APPROVED 

Supplement 212 to the AMS 

Master Solicitation for 

Purchase of Fresh Chilled 

Boneless Beef Products for 

Further Processing into Fully

Cooked Items for Distribution 

to Federal Food and Nutrition 

Assistance Programs 

Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) 

Livestock and Poultry (LP) Program 

Standards and Specification Division (SSD) 

Room 2628-S, STOP 0258 

Phone: (202) 690-3148 

Supersedes: Supplement 212 July 2022 – Changes 

from previous requirements in blue 

Effective: March 2023 

100 Overview 

110 This document provides additional program requirements for the purchase of Fresh 

Chilled Boneless Beef Products by the Department of Agriculture (USDA), including 

the applicable Federal Purchase Program Specification (FPPS) (Exhibit A). 

200 Instructions to Potential Suppliers 

210 The fresh chilled boneless beef products shall be purchased on a competitive bid basis 

from qualified suppliers who have met the requirements described in this Section. 

Interested suppliers may submit a technical proposal at any time during the purchase 

program. Suppliers should allow 10 working days, from USDA’s receipt of the technical 

proposal for notification of evaluation results. A supplier is deemed eligible upon 

notification of approval of the technical proposal by the Standards and Specification 

Division (SSD). 

220 Submission of a technical proposal is not binding on USDA. Actual purchases shall 

be described in the AMS Master Solicitation for Commodity Procurements – Domestic 

Programs (MSCP-D) and Solicitations. 

230 Documentation Requirements 

231 Technical Proposal Requirement 

231.1 Include a detailed description of the boneless beef product offered and each of the 

production steps that are taken to meet or exceed the minimum product requirements 

set forth in the FPPS. (Plan/Do) 

231.2 Describe all the quality assurance methods used to verify conformance to all 

requirements. This shall include the monitoring and measurements taken during the 

process to verify conformance with each requirement. All measurement results shall 

be recorded and made available to AMS. (Check) 

Approved by DBJ 

Date Issued: 05/10/12

Date Revised: 02/15/23 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

231.3 Identify all corrective actions to be taken if deviations from contractual and 

specification requirements occur during production, and all preventative actions to be 

taken to preclude a reoccurrence. (Act) 

231.4 The technical proposal shall follow the format as shown in Exhibit C. Technical 

proposals should be brief and concise. 

231.5 The technical proposal shall be preceded by the following, as required by the 

template: 

231.5.1 Table of Contents listing the major areas as they appear in the technical proposal: 

and 

231.5.2 List of attachments, forms provided with the technical proposal, if appropriate with the 

applicable document name and reference number. 

232 SSD shall review each technical proposal to determine if it is adequate and shall 

notify the supplier of the status and their eligibility to bid. 

233 Animal Welfare Requirements 

233.1 All eligible suppliers shall meet the animal handling and welfare requirements set 

forth in the FPPS for Animal Handling and Welfare, effective March 2021 (Exhibit B). 

300 Instructions for Submission of Technical Proposal 

310 The following procedures establish the acceptable minimum requirements for 

the format and content of the technical proposal: 

310.1 The Government has provided a technical proposal format to be used in preparing the 

technical proposal (see Exhibit C). The supplier shall submit the technical proposal as 

an email file attachment to AMS (TechnicalApprovals@usda.gov and 

Steve.Whisenant@usda.gov). The technical proposal shall be saved in a nonportable document file format (not PDF, e.g., Microsoft Word). The technical proposal 

shall be submitted in its entirety. If the file size of the technical proposal is too large to 

send in a single email, it may be divided and sent in multiple emails (i.e., Part 1, Part 2, 

Part 3, etc.). The collection of attachments and appendices may be submitted as a 

separate document as well. 

310.2. The technical proposal shall be submitted by an authorized agent of the company. 

310.3 While it is not the desire of the Government to penalize a supplier for non-compliance 

with formatting instructions, technical evaluators may have difficulty evaluating the 

technical proposal to the fullest extent possible if the proposal is not presented in the 

proper format. Technical evaluators shall not be required to search other subsections 

or sections of the supplier’s technical proposal for information requested in the 

evaluation. 

