approximately 0700 hours on June 11, 2022, while walking on the walkway next to the serpentine leading to the stunning restrainer, I, Dr. REDACTED observed the following noncompliance in the holding pen. In the holding pen, a cow’s head was stuck in the gate opening between the gate and the pen bars. The top latch to the gate was latched, but the bottom latch, where the head was stuck was not latched. An establishment employee attempted to open the gate, but the top latch was stuck. During this time the cow was vocalizing, pawing the ground, and swishing her tail. At approximately 0705 hours, a hammer was used to free the latch and the animal was freed. I inspected the animal and found no injuries caused by the incident. Plant Manager REDACTED was notified of the incident. He suggested that the bottom latch on the gate was accidently left unlatched by establishment employees which provided the opportunity for the cow to get her head stuck. Corrective actions proffered were to ensure that employees would always secure the bottom latch on the holding pen gate. Driving of livestock from the unloading ramps to the holding pens and from the holding pens to the stunning area shall be done with a minimum of excitement and discomfort to the animals in accordance with 9 CFR 313.2(a).

313.2

HATS Category III: Water and Feed Availability At approximately 1230 hours on June 9, 2022, while performing HATS category III for feed and water availability as part of the Livestock Humane Handling Verification task, I, Dr. REDACTED observed that the water trough between cattle pens 8 and 9 was empty leaving the cattle occupying pens 8 and 9 without access to water. I notified Plant Manager REDACTED of the empty water trough and noncompliance with 9 CFR 313.2(e), which states that animals shall have access to water in all holding pens. Immediately after I notified plant management, Mr. REDACTED filled the water trough with water. This NR is linked to NR#VMH0714041311N on April 11, 2022.

313.15(a)(1)

HATS Category VIII: Stunning Effectiveness At approximately 0840 hours on May 5, 2022, I, SPHV Dr. REDACTED observed the following non-compliance at the stunning station. Plant Manager REDACTED was standing next to the stunner employee at the restrainer. An Angus beef cow was in the restrainer and the first stun with a handheld captive bolt gun was administered to the forehead. The cow remained standing and was looking around, which are signs consistent with consciousness. After Mr. REDACTED and the plant employee watched the animal for about five seconds, the employee reloaded the captive bolt gun and administered a second stun to the forehead. The animal fell to the bottom of the restrainer, its eyes were rolled downward in the sockets, its third eyelids were up and the tongue was hanging out, which indicated that the animal was stunned, but potentially regaining consciousness. When the animal was released to the kill floor, the establishment employee started to shackle and hoist it, with the hind leg raised up. I along with Mr. REDACTED witnessed the animal breathing approximately one breath every second. The employee stopped hoisting it and administered a third shot behind the poll. The animal stopped breathing, its eyes went to center and the pupils were dilated. I immediately tagged the knock box with U.S. Rejected Tag No.B-45951707 and Mr. REDACTED was immediately notified. U.S. Retained Tag No. B-45951789 was affixed to the skinned head for inspection. I observed two holes on the forehead: one hole was in the center of the forehead approximately two inches above the level of the eyes and one hole was slightly off center approximately one inch above the first hole. I also observed a third hole in the center behind the poll. This incident is noncompliant to 9 CFR 313.15(a)(1) and linked to NR# VMH2715055904N which occurred on May 4, 2022.

313.15(a)(1)

HATS Category VIII: Stunning Effectiveness At approximately 1055 hours on May 4, 2022, I, SPHV Dr. REDACTED observed the following non-compliance at the stunning station. A steer was in the knock box, and the first stunning attempt with a handheld captive bolt gun was administered to the forehead. The steer did not fall but continued to stand, moving its head from side to side, looking in all directions, and vocalized which are signs consistent with consciousness. The establishment employee took immediate action, reloaded the captive bolt gun, and within approximately ten seconds after the first attempt, he applied a second stunning attempt behind the poll, but the animal remained standing, looking around. Approximately another ten seconds later, a third attempt was administered to the forehead, which rendered the steer immediately unconscious. I immediately tagged the knock box with U.S. Rejected Tag No.B-45951799 and notified Plant Manager REDACTED of the humane handling noncompliance. U.S. Retained Tag No. B-45951792 was affixed to the skinned head for inspection. I observed two holes in the forehead: one hole was in the center of the forehead, and one hole was off center approximately three inches down the forehead from the first hole. I also observed a third hole in the center behind the poll. This NR is linked to NR#VMH4215052102N which occurred on May 2, 2022. Failure to render an animal immediately unconscious with the first application of a captive bolt stunning device is noncompliant with 9 CFR 313.15(a)1. Since the establishment had 4 prior NRs due to ineffective stunning with the captive bolt gun, a Notice of Intended Enforcement was issued to the establishment today.

