Masami Foods, Inc.: Non-Compliance to Humane Livestock Handling in 2024 (USDA)

313.15(a)(1)

HATS Category VIII: Stunning Effectiveness On September 16, 2024, at approximately 1130 hours, I, the SPHV was performing a livestock humane handling task and observed the following noncompliance. The steer that had passed ante-mortem inspection laid down in the chute as it was too fat to get through a turn in the chute. The animal was neurologically sound. The stun operator applied the first stun to the animal in the chute using a handheld captive bolt (HHCB) device. The first stun was ineffective, and the animal was still conscious at that time. I observed the steer vocalizing and moving its head back and forth and up and down in a controlled manner. The stun operator readily retrieved the backup HHCB and a second effective stun was applied once available. I placed US Reject tag A7627324 on the lever of the stun box. The slaughter floor supervisor was verbally notified of the rejected equipment and forthcoming noncompliance record for failure to comply with 9CFR313.15(a)(1). Upon inspection of the dressed head there were two penetrating stun holes. One hole was low and entered the frontal sinus cavity. A second penetrating hole was observed within the target zone. The Denver District Management Team was notified through supervisory channels. The establishment has implemented and maintains a robust humane handling plan. There have been no noncompliance records for a similar root cause issued in the last 90 days.

313.2

HATS Category III: Water and Feed Today 9/3/2024 at approximately 0605 hours, the Food Inspector and CSI/IIC observed during antemortem inspection that the water trough in pen 15 was empty. We notified the barn employee, and he checked the automatic waterer which was not operating. No regulatory control action was taken as we observed the barn employee immediately fill the trough with a hose. There were three head of cattle in pen 15, and the cattle did not go directly to water once the trough was filled. The employee informed me that the cattle arrived at the establishment on Monday night 9/2, and he had checked all the waters before leaving work on Friday 8/30. I verbally notified the Plant Manager that I would be issuing a noncompliance record for the establishments failure to meet requirements set forth in regulation 9 CFR 313.2(e). The Denver DVMS was contacted through supervisory channels. This noncompliance record is associated with NR #CCC5411072222N/2 which was written on 7/22/2024 for the same root cause. This establishment has implemented a robust approach to the humane handling of livestock.

313.2

Category V - Suspect and Disabled Category VII - Slips and Falls On 3Sept2024 at approximately 0600 hours, the food inspector (FI) and CSI/IIC were performing antemortem inspection on three lots of cattle and observed the following noncompliance. Plant employees had separated out three lame/disabled cattle into pen 15 upon delivery the previous night. During antemortem inspection, the FI and CSI/IIC observed the three cattle in Pen 15, and one cow did not rise from sternal recumbency for inspection. The FI told the barn employee that the animal did not stand up, and the barn employee entered the pen. The downed animal attempted to stand but was not able to stand as the animal could not gain traction and spun in a circle while in sternal recumbency. The FI verbally notified the SPHV of the downed animal. During the SPHV’s inspection in the barn, the downed animal struggled again to gain footing but was able to stand on its own. The animal was neurologically sound. Also, as the barn employee entered pen 15, the steer in the adjacent pen was startled and slipped. The steer lost traction on both front feet and fell to his knees while trying to move away from the barn employee. The steer immediately got back up and walked away and was also neurologically sound. The production manager was verbally notified of the forthcoming noncompliance with 9CFR313.1(b). No regulatory control action was taken. The Denver DVMS was contacted through supervisory channels. This establishment has implemented a robust approach to the humane handling of livestock. There have been no noncompliance records issued in the past 90 days for the same root cause. The CSI/IIC, SPHV, plant manager, production manager, and kill floor supervisor held a meeting later that morning to discuss the condition of the flooring in the barn as documented in MOI CCC3410091305G. The flooring in the barn is made of concrete that is roughed up in some areas and can get slippery when it gets wet. The plant management discussed a planned improvement plan for a long-term solution for the barn footing.

