ABF Packing, Inc.: Non-Compliance to Humane Livestock Handling in 2025 (USDA)

313.2

On 08/29/2025 at approximately 1435 hours, while conducting HATS category IV task, I, SCSI REDACTED, observed the knocker repeatedly lowering the metal knock box door onto the hindquarters of a cow in an attempt to force the animal into the knocking box. The door was brought down across the lower back and hip region of the cow three times. As a result, the animal’s rear legs began to buckle under the pressure applied by the metal door. I immediately entered the facility and notified plant management of the incident, citing the inhumane handling practices carried out by the employee. The cow did not appear to sustain any visible injuries from the use of the knockbox door. REDACTED, Slaughter foreman, REDACTED, Cattle foreman, and REDACTED, QA tech, were informed of the non-egregious noncompliance observed while plant personnel were handling the livestock. Mr. REDACTED and Ms. REDACTED were informed that I will be documenting a noncompliance for the plant failure to comply with 9 CFR 313.2(a). The establishment does have an active robust systematic livestock handling program and no recent similar noncompliance has been documented.

313.1

On 05/01/2025, at approximately 0650 hours, FI REDACTED informed Dr. REDACTED SPHV, and SCSI REDACTED that a cow was loose on the slaughter floor. IPP informed us that the cow ran through the floor contaminating product and production equipment until it was herded off the floor. The cow entered through the shackler doorway onto the slaughter floor after getting loose in the holding pen areas at the back of the plant. All IPP were safe and accounted for during the incident. At approximately 0708 hours, US Reject tag B-454044547 was hung on the knock box stopping all slaughter operations. This noncompliance record is being issued for failure to comply with FSIS regulation 9 CFR 313.2(a) and Humane handling HATS Category IV – Ante mortem inspection for livestock pens, driveways and ramps. The shackler area does not have any safety fencing to prevent live animals from entering the slaughter floor if the animals get free into the area. All slaughter activities are on hold until written corrective actions are presented to the SPHV-IIC, and measures have been taken to prevent another unsafe working condition.

313.2

HATS Category VI. Electric Prod/Alternative Object Use (9 CFR 313.2): On 3/21/25, at approximately 2:24pm, CSI REDACTED was performing a routine Livestock Humane Handling task over the cattle holding pens. CSI REDACTED was observing the suspect cattle at establishment M19478. CSI REDACTED observed as a prolapsed beef cow was loaded into the drive alley. An establishment employee used an electric prod and poked the prolapsed anus of the animal. The animal dashed forward down the drive alley. The employee looked up and noticed I was watching; he then hung the electric prod up on a hook near the drive alley. I alerted Supervisor REDACTED to hand me the electric prod. Upon further inspection I observed specs of blood on the metal tips of the prod. I informed Mr. REDACTED what I had observed. Mr. REDACTED stated that the prod is not functional and then showed me by pressing the button on the device. Mr. REDACTED then handed me the electric prod and I observed that the device did not emit electricity. The temporary yard supervisor, REDACTED was then alerted to the incident. The temporary yard supervisor then said he would speak to the employee. The prod was removed from the holding pen area. This is a violation of regulation 9 CFR 313.2 CSI REDACTED then notified SPHV Dr. REDACTED. CSI REDACTED notified Supervisor REDACTED that a Non-Compliance would be issued. This establishment does have written robust systematic approach to humane handling.

313.15(a)(1)

HATS Category VIII Stunning Effectiveness 313.15 (a)(1): Immediate unconsciousness (captive bolt) On 12/5/24, at approximately 10:39am, CSI REDACTED was on the slaughter floor performing a routine Livestock Humane Handling task. CSI REDACTED was observing the knock box at establishment M19478. CSI REDACTED observed as a heifer was loaded into the knock box. An establishment employee administered the first knock with a captive bolt stunner, the heifer did not drop. The animal looked down after the first knock and then brought its head back up. The first knock did not render the animal unconscious. The animal was standing upright looking around the knock box, it was blinking and breathing normally. The employee then administered a second knock in the back of the head and the heifer was visually conscious. The heifer was standing upright, it was moving its head side to side looking around and its eyes were blinking normally the captive bolt was still attached to its head. The heifer was rhythmically breathing. The establishment employee then administered a third knock and the animal fell and was rendered unconscious. Upon inspection of the cattle skull, CSI REDACTED observed three holes on the head. Two knocking holes were on the front forehead area. One knocking hole was in the back of the skull. The first knocking hole was below the correct center x pattern and to the left. The second knocking hole was above the center x and to the right. Both knocking holes located on the front of the skull were off center. This is a violation of regulation 9 CFR 313.15 (a)(1) CSI REDACTED took enforcement action and placed a US Retain tag on the knock box using tag B-45 404858. CSI REDACTED then notified Dr.REDACTED CSI REDACTED notified Yard Supervisory REDACTED that a Non-Compliance would be issued. This establishment does have written robust systematic approach to humane handling.

313.15(a)(1)

HATS Category VIII: Effective stun 9 CFR 313.15(a) On November 26, 2024; I was performing a routine livestock humane handling task at the knock box. HATS Category VIII: Stunning effectiveness; as per 9CFR 313.15(a)(1); While I was observing knocking at approximately 10:00 hours, I witnessed the captive bolt was not functioning properly. The stunner would go to knock an animal, and the captive bolt would not fire. I observed as the stunner would reload the captive bolt until it fired. At approximately 12:07 hours, I observed the following: The employee at the knock box attempted to render a bovine unconscious with a captive bolt, at his first attempt the captive bolt penetrated the skill but did not render the animal unconscious. I observed that the animal remained conscious and was still upright, the head and ears were upright, and its eyes were spontaneously blinking. The employee paused for a bit to observe the animal. I then observed as he reloaded his captive bolt and then applied a second knock to the back of the head which was successful in rendering the animal unconscious. I observed that the employee had two other captive bolts ready behind him, instead he reloaded the same captive bolt. I used regulatory enforcement action and tagged the knock box with U.S. Retain tag B-45 259814. I immediately informed yard supervisor REDACTED regarding the incident and that an MOI would be documented. Upon further review and instruction from supervisors an NR will be documented in violation of 9 CFR 313.15(a)(1). There was no recent similar NR. The plant has an active RSA program.