313.15(a)(1)

HATS Category VIII: Stunning Effectiveness At approximately 1250 hours on May 2, 2022, I, EIAO Dr. REDACTED observed the following non-compliance. While performing an onsite verification visit, I was in the bleeding area observing sanitary dressing and skinning procedures. A steer was loaded into the knock box and I heard the captive bolt gun discharge. I noted the animal did not collapse. I immediately heard the animal vocalize and could hear the animal walking back and forth. I observed the stunning employee reload the hand-held captive bolt gun and start to follow the animal's head with the gun as it moved back and forth and side to side in the knock box for approximately 30 to 40 seconds. Once the animal was still, a second stun was applied which rendered the animal insensible. The stunning employee then released the animal from the knock box and it rolled into the bleeding area. He checked for signs of insensibility before proceeding to shackle and hoist the animal. Once the head was skinned and removed, I inspected the skull. Two holes were present, one above the left eye and a second hole present just left of midline of the forehead. Both holes penetrated the thickness of the skull. SPHV, Dr. REDACTED was present for the head inspection and applied retain tag number B-45 951736 to the head at 1300 hours. I informed plant manager, REDACTED, and HACCP Coordinator, REDACTED of the forthcoming noncompliance and that slaughter operations were halted until further instructions from the district office. The SPHV applied reject tag number B-45 951802 to the knock box at approximately 1320 hours. This noncompliance report is linked to NR # VMH5416043128N which occurred on April 28, 2022. Failure to render an animal immediately unconscious with the first application of a captive bolt stunning device is noncompliant with 9 CFR 313.15(a)1.

313.15(a)(1)

HATS Category VIII: Stunning Effectiveness At approximately 1330 on April 28, 2022, I, SPHV Dr. REDACTED observed the following non-compliance at the stunning station. A dairy cow was in the knock box, and the first stunning attempt with a handheld captive bolt gun was administered to the forehead. The cow did not fall but continued to stand, moving its head from side to side, and looking in all directions, which are signs consistent with consciousness. The establishment employee took immediate action, reloaded the captive bolt gun, and applied a second stunning attempt to the forehead, which rendered the cow immediately unconscious. I continued to observe stunning for another twenty minutes and no additional incidents of noncompliance were observed. Plant Manager REDACTED and Consultant REDACTED were notified of the noncompliance. Failure to render an animal immediately unconscious with the first application of a captive bolt stunning device is noncompliant with 9 CFR 313.15(a)1. This NR is linked to VMH5308045113N on April 12, 2022.

313.50

HATS Category IV: Antemortem Inspection, Facilities At approximately 0545 on April 28, 2022, I, SPHV Dr. REDACTED observed the following non-compliance in Pen 3: Approximately 20 head of cattle were occupying Pen 3, a pen with a water trough that had been tagged with U.S. Rejected Tag No.B-45951583 and entry gate tagged with U.S. Rejected Tag No.B-45951582 on Monday, April 25, 2022. The pen was tagged because a heifer was observed to have her head stuck between the bars above the water trough and was in distress enough to be euthanized and condemned. On Monday, April 25, 2022, Plant Manager REDACTED notified me that the bars at the water trough would be reconstructed to prevent recurrence; however, the reconstruction had not yet been implemented, and the pen still had the U.S. rejected tag affixed to it. Upon immediate observation of the occupied pen, I instructed the plant employees to remove the animals from Pen 3, and the cattle were relocated to Pen 8. I notified Assistant Plant Manager REDACTED of the noncompliance. No equipment, alleyway, pen or compartment so tagged shall be used until made acceptable to the inspector in accordance with 9 CFR 313.50(a).

