Nordik Meats Inc: Non-Compliance to Humane Livestock Handling in 2022 (USDA)

313.15(a)(2)

At approximately 8:30 a.m June 8th 2022 while performing a HATS category VI “Electric Prod/Alternative Object Use” task, I observed a beef being moved into the stunning area.  For an approximate five minute time-span, a plant employee repeatedly prodded the beef with a battery-operated electric prod, trying to get the animal in position to lock it in the headgate.  Numerous attempts to keep the beef in the headgate failed because a handle broke off the headgate.   I noticed the prodding was becoming excessive and the animal becoming more excited, so I asked the employee to stop.  The employee did not head this instruction; therefore I left the area and informed, REDACTED.  Upon our return the operator was still using the electric prod to try to move the beef.  U.S Reject Tag #B15 260064 was placed in stunning area until a verbal corrective action and preventive measured were offered.  This is a noncompliance with 9 CFR 313.2(b) and 9 CFR 313.15(a)(2) which states “Electric prods, canvas slappers, or other implements employed to drive animals shall be used as little as possible in order to minimize excitement and injury. Any use of such implements which, in the opinion of the inspector, is excessive, is prohibited.”

313.2

On Tuesday, 2-8-2022, at 0545 hours, while performing a monthly Odd Hour Inspection Verification task, I observed the following noncompliance with HATS Category III – Water and Feed Availability. While walking through the barn, IPP REDACTED observed the water tank had frozen over. There was an indentation into the ice of the water trough with a diameter of approximately 4 inches and a depth of 2 inches from the animals licking the ice. IPP noticed that the water tank heater was not plugged into the wall, and the backup tub for water was also empty. There was no accessible water available for the 30 steer that were in the pen at the time of the inspection. This is a noncompliance with 9 CFR 313.2(e) that states water should be available for all livestock in holding pens in the facility. U.S. Reject tag number B38112674 was placed onto the chute, I notified Plant Manager REDACTED of the noncompliance and the establishment immediately provided water to the animals. Once water was provided, I removed the reject tag.

313.2

On Tuesday, 2-8-2022, at 1330 hours, while performing a HATS Category IV – Handling During Ante-Mortem Inspection I observed the following noncompliance with HATS category III- water and feed availability. When IPP REDACTED went to the barn to perform antemortem inspection, he observed an animal standing in the center holding pen after being unloaded by establishment management. IPP noticed that the water trough in the holding pen was empty. The animals showed no signs of distress and appeared healthy. IPP notified the employee in charge of moving cattle of the noncompliance. The employee took immediate corrective action by providing the animal with a bucket of water. Once the animal was provided water Plant Manager REDACTED was notified of the noncompliance. This is a noncompliance with 9 CFR 313.2(e). This noncompliance is being associated with a similar noncompliance dated 2-8-2022 earlier in the day NR Number WZA3706022908N. The earlier preventive measures were inadequate and/or not yet implemented to prevent the noncompliance for recurring.

313.1

At approximately 1200 hours, while performing HATS task VII with Front Line Supervisor Dr. REDACTED, the following noncompliance was observed As soon as FSIS personnel entered the loading area to the pen, the animals were startled and ran to the opposite side of the pen. Two steers slipped and fell. The flooring of the pens leading all the way into the chute was inadequate to prevent the animals from slipping. There was no bedding left on the pen floor and the concrete was covered in water and manure. This is a noncompliance with 9 CFR 313.1(b ). Plant Manager REDACTED gave verbal corrective actions that bedding would be added to the pens and then after slaughter operations were completed the pens would be cleaned and new bedding laid down.

313.2

At approximately 1200 hours, while performing HATS Category III – Water and Feed Availability, I noticed the following noncompliance. The lot of 30 head of beef were unloaded between 1100-1200 on Monday 1-31-22 and there was neither evidence of feed in the pens, nor evidence that the animals had been recently fed. IPP asked Plant Manager Mr. REDACTED if the animals were given feed this morning. Mr. REDACTED stated that they stopped feeding the animals during slaughter days because they were having an issue with regurgitated ingesta after the animals were hung. IPP informed Mr. REDACTED that the regulations require the animals to be fed after 24 hours at a slaughter establishment and that this is a noncompliance with 9 CFR 313.2(e). Mr. REDACTED gave verbal corrective actions of feeding the remaining beef immediately.

