Upper Iowa Beef LLC: Non-Compliance to Humane Livestock Handling in 2022 (USDA)

313.15(a)(1)

Category VIII Stunning Effectiveness       At approximately 0905, while observing stunning effectiveness, I observed an inadequate stun applied to a beef animal. I observed the operator using the compressed air stunning device apply the first stun. After the first stun was applied the operator checked for consciousness, at which time I observed the animal was conscious, the animal was still standing, blinking and reacting to the operator’s motions by blinking when the operator moved their hands near the animals eyes. The operator immediately applied a second stun with the same device which rendered the animal unconscious. I took a verbal regulatory control action to stop stunning and asked for corrective actions. Quality Assurance Supervisor REDACTED offered corrective actions around 0915. The corrective actions were acceptable, and I released the regulatory control action. I informed Quality Assurance Supervisor REDACTED that I would be issuing a non-compliance for this incident. This is a non-compliance with 9 CFR 315.(a)1.

313.15(b)(1)(iii),313.1

At approximately 0845 hours, while verifying HATS Category IV – Antemortem Inspection and VIII – Stunning Effectiveness, in the antemortem room near the cattle alleyway prior to the restrainer, I observed the following noncompliance: The first of two overhead drop-down rump bars used to prevent animals from backing up had an approximately 12 inch wide hole in the covering therefore exposing angle iron that did not protect the animals’ tails or lower backs from bruising. I immediately tagged the alleyway with U.S. Reject tag number B45 414551. I verbally notified Mr. REDACTED, Slaughter Supervisor, of the noncompliance with regulations 9 CFR 313.1(a) and 9 CFR 313.15(b)(1)(iii). During examination on post-mortem inspection, I observed of seventeen beef carcasses in production in the slaughter room, five carcasses displayed bruising along the tail base that were approximately 4-5 inches long correlating with the impact location of the overhead drop-down rump bar. The establishment took immediate corrective actions, replacing the worn covering of the rump bar, at which time I removed the reject tag from the alleyway and slaughter operations resumed.

313.15(a)(2),313.2

HATS Category V: Handling of Suspect and Disabled Cattle While performing HATS Category V: Handling of Suspect and Disabled Cattle at approximately 0900 hours, I observed the following humane handling noncompliance: I observed a steer at the end of the chute leading to the restrainer was down and lying on the floor with one hind leg in the air. The beef immediately behind him (i.e. the second beef) was standing with his head under the first beef’s raised hind leg. The door to the restrainer is a guillotine gate and it was closed at that time. The restrainer operator on the other side of the guillotine gate opened the door to the restrainer. The second beef then walked over the down beef to go into the restrainer. The beef behind the second beef (i.e. the third beef) then walked forward and stood over the down beef. The first beef didn’t vocalize or appear to react to either beef walking over him. Establishment personnel moved the third beef off the first beef. Establishment personnel then moved to humanely stun the first beef with a hand-held captive bolt device; however, before they were able to stun the first beef, he stood on his own. He had no obvious injuries and, when the guillotine gate was opened, he moved into the restrainer on his own. Superintendent, Mr. REDACTED, QA Superintendent, Mr. REDACTED and QA Technician, Mr. REDACTED were present. I notified Mr. REDACTED of the humane handling noncompliance. I contacted SPHV, Dr. REDACTED, for further direction. She instructed me to take a regulatory control action and place U.S. Reject Tag number B45414527on the restrainer. I discussed the humane handling noncompliance with the establishment and they verbally informed me of their preventative measures.