320 Technical Proposal Revisions 

Approved by DBJ 

Date Issued: 05/10/12

Date Revised: 02/15/23 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

321 Changes to a supplier’s technical proposal may be submitted at any time or at the 

request of the SSD. All technical proposal revisions shall meet the following criteria: 

321.1 Any changes to a technical proposal made by the supplier after its initial submittal 

shall be accomplished by submitting an entire technical proposal. A cover letter shall 

be submitted with the changes identified and an explanation of the need for the 

change. The supplier shall include the revision date and the appropriate page 

number(s). 

321.2 Changes from the original technical proposal shall be highlighted and deletions in 

strikeouts. 

400 AMS Contract Compliance 

410 The contractor may request to use either AMS’s QAD Grading-based Monitoring and 

Certification service or QAD Audit-based Verification service, for assessing contract 

compliance of the finished product. AMS will seek to honor the request but reserves 

the right to make a final determination Once an option is implemented, the contractor 

shall remain under that service until completion of the contract, at which time it may 

request a change in oversight option for any subsequent contract. 

420 The cost of all audit, grading and certification services performed by the AMS agents 

shall be borne by the contractor. This includes, but is not limited to, audits, 

examinations, supervision, official documentation, and related services. 

430 Questions concerning charges and the availability of AMS agents can be directed to 

a USDA/AMS, LP Program’s Quality Assessment Division (QAD) field office or to: 

USDA, AMS, LP, QAD Business Operations Branch 

10809 Executive Center Drive, Suite 318 

Little Rock, AR 72211-6022 

Phone: 501-312-2962 

Email: QAD.BusinessOps@usda.gov 

440 Option A: QAD Grading-Based Monitoring and Certification 

440.1 Monitoring of production and processing and product certification shall be 

conducted through the direct continuous supervision of a USDA grader in 

accordance with the requirements listed in the FPPS and AMS/LP/QAD Policies 

and Procedures for certifying USDA commodity foods. A technical proposal is 

not required to be submitted when the contractor is operating under the QAD 

Grading-based Monitoring and Certification service option. 

440.2 Pre-Production Onsite Plant Survey 

440.2.1 QAD shall contact the contractor to set-up a pre-production plant survey and discuss 

production and certification requirements. 

440.3 Post-Award Monitoring and Certification 

Approved by DBJ 

Date Issued: 05/10/12

Date Revised: 02/15/23 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

440.3.1 The USDA grader shall be present at all times during production and processing of 

the commodity food. 

440.3.2 The USDA Grader may select samples for laboratory analyses or inspect the 

commodity at any point in transit and after delivery to point of destination. 

440.3.3 The contractor shall perform checkloading examinations as described in the FPPS at 

the time of shipment and issue an acceptance document to accompany each 

shipment. 

440.3.4 The AMS Grader shall be responsible for certification of compliance with the 

requirements of the FPPS for raw material, packaging and packing, metal detection, 

labeling and marking and net weight. 

450 Option B: Audit-Based Verification 

450.1 Verification of production and processing shall be conducted through routine audits 

performed by QAD according to the suppliers’ and contractor’s approved technical 

proposal (see section 200 and 300 Technical Proposal Requirements) and the 

applicable FPPS. 

450.1.1 Interested contractors may submit sample(s) and a technical proposal at any time 

during the purchase program. Contractors should allow 10 working days, from 

USDA’s receipt of the product sample(s) and technical proposal for notification of 

evaluation results. A contractor is deemed eligible upon notification of approval of the 

sample(s) and technical proposal by the SSD. 

450.1.2 Once a contractor is notified by the SSD that the technical proposal meets the 

applicable criteria, QAD shall contact the contractor to set up a pre-award onsite 

capability assessment audit. 

450.2 Pre-Award Onsite Capability Assessment Audit 

450.2.1 QAD shall conduct an onsite capability assessment that shall consist of reviewing: 

450.2.2 Food Defense Requirements – Refer to Section 521 of this Supplement. 

450.2.3 Production of the commodity that complies with the applicable FPPS and approved 

technical proposal. 