313.30(a)(3),313.30(a)(1)

On Wednesday December 8, 2021 at 0800 hours, while performing a HATS category VIII “stunning effectiveness” task, Inspection Program Personnel (IPP) observed the stunning operator take two stunning attempts to render a hog unconscious. Before entering the slaughter floor IPP heard a hog make a loud vocalization. Upon Immediate investigation IPP noticed the employee place the head-only electrical stunning wand onto the animal and the activation light on the machine lit up for half a second. The animal vocalized again and remained standing. IPP observed the animal looking around and wobbling slightly. The plant manager pushed the wall of the stunning area into the side of the hog to prevent any movement. The operator reapplied the electrodes to the animals head, activated the electrical current, and the hog was immediately rendered insensible. The animal remained insensible throughout hoisting and bleeding. IPP placed regulatory control tag No. B15260293 onto the electric stunner, and alerted Plant Manger REDACTED of the noncompliance with 9 CFR 313.30(a)(1.0

313.15(a)(1)

At 0614 hours, while performing a HATS Category VIII “Stunning Effectiveness Task,” Inspection Program Personnel (IPP) observed an establishment employee take five stun attempts, with a hand-held captive bolt device (HHCB), to render a beef unconscious. This was the first beef of the day to be slaughtered. The animal was placed into the head gate to secure it from freely moving. The first stun attempt was ineffective at rendering the animal unconscious. The animal was conscious and remained standing and moved its head. The stunning employee grabbed a backup pre-loaded HHCB and attempted to stun the animal again. The second stun attempt failed to render the animal unconscious and the animal remained standing and moved its head back and forth. The stunning employee reloaded the HHCB and attempted a third stun without successfully stunning the animal. The beef stayed standing and the IPP observed the fur on the head of the animal had gunpowder residue from the blanks used in the HHCB. After the fourth stun attempt, the animal fell to the floor. The stunning employee checked for consciousness. The animal blinked and was tracking movement with its eyes. The fifth and final stun attempt rendered the animal unconscious. Its eyes did not respond to touch and its tongue hung out. After rendering the beef unconscious, it was hoisted and bled. IPP placed U.S. Reject tag number B15260288 on the stunning area, and informed Mr. REDACTED that this was a noncompliance and a noncompliance record (NR) would be issued. IPP also told Mr. REDACTED the District Office would be contacted for further guidance. Upon closer inspection of the skull, IPP noticed five holes, two approximately 1⁄2 inch above the eyeline, two more approximately 11⁄2 inches above those, and one in between the two groups.

313.15(a)(1)

At 1120 hours, while performing a HATS category VII "stunning Effectiveness" task. Inspection Program Personnel (IPP) observed the stunning operator take two stunning attempts, with a Hand-held captive bolt (HHCB)) to render a beef Unconscious . The animal did not drop to the ground. The stunning operator immediately used a second pre-loaded HHCB, and stunned the animal a second time rendering the beef unconscious. This is a noncompliance with 9 CFR 313.15(a)(1). IPP informed The slaughter floor supervisor of the noncompliance and the issuance of the Noncompliance record. Verbal corrective actions were given and preventative measures were offered. During Post mortem inspection IPP noticed that the first stunning attempt contacted the skull, but did not penetrate the skull.

313.15(a)(3),313.15(a)(1)

At 0627 hours, while performing a HATS category VIII “Stunning Effectiveness” task, Inspection Program Personnel (IPP) observed the stunning operator take two stunning attempts, with a hand-held captive bolt device (HHCB) to render a beef unconscious. The animal moved its head right before the stunning operator made the first stunning attempt. The animal dropped but when the stunning operator touched the eye the animal blinked and immediately stood back up and was conscious. The stunning operator took the backup pre-loaded HHCB, and stunned the animal a second time, resulting in unconsciousness. This is a noncompliance with 9 CFR 313.15(a)(1). IPP informed Plant Manager Mr. REDACTED of the noncompliance and the issuance of the noncompliance record. U.S. Reject Tag #B40017295 was placed on the stunning area until verbal corrective actions and preventive measures were offered. During the Postmortem inspection IPP observed two holes in the skull one being approximately 1⁄2 of an inch above the eye line and a second hole 2 inches above. A similar noncompliance was documented on 2/18/21 on NR WZA4613024603N for improper HHCB placement. The establishment provided a verbal response stating, “I retrained REDACTED and have him on direct observation for the next 15 knocks.” These corrective actions were inadequate in preventing reoccurrence from the same stunning operator.