313.1

HATS Category IV: Antemortem Inspection, Facilities At approximately 05:45 on 4/25/2022 while performing antemortem inspection as part of HATS Category IV, I, Dr. REDACTED observed the following noncompliance in Pen 3. In Pen 3, a heifer had its head stuck between the metal bars at the water trough. The rest of the animals were removed from the pen by establishment employees for ante-mortem inspection; however, this animal could not remove her head from the metal bars. After observing the animal for approximately 3-5 minutes, I could see this animal was in distress as it was moving her head from side to side, pulling her head back and forth, and moving her body in all directions trying to get her head free. I condemned the animal due to this condition of distress, and the establishment employees immediately euthanized her. I placed U.S. Rejected Tag No.B-45951583 to the water trough in Pen 3. I notified Plant Manager, REDACTED, of the placed tag and noncompliance. Livestock pens, driveways and ramps shall be maintained in good repair. They shall be free from sharp or protruding objects which may, in the opinion of the inspector, cause injury or pain to the animals in accordance with 9 CFR 313.1(a).

313.1

HATS Category IV: Antemortem Inspection, Facilities At approximately 12:45 on 4/19/2022 while performing a humane handling task for facilities as part of HATS Category IV, I, Dr. REDACTED observed the following noncompliance in Pen 10 by the feeding troughs. A suspension metal cord/wire was unraveling, revealing a sharp point approximately two feet above the feeding trough in Pen 10. I placed U.S. Rejected Tag No.B-45702679 to the metal cord. I notified Plant Manager, REDACTED, of the placed tag and noncompliance. Approximately 15 minutes later, a plant employee removed the sharp wire from the suspension cord. I removed the tag after observing Pen 10 was free of sharp protruding objects. Livestock pens, driveways and ramps shall be maintained in good repair. They shall be free from sharp or protruding objects which may, in the opinion of the inspector, cause injury or pain to the animals in accordance with 9 CFR 313.1(a).

313.15(a)(1)

HATS Category VIII: Stunning Effectiveness At approximately 11:30 on 4/12/22, while performing the observation of stunning effectiveness for the Livestock Humane Handling Verification task, I, Dr. REDACTED observed the following noncompliance at the stunning station. A steer was in the knock box, and the first stunning attempt with a handheld captive bolt gun was administered to the forehead. The steer did not fall but continued to stand, moving its head from side to side, and looking in all directions, which are signs consistent with consciousness. The establishment employee took immediate action, reloaded the captive bolt gun, and applied a second stunning attempt to the forehead, which rendered the steer immediately unconscious. No other incidents of noncompliance were observed during the 30 minutes of observation. Plant Manager, REDACTED, was notified of the Humane Handling noncompliance. Failure to render an animal immediately unconscious with the first application of a captive bolt stunning device is noncompliant with 9 CFR 313.15(a)1. This NR is linked to VMH5015042604N on 4/4/22.

313.2

HATS Category III: Water and Feed Availability At approximately 11:30, while performing HATS category III for feed and water availability as part of the Livestock Humane Handling Verification task, I, Dr. REDACTED observed that the water trough in cattle pen 3 was empty leaving the cattle occupying pen 3 without access to water. I notified Plant Manager, REDACTED, of the empty water trough and noncompliance with 9 CFR 313.2(e), which states that animals shall have access to water in all holding pens. Approximately, five minutes after I notified plant management, a plant employee filled the water trough with water.

313.1

HATS Category IV: Antemortem Inspection, Facilities At approximately 14:15 on 4/7/22, while performing HATS category I for inclement weather as part of the Livestock Humane Handling Verification task, I, Dr. REDACTED observed the following noncompliance in the cattle walkway near Pens 9 and 10. A screw was protruding from the east wall of the cattle walkway leading to pens 9 and 10. I observed a piece of hair attached to the screw, suggesting previous contact with an animal. I placed U.S. Rejected Tag No.B-45951725 to the screw. I also observed a sharp metal wire with two sharp end points twisted around a metal chain attached to the same wall approximately eight feet south of the screw. I placed U.S. Rejected Tag No.B-45702684 to the chain. I notified Plant Manager, REDACTED, of the placed tags and noncompliance. Mr. REDACTED immediately removed the screw from the wall and the sharp twisted wire from the chain. I removed the tags after observing the cattle walkway was free of sharp protruding objects. Livestock pens, driveways and ramps shall be maintained in good repair. They shall be free from sharp or protruding objects which may, in the opinion of the inspector, cause injury or pain to the animals in accordance with 9 CFR 313.1(a).