450.2.4 Records related to purchasing, receiving, production, quality control, inventory, 

shipping, and, 

450.2.5 Interviews with management and production personnel. 

450.2.6 Upon completion and if necessary (due to time constraints), QAD may provide the 

SSD either with a verbal or email notification of the audit findings. SSD shall notify 

the vendor of their status based on the audit findings as well as QAD and the 

Approved by DBJ 

Date Issued: 05/10/12

Date Revised: 02/15/23 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commodity Procurement Program (CP). The official final audit report shall be sent to 

the contractor once released from QAD. 

450.2.7 After bid opening, CP shall contact QAD and SSD to determine that vendors have 

met all requirements to deem the bids responsive or non-responsive. 

450.2.8 Bids that are determined to be non-responsive bids, CP shall notify the contractor(s) 

directly. 

450.3 Post-Award Assessment Audit 

450.3.1 Contractors who receive contracts shall have their required documentation readily 

available for review upon request by SSD, QAD, or other AMS agents. Records may 

be maintained in hard copy or electronic media. However, records maintained as 

electronic media shall be made available in printed form immediately upon request. 

450.3.2 QAD shall conduct an onsite audit of the contractor’s and subcontractor’s facility(s) 

and processes when production commences for the first contract awarded. 

Additional audits, and their frequency, shall be conducted as determined by the 

QAD, but not less than once per month for contractors or subcontractors with 

continuous or multiple contracts, or once per contract for intermittent contractors. At 

the discretion of the QAD, more frequent audits may be conducted when audit 

deficiencies are detected. 

450.4 Post-Award Actions 

450.4.1 Any deviation from contractual requirements shall be immediately reported by the 

contractor to the Contracting Officer and SSD. The Contracting Officer or SSD shall 

notify the contractor regarding eligibility to continue to participate as a contractor. 

450.4.2 Contractor shall assure that the delivered product complies with the provisions of the 

FPPS, the applicable assessment by USDA, and the contractor’s technical proposal 

approved by the SSD. 

450.4.3 In the instance that any non-conformance is cited by the USDA auditor, or when a 

complaint is received by commodity recipient agencies, the supplier or contractor 

shall submit a cause-and-effect analysis and corrective actions to address the nonconformance or complaint. 

500 Capability Assessments 

510 Once a supplier is notified by the SSD that the technical proposal meets the 

applicable criteria, QAD shall contact the supplier to set up a pre-award onsite 

capability assessment audit of the facility’s processes, food defense plan, and quality 

control program used to produce the product(s) to determine the supplier’s ability to 

meet contractual requirements. 

520 Pre-Award Onsite Capability Assessment Audit 

521 Food Defense Assessment 

Approved by DBJ 

Date Issued: 05/10/12

Date Revised: 02/15/23 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

521.1 The QA Division shall conduct a food defense audit that shall include, but is not 

limited to, a thorough evaluation of the supplier’s food defense plan. Documentation 

shall support the supplier’s food defense plan. If the report demonstrates that the 

food defense plan is inadequate, the supplier shall be notified by the SSD that they 

are ineligible to bid. The supplier shall have an opportunity to correct identified 

deficiencies, modify their food defense plan and resubmit a brief description for 

further consideration. Eligibility shall depend on whether the modifications 

demonstrate compliance with the food defense plan. 

522 Harvesting Requirement 

522.1 The QA Division shall conduct monthly harvesting and humane handling audits based 

on the requirements stated in the attached FPPS and the company’s approved 

technical proposal. Documentation shall support the supplier’s adherence to meeting 

the harvesting and humane handling requirements as set forth in the FPPS. 

523 Documentation shall support: 

523.1 the production of the fresh boneless beef product that complies with the FPPS and 

the potential supplier’s approved technical proposal, and 

523.2 the supplier’s food defense plan. In addition, the audit shall consist of the review of 

records related to purchasing, receiving, production, quality control, inventory and 

shipping records, and interviews with management and production personnel. 

524 Upon completion of the onsite capability assessment, the auditor shall provide either 

a verbal or email notification of the audit findings to the SSD to determine (based on 

the audit findings), supplier eligibility to bid. Supplier shall be notified by the SSD and 

the official final report shall be sent once released from QAD. 

