Upper Iowa Beef LLC: Non-Compliance to Humane Livestock Handling in 2024 (USDA)

313.1

At approximately 0630 hours on 4/12/2024; I (REDACTED, CSI) was performing the odd hours inspection and observed trim, along the roll door entrance to cattle pen #4, that was broken with an approximately 1-inch sharp metal section containing too numerous to count black hairs. US Rejected tag NO. B-45 414581 was taped up to reject the cattle entrance to pen #4. I informed QA Kill Side Supervisor REDACTED that I had taken a regulatory control action due to the sharp metal section that contained the hairs. Mr. REDACTED verbally expressed that he understood and indicated he would contact the maintenance department immediately. I was called out to the barns to inspect. The trim was covered with new metal that was rounded and in good repair and free from sharp objects. I verbally informed QA Superintendent REDACTED that a record of the noncompliance would be documented. This NR is associated/linked to noncompliance record BYF4709034419N. This situation represents the establishment's failure to meet the regulatory requirements of 9CFR 313.1(a).

313.50

At approximately 0650 hours on 4/12/2024; I (REDACTED, CSI) went to perform ante-mortem inspection and observed cattle were in the indoor pens #3 and #4. At approximately 0630 hours I had horizontally adhered tape across the roll door frame and adhered the US Rejected tag NO. B-45 414581 to the tape, as sharp metal trim was protruding and contained too numerous to count cattle hairs. I had informed QA Kill Side Supervisor REDACTED and barn establishment employee of the regulatory action. The tape on the north side trim was still hanging at approximately waist level with my US Rejected tag NO. B-45 414581 still visible adhered to the tape. Only inspection personnel are to remove U.S. REJECTED and U.S. RETAINED tags. I inspected the area that needed repair. There was a new piece of metal covering the sharp broken metal trim, so I removed my US Rejected tag NO. B-45 414581 and tape from the trim releasing the area. I verbally informed QA Superintendent REDACTED that the noncompliance would be documented. This situation represents the establishment's failure to meet the regulatory requirements of 9CFR 313.50.

313.1

On March 18, 2024, while verifying ante mortem facilities, at approximately 1120 hours, I, REDACTED, observed the following non compliances: · The hydraulic poll restrainer part of the restraining box had a sharp weld mark that would touch the back of the neck of the cattle. There is also a sharp edge in the chin lift portion of the head gate. · In the barn ante mortem pens, there are dividers that are rusty and have created holes and the metal is peeled back, with the edges bent out into the pen, one being ten inches wide by five inches long and another being eighteen inches tall by thirty-six inches wide, creating sharp surfaces that are accessible to the cattle. There was black hair in the rusted out divider. · The trim around the roll up barn door outdoors on the east side of the barn has sharp parts that contained black hair. There were two sharp areas on the north and one area on the south side of the barn door trim. Retained tag NO-B45414598 was applied to the barn door on the west side of the building. This is in violation of 9 CFR 313.1(a). These items were shown to QA superintendent REDACTED, and he was informed of the forthcoming noncompliance record. By approximately 1420 hours, the items listed above were reinspected, repaired and the retained tag was removed from the facility door.

313.2

At approximately 0930 hours, on November 9,2023, while performing postmortem inspection I, REDACTED, CSI walked to the restrainer due to observing an establishment employee standing on top of the side panel of the restrainer box spraying water into the cattle holding area of the restrainer box that contained two cattle. Once at the restrainer I observed the following humane handling noncompliance, one bovine had its head in the head restrainer and the second bovine had its sternum on top of the other bovine’s back, and its head was level with the side panels of the restrainer. An establishment employee attempted to stun the second bovine with the handheld captive bolt device (HHCBD), this beef remained in the upright position on top of the first beef. I heard the HHCBD discharge normally and was unable to visualize the placement of the shot due to the location of the restraining box panels. Then a second establishment employee attempted to stun the first bovine in the head restraint with the air driven captive bolt device, the first bovine dropped to the floor of the restrainer; I did not observe signs of consciousness. The second bovine’s head and front legs raised up, appearing stiffened. I did not appreciate vocalization from the second bovine nor was I in a position to observe eye movements and could not assess the consciousness of the second bovine. The establishment employee attempted a second stunning with the HHCBD at which time the bovine went limp and dropped to the restrainer floor. Due to multiple cattle in the retraining box, I was unable to observe signs of consciousness. As I walked towards the slaughter floor exit door, the restrainer floor opened, and the cattle were rolled out onto the landing area. I did not appreciate consciousness in the cattle at this time. This incident represents undue duress and excitement; non-compliant with 9 CFR 313.2. I took a regulatory control action by adhering U.S. Reject tag # B-45414585 to the restrainer box. I informed QA Kill Supervisor REDACTED of the regulatory control action while I spoke to my supervisor. The establishment provided verbal corrective actions including retraining establishment employees and to continue with sensibility checks. I removed the U.S. Reject tag and slaughter operations continued. CSI REDACTED observed, during post-mortem examination, an approximately 2 to 3 feet by 1-foot bright red bruise in the muscles over the posterior lumbar and pelvic area of carcass #131 that corresponded to the first bovine that was under the second bovine in the restrainer. This noncompliance is associated with the noncompliance # BYF4817092529N/1 occurring on September 29th, 2023 at which time three bovines were allowed in the restrainer box resulting in visible injury to one of the bovines which was then euthanized. The verbal corrective actions at that time were to retrain establishment employees on communication regarding fractious bovines and the proper use of the guillotine gate to prevent multiple bovines from occupying the restrainer box; there has been no additional communication of corrective actions from the establishment to date. The two incidences demonstrate injurious situations for the cattle when more than one bovine is allowed into the restrainer box; the establishment is unable to control the flow of cattle due to inadequate facilities, inability to use the facilities as designed and/or the inability to handle and maintain calm cattle as they move through the facilities.