313.15(a)(1)

HATS Category VIII: Stunning Effectiveness At approximately 06:40, while performing the observation of stunning effectiveness for the Livestock Humane Handling Verification task, I, Dr. REDACTED observed the following noncompliance at the stunning station. A steer with horns was in the knock box, and the first stunning attempt with a captive bolt stunning device was administered to the forehead. The steer did not fall but continued to stand walking forward and backward in the knock box, moving its head from side to side, and looking in all directions, which are signs consistent with consciousness. The establishment employee took immediate action, reloaded the captive bolt device, and applied a second stunning attempt to the back of the head, which rendered the steer immediately unconscious. I continued to observe effectiveness of stunning for another 15 minutes, and no other incidents of noncompliance were observed. Assistant Plant Manager, REDACTED was notified of the Humane Handling noncompliance. Failure to render an animal immediately unconscious with the first application of a captive bolt stunning device is noncompliant with 9 CFR 313.15(a)1.

313.15(a)(1)

Humane Handling Activity Tracking System (HATS) Noncompliance, Category VIII: Stunning Effectiveness Just before noon on Thursday, November 25, 2021, the Supervisory Public Health Veterinarian (SPHV) was performing routine Humane Handling observations at M934, Charlie DiMaria & Sons. The SPHV was observing at the knockbox when the establishment employee placed a handheld captive bolt stunner on a bovine’s forehead and fired. The shot was unsuccessful in rendering the animal insensible. The SPHV determined that the shot was unsuccessful in rendering the bovine insensible because the animal remained standing, had its eyes open, and voluntarily turned its head and looked around. The establishment employee assessed the bovine and recognized that it remained conscious. Within a matter of approximately 15 seconds the establishment employee reloaded the captive bolt stunner, placed it to the bovine’s forehead, and fired. After the second shot was fired the animal collapsed to the floor and was deemed to be insensible. After the bovine was insensible, the SPHV notified the establishment employee that an NR would be issued. Later the SPHV also notified REDACTED QA Supervisor, about the Humane Handling noncompliance. Failure to successfully render an animal insensible with the first application of a captive bolt stunner is noncompliant with 9 CFR 313.15(a)(1). This NR is not linked.

313.2

HATS category VI: Electric Prod Use At 1155am, while walking around the cattle pens, I observed a noncompliance in the form of excessive use of the electric cattle prod. Dairy cows were being moved from pen 6 into the holding pen for slaughter. The employee who performs slaughter was holding the plastic slapper in his left hand and the electric cattle prod in his right hand. He applied the prod to the upper rear leg of 3 cows. Each of the 3 cows was actively walking in the intended direction when the prod was applied, and increased speed afterwards. I immediately informed REDACTED of the noncompliance and she spoke to the employee. She told me that retraining would be performed. Applying the cattle prod to an animal that is actively walking in the intended direction is excessive use of the prod and creates unnecessary discomfort to the animal.

313.1

Recently, FSIS discussed with the establishment the inadequacies of the suspect pen. FSIS requires that establishment have either a dedicated suspect pen, or a sign that can be moved to designate a pen for suspects. Suspect pen must be covered to provide protection from the elements. Establishment informed FSIS they would make repairs to the suspect pen, and on Friday October 8 we were emailed a photo of the pen with the caption "constructed and refurbished suspect pen, added overhead covering." The suspect pen is presented as ready to be used. However, the sharp edges were not fixed. There remains, to the right of the water trough, a broken and exposed piece of pipe, with sharp edges. This water trough also supplies pen 3, and sharp edges around the trough extend into pen 3 and could harm the animals in this pen. Livestock pens must be safe for use. Sharp edges around water trough that supplies suspect pen and pen 3 could cause harm to animals.