524.1 If the audit findings demonstrate that the process or food defense plan is inadequate, 

the applicant shall be notified by the SSD that they are ineligible to bid. The supplier 

shall have an opportunity to correct identified deficiencies, modify the process, food 

defense plan, and/or technical proposal, and resubmit for further consideration. 

524.2 Eligibility shall depend on whether the modifications demonstrate that: 

524.2.1 the process is capable of delivering fresh boneless beef products in compliance with 

the FPPS, 

524.2.2 the supplier is in compliance with the food defense plan, 

524.2.3 a successful QAD corrective action audit is conducted, and 

524.2.4 the supplier complies with other applicable contractual requirements. 

530 Post-Award Assessment Audit 

Approved by DBJ 

Date Issued: 05/10/12

Date Revised: 02/15/23 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

531 Eligible suppliers who receive contracts shall have their documented food defense 

plan, technical proposal, and supporting documentation readily available for review by 

the SSD or AMS agents. Records may be maintained on hard copy or electronic 

media. However, records maintained as electronic media shall be made available in 

printed form immediately upon request by the SSD or AMS agents. 

532 QAD shall conduct an onsite audit of the supplier’s facility(s) and processes when 

production commences for the first contract awarded. Additional audits shall be 

conducted as determined by the SSD, but not less than once per month for suppliers 

with continuous or multiple contracts, or once per contract for intermittent suppliers. 

At the discretion of the SSD, more frequent audits may be conducted when audit 

deficiencies are detected. 

540 Post-Award Actions 

541 Any deviation from contractual requirements shall be immediately reported by the 

supplier to the Contracting Officer and SSD. The Contracting Officer or SSD shall 

notify the supplier regarding eligibility to continue to participate as a contractor. 

542 Suppliers shall assure that the delivered product complies with the provisions of the 

FPPS, the applicable assessment by USDA, and the supplier’s technical proposal 

approved by the SSD. 

550 The cost of all audit, product monitoring, and certification services performed by the 

AMS agents shall be borne by the supplier. This includes, but is not limited to, audits, 

examinations, supervision, official documentation, and related services. 

551 Questions concerning charges and the availability of AMS agents can be directed to 

a USDA/AMS, LP Program’s Quality Assessment Division (QAD) field office or to: 

USDA, AMS, LP, QAD Business Operations Branch 

10809 Executive Center Drive, Suite 318 

Little Rock, AR 72211-6022 

Phone: 501-312-2962 

Email: QAD.BusinessOps@usda.gov 

600 Past Performance 

610 Supplier Monitoring Program Requirements 

611 Boneless beef suppliers’ performance as a supplier on contracts awarded by the 

Department of Agriculture (USDA) shall be evaluated monthly on a 180-day (6 month) 

basis or cycle. 

612 The evaluation shall consist of all non-conformances (NC) that were identified by the 

QA Division auditor. The NC’s shall be categorized as critical, major, or minor based 

on their impact on the quality, safety, or value of the involved product. 

Approved by DBJ 

Date Issued: 05/10/12

Date Revised: 02/15/23 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

613 The accumulation of at least two critical NC’s, one critical/two major NC’s, three major 

NC’s, or a total five NC’s in any combination, (i.e., critical, major, or minor) within the 

monthly 180-day (6-month review) shall result in the boneless beef supplier being 

deemed ineligible by the SSD to supply fresh boneless beef product to AMS 

contractors to fill USDA contracts. 

613.1 To regain eligibility status, the boneless beef supplier shall submit appropriate 

corrective and preventative measures to SSD for evaluation and the measures shall 

be verified by QAD as effective. The SSD shall notify the boneless beef supplier 

when eligibility to supply boneless beef has been reinstated. 

614 The microbial test results shall be analyzed separately under statistical process 

controls. 

615 The criteria for the three categories of non-conformances are as follows: 

615.1 Critical 

615.1.1 Production non-conformances--a complete breakdown of the production process has 

occurred. It is apparent that the company cannot produce product that complies with 

contract requirements. 

615.2 Major 

615.2.1 Production non-conformances--major deviation from the production process has 

occurred that significantly impacts the quality or performance of the product. It is 

questionable if the company can consistently produce product that complies with 

contract requirements. 

615.3 Minor 

615.3.1 Production non-conformances--minor deviation from the production process has 

occurred that minimally impacts the quality or performance of the product. It is likely 

that the company can produce a product that complies with contract requirements. 

620 Sustained Acceptable Performance 

621 A supplier shall be deemed ineligible to supply fresh boneless beef products or 

ground beef for the USDA purchase programs if: 

621.1 The supplier is subject to a Class I recall; or 

621.2 Based on an evaluation of all AMS test results for E. coli O157:H7 and Salmonella 

during the previous calendar quarter, the incident rate for either boneless beef or 

ground beef exceeds the central line (cl) values set forth in Appendix B of the 

referenced FPPS (Exhibit A). 

622 If deemed ineligible, a supplier shall: 

Approved by 

Date Issued: 05/10/12

Date Revised: 02/15/23 

DBJ 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

622.1 perform a cause-and-effect analysis, 

622.2 submit the corrective and preventative actions to SSD for review and approval, 

622.3 have a successful corrective action audit conducted. 

622.4 SSD shall notify the boneless beef supplier when eligibility to supply boneless beef 

has been reinstated. 

700 Domestic Origin Certification Clause 

710 The supplier shall include this domestic origin certification clause in its entirety in all 

subcontracts for meat or meat products used in fulfilling any contracts awarded under 

this Supplement and Master Solicitation. The burden of proof of compliance is on the 

Contractor. All raw materials shall be shipped in containers labeled as “Domestic 

Only Product” on the principal display panel and the bill of lading accompanying the 

shipment shall contain the statement “Domestic Only Product.” 

800 Certificate of Conformance (COC) 

810 In addition to the referenced payment documents required in the Master Solicitation, 

please include a copy of the Contractor’s Certificate of Conformance (Exhibit D). 

900 Contractor Checkloading 

910 Under both the QAD Grading-based Monitoring and Certification option and the 

QAD Audit-based Verification service option, the contractor shall perform 

checkloading examinations as described in the FPPS at the time of shipment 

and issue contractor’s certificate to accompany each shipment that includes all 

of the following information: 

910.1 Purchase Order Number, 

910.2 Sales Order and Sales Order Item Number, 

910.3 Name of product, 

910.4 Shipping Date, 

910.5 Production lot number(s) and date each lot was produced, 

910.6 Count of shipping containers and total projected net weight in each production 

lot, 

910.7 Identity of car or truck (car numbers and letters, seals, truck license, etc.) as 

applicable 

910.8 Contractor certification that product conforms with the FPPS, 

Approved by DBJ 

Date Issued: 05/10/12

Date Revised: 02/15/23 
 

910.9 Count and projected net weight verified, and

910.10 Signature of company official responsible for checkloading. 

1000 Exhibits 

Approved by DBJ 

Date Issued: 05/10/12

Date Revised: 02/15/23 
APPROVED

Federal Purchase Program

Specification (FPPS) for

Fresh Chilled, Boneless

Beef for Further

Processing into Fully

Cooked Items

Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS)

Livestock and Poultry (LP) Program 

Standards and Specification Division (SSD)

Room 2628-S, STOP 0258

Phone: (202) 690-3148

Supersedes: FPPS BB July 2022 – Changes from previous 

requirements in blue

Effective: March 2023

Approved by DBJ

Date Issued: 04/26/04

Date Revised: 02/15/23

100 Scope

110 This FPPS – Boneless Beef (BB) – 2023 is for use by a contractor of the 

Department of Agriculture (USDA), AMS, Commodity Procurement (CP) 

Staff to deliver fresh-chilled (never previously frozen) boneless beef for 

further processing into fully cooked items. 

200 Applicable Documents

210 The following documents are incorporated as part of this USDA, 

FPPS-BB-2023: 

210.1 Quality Assessment Division (QAD) Procedures Manual.

210.2 Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) Directive 10,010.1. 

210.3 Applicable Supplement to the AMS Master Solicitation for Commodity 

Procurements – Domestic Programs (MSCP-D). 