313.2

HATS Category III: Water and Feed Availability HATS Category IV: Ante-mortem Inspection HATS Category V: Suspect and Disabled On 22July2024 at approximately 0610 hours, the food inspector performing antemortem inspection on 243 hogs reported to the SPHV that there was one U.S. Suspected hog and that the food inspector didn’t think some of the pens had water available. The U.S. Suspect hog had already been segregated by the establishment prior to antemortem inspection. Per the SPHV’s examination, the U.S. Suspect hog was in lateral recumbency and markedly dehydrated with tacky gums, but a normal body temperature. This U.S. Suspect hog did not have access to water in the holding pen. The SPHV checked availability of water in the rest of the holding pens containing live animals and found the following noncompliance. Seven of the nine pens of hogs did not have access to water as the automatic hog nipple watering system was not working. Approximately a quarter of the hogs in the pens without water available were unable to rise on their own and markedly lethargic and dehydrated. I observed remnants of hog feed pellets in the feed bunks of all the pens. The CSI reported these findings to the establishment production manager. The production manager took immediate action prior to starting slaughter operations by sending six kill floor employees to start bucketing water, filling water troughs, and hosing off the hogs. Only one hog was not able to rise on its own after approximately two hours of filling water troughs and bucketing water to the animals that were down. The production manager was notified of this noncompliance for failure to provide water to live animals per Title 9 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 313.2(e). The Denver District Management Team was contacted through supervisory channels. There have been no noncompliance records issued within the past 90 days for the same root cause. This establishment has implemented a robust systematic approach to the humane handling of livestock.

313.2

HATS Category I: Adequate Measures for Inclement Weather HATS Category III: Water and Feed Availability On 22July2024 at approximately 1100hours, the SPHV observed two lots of approximately 30 cattle each unloading into the covered, enclosed holding pens. At approximately 1600 hours, the SPHV returned to the holding pens and noted the cattle in the furthest north holding pen rattling the water trough. Upon further inspection, the SPHV observed the automatic water trough to be empty. The SPHV notified the plant manager, who took immediate action and filled the water trough, therefore no regulatory control action was taken. The plant manager was verbally notified of the noncompliance for failure to provide water to live animals per Title 9 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 313.2(e). The Denver District Management Team was contacted through supervisory channels. There have been no noncompliance records issued within the past 90 days for the same root cause. This establishment has implemented a robust systematic approach to the humane handling of livestock.

313.15(a)(1),313.15(b)(1)(iii)

On Monday, February 5, 2024, at approximately 1345 hours, the Food Inspector (FI), approached the stunning area to observe stunning effectiveness. The FI observed the stun operator leaning down into the stun box from the side to stun a cow. The cow did not have its head secured in the stunning head gate. The FI observed the stun operator discharge the hand-held captive bolt (HHCB) device. The FI heard the thudding sound of the HHCB device making contact with the animal and the cow vocalizing. The cow remained standing and was stomping and moving around inside the stun box as the stun operator readily retrieved a preloaded backup HHCB device. The FI observed the stun operator following the cows head around inside the stun box. At this point, the Supervisory Public Health Veterinarian (SPHV) was walking up behind me, and the FI informed the SPHV of the ineffective stun event. Then the FI observed the stun operator apply an effective stun. At approximately 1346 hours, I, the SPHV observed a commotion on the kill floor at the stunning area and approached the observing FI. The FI notified me that she had observed an ineffective stun, and that the animal was still conscious and standing inside the stun box. I observed the stun operator following the animals head around inside the stun box and then apply an effective stun. I observed the animal roll out of the stun box with no signs of consciousness observed after this point. I observed a HHCB device in the bottom of the stun box. I verbally notified the establishment management of the incident and applied U.S. Reject Tag #A7627322 to the stun box and informed them that no other animals were to be stunned and applied U.S. Retain Tag#MPD45040100 to the head of animal and allowed the establishment to continue processing the ineffectively stunned animal. Upon inspection of the dressed head, I observed three separate stun holes. There was one hole above the right eye that penetrated perpendicularly; a second hole higher than the rest that penetrated more parallel along the surface of the skull; and a third hole that was centered along the midline above the eyes. The Denver District Management Team was contacted through supervisory channels. There have been no noncompliance records issued within the past 90 days for the same root cause. This establishment has implemented a robust systematic approach to the humane handling of livestock.