300 Checklist of Requirements 

301 All items shall be produced in accordance with Food Safety and Inspection 

Service (FSIS) regulations and the AMS Checklist of Requirements. The 

contractor’s technical proposal, submitted to the Standards and 

Specification Division (SSD), shall adhere to the following checklist 

requirements. 

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit A
Approved by DBJ

Date Issued: 04/26/04

Date Revised: 02/15/23 2 

302 Substitution Programs - Contractors that may produce boneless beef for 

processing into fully cooked items for direct sales to further processors 

that hold QAD substitution plans shall declare this in their technical 

proposal. It is the contractor’s responsibility to ensure that substitutable 

boneless beef raw materials sold to further processors for use as 

substitutable product are produced and managed according to provisions 

outlined in Section 310. 

310 Material Requirements for Fresh-Chilled Boneless Beef

311 Domestic Origin and Harvest (Slaughter) Requirements – The contractor’s 

quality control program shall be documented and have received a 

satisfactory onsite capability assessment by QAD prior to supplying 

materials for the program. Additionally, each establishment shall be

subjected to verification audits conducted by QAD during production 

activities that demonstrate its adherence to the documented program. 

Boneless beef shall be derived from carcasses that are derived from cattle 

harvested at establishments that comply with the following origin and 

harvest requirements.

312 Domestic Origin - All beef shall originate from U.S. produced livestock as 

defined within the AMS Master Solicitation for Commodity Procurements – 

Domestic Programs (MSCP-D) and Supplement.

313 Humane Handling - All cattle shall be humanely handled in accordance 

with all applicable FSIS regulations and AMS requirements.

314 Spinal Cord Removal – All spinal cord tissue shall be removed during the 

harvesting process.

315 Pathogen Intervention – The harvest process shall include at least two 

pathogen intervention steps. One of the intervention steps shall be a 

critical control point (CCP) in the establishment’s FSIS recognized harvest 

process Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) plan. The CCP 

intervention(s) shall be scientifically validated to achieve a three-log 

reduction of enteric pathogens.

316 Residue Prevention – Harvest and production establishments shall have a 

HACCP system to control veterinary drug, pesticide, and environmental 

contaminant residues per FSIS regulations. Helpful information is available 

in the FSIS Compliance Guide for Residue Prevention 2013. 

317 Boneless Beef Requirements 

317.1 Traceability – Boneless beef shall be traceable to sources that comply with 

the above domestic origin and harvest requirements. 

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit A
Approved by DBJ 

Date Issued: 04/26/04

Date Revised: 02/15/23 3 

317.2 Handling - All boneless beef shall be maintained in excellent condition. 

The contractor’s technical proposal shall include detailed production 

scheduling that addresses time and temperature controls necessary to 

maintain excellent condition of the boneless beef.

317.3 Boneless beef commonly referred to by the industry as XF trimmings (e.g., 

Beef Fat with Visible Lean) is not allowed as a raw material source for 

grinding. 

317.4 Objectionable materials - The following objectionable materials shall be 

excluded:

317.4.1 Major lymph glands (prefemoral, popliteal, and prescapular), thymus 

gland, sciatic (ischiatic) nerve (lies medial to the outside round), and

internal fat (kidney, pelvic, and heart fat). 

317.4.2 All bone, cartilage, shoulder tendon, elbow tendon, silver skin from the 

outside round, sacrosciatic ligament, opaque periosteum, serous 

membrane (peritoneum), tendinous ends of shanks, patellar ligament 

(stifle joint), gracilis membrane (from the inside round), achilles tendon, 

back strap and abdominal tunic. 

317.5 Mechanical Separation - Boneless beef that is mechanically separated 

from bone with automatic deboning systems or advanced lean (meat) 

recovery (AMR) systems is not allowed.

317.6 Lot - A lot shall consist of a single combo sized bin of approximately 2,000 

pounds of boneless beef produced within a day, between “cleanup to 

cleanup” (see Appendix C) and that is from a single harvester or from a 

single processor. 

317.7 Microbial Testing – All lots of fresh chilled boneless beef shall be tested for 

all indicator microorganisms listed in Appendix B. All samples shall be 

sent to the AMS designated laboratory (ADL). 

317.7.1 Sample Preparation and Handling - The ADL shall be responsible for 

supplying procedures for sample preparation, and submission. The ADL

shall require contractors to submit this form as an official record with each 

sample. Samples submitted for boneless beef produced under a 

substitution plan shall be appropriately identified on the ADL sample 

submission form. The ADL shall also be responsible for supplying shipping 

supplies (including sampling bags and shipping materials), to each 

contractor. Contractor’s technical proposal shall include and describe 

sample collection and preparation procedures provided by the ADL. 

317.7.2 Sample Selection 

317.7.2.1 For Beef Manufacturing Trimmings – The composite sample shall be 

selected as described within FSIS Directive 10,010.1.

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit A
Approved by DBJ

Date Issued: 04/26/04

Date Revised: 02/15/23 4 

317.7.2.2 For every lot of beef Manufacturing Trimmings, one sample shall be 

prepared from five different pieces of trim from five different pieces of beef 

product. The sample for indicator microorganisms (aerobic plate count, 

total coliform and generic E. coli) shall weigh 25 grams ± 10 percent.

317.7.2.3 When boneless beef has been exposed to any anti-microbial treatment, no 

sample units shall be selected for at least 15 minutes after such treatment. 

All anti-microbial treatments (e.g., techniques and procedures) 

administered during production and post-production shall be described in 

the supplier’s technical proposal.

317.7.2.4 If the contractor plans to do microbiological testing in addition to that 

required by AMS, the technical proposal shall identify in detail such 

testing, including location of sample collection, frequency of sample 

collection, and intended use of testing results. AMS shall determine 

whether such additional sampling and testing constitutes “prescreening,” 

in which case it shall not be allowed.

317.7.3 Testing and Results 

317.7.3.1 The microbiological testing for all indicator microorganisms shall be in 

accordance with the applicable AMS-approved testing methodologies.

317.7.3.2 When the critical limit is exceeded for indicator microorganisms, the 

boneless beef contractor shall document the removal of the affected lot(s) 

and make such documentation available to an AMS Agent upon request. 

317.7.3.3 The ADL shall record results of all indicator microorganisms’ analysis in a 

format that can be easily captured and analyzed.

317.7.3.4 The ADL shall record all results on spreadsheets and calculate the 

process capability (CPU) for indicator organism tests performed on 

production lots as outlined in Section 317.7.

317.7.3.5 Any lot that exceeds the critical limit criteria of Appendix B shall not be 

delivered to USDA.

317.7.4 Statistical Process Capability – The statistical process capability of a 

boneless beef contractor to comply with microbial requirements shall be 

based on the assessment of calculated process capability (CPU) derived 

from the individual combo test results representing one 2,000-pound

combo lot randomly selected by the ADL from every five consecutive 

individual 2,000-pound combo lots produced each production day. In the 

event that a production day concludes with less than five consecutive 

individual 2,000-pound combo lots, a randomly selected test result shall be 

utilized from one of the remaining lots. The spreadsheets shall be 

maintained so that process capability assessment on the 20 lots can be 

determined as described within Appendix B. Test results involving all 

boneless beef offered for testing for AMS purchase programs shall be 

monitored by AMS and the contractor, to determine individual lot 

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit A
Approved by DBJ 

Date Issued: 04/26/04

Date Revised: 02/15/23 5 

acceptance and/or capability of the contractor’s process according to 

Appendix B. Ineligible boneless beef contractors may re-enter the program 

under conditional status provided corrective actions have been submitted 

for review and approved, implemented and a satisfactory onsite corrective 

action audit by QAD has been conducted. Upon notification by the SSD

that the plan has adequately addressed the issues that resulted in the 

ineligible status determination, the boneless beef contractor may re-enter 

the program under conditional status.

317.7.5 Contractor’s Responsibility - The contractor shall provide results and 

process capability status (as applicable) involving each lot of boneless 

beef to be delivered to the USDA. Test results and process capability 

status (as applicable) for individual lots shall be provided to the QAD agent 

upon request. In the event a boneless beef contractor has been deemed 

ineligible, and wants to continue in the program, the ineligible boneless 

beef contractor may re-enter the program under conditional status 

provided corrective actions have been submitted for review and have been 

deemed approved, implemented and a satisfactory onsite corrective action

audit by QAD has been conducted. Upon notification by the SSD that the 

plan has adequately addressed the issues that resulted in the ineligible 

status determination the boneless beef contractor may re-enter the 

program under conditional status.

317.7.6 Supplier requests to remove samples from AMS testing shall be submitted 

and approved by SSD prior to sample removal from ADL testing.

317.7 Lots of boneless beef tested for indicator microorganisms only (as 

described in Section 317.7) shall not be diverted for use in ground beef 

products for delivery to USDA under FPPS-GB or for Type II under FPPSCGB. 

320 State of Refrigeration

321 Fresh-chilled boneless beef shall be maintained and delivered at a 

temperature not to exceed 40oF.

330 Fat Limitations 

331 Requirements - The contractor shall establish a target average of 15 

percent fat of all boneless beef destined for USDA. The upper and lower 

specifications limits shall be 18.0 and 12.0 percent fat respectively. 

Production lots with average fat results that are not within the upper and 

lower specification limits shall not be shipped to USDA. 

332 Process Capability -The processor’s capability (Cpk) value shall be one (1) 

or higher when the average results from 20 consecutive production lots 

(which always shall include the last production lot) are calculated. 

333 Documentation - The contractor shall declare within its technical proposal:

333.1 Lot size, number of samples, selection and preparation procedures,

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit A
Approved by DBJ

Date Issued: 04/26/04

Date Revised: 02/15/23 6 

333.2 The laboratory and a test method, 

333.3 Data management and storage of fat results,

333.4 Statistical Process Control (SPC) charting methods which shall include a 

process capability report (histogram) that is capable of calculating a Cpk 

value (see Exhibit A).

334 Assessment by AMS - AMS reserves the right to:

334.1 Check production records of the recipient where the contractor’s boneless 

beef is further processed; 

334.2 Select and analyze samples at the further processor. The results may be 

used by the contracting officer as a “check” to determine if fat content is in 

compliance with the fat limitation requirements; and/or

334.3 Deem a contractor unreliable for failure to comply with the above 

requirements. 

340 Packaging and Packing

341 The contractor’s technical proposal and process shall assure that all 

packaging, packing, closure, marking, and palletizing comply with the 

National Motor Freight Regulations and FSIS regulations and the 

requirements listed below. The contractor also shall have procedures for 

verifying the net weight of shipping containers. 

342 Packaging and Packing – The contractor shall bulk package the boneless 

beef within lined “combo bins” in such a manner to maintain the product in 

excellent condition. The combo bins of boneless beef shall be covered so 

that the container arrives at the destination intact. 

343 Net Weight – The contractor shall have procedures that accurately 

determine the net weight of the boneless beef. Each filled combo bin shall 

weigh from 1850 to 2250 pounds. AMS reserves the right to perform net 

weight examinations at destination. 

344 Marking of Containers – All shipping container markings shall include all 

information required by FSIS regulations and the following information: 

344.1 The following statement: “Complies with FPPS-BB-2023 - Boneless Beef

for Further Processing into Fully Cooked Items”: 

344.2 A code number that shall indicate traceability to production lot and date. 

344.3 USDA Shield (at least 2 inches high).

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit A
Approved by DBJ 

Date Issued: 04/26/04

Date Revised: 02/15/23 7 

344.4 Purchase Order Number.

344.5 Fat Declaration. 

344.6 The appropriate material number listed in the table below for each of the 

items: 

Item Material Number

Boneless Beef Combo, Fresh 100155

Note: All labeling shall be illustrated in the Contractor’s technical 

proposal. 

345 Total net weights per delivery unit - The delivery unit shall be 40,000 

pounds. 

346 Sealing - All products shall be delivered to AMS assigned destinations 

under seal with tamper proof, tamper resistant, serially numbered, high 

security seals that meet the American Society for Testing and Materials 

Standard (ASTM) F 1157-04 and/or the International Organization for 

Standards (ISO) 17712-2013 as required under the Master Solicitation. 

Seals shall be >1⁄8th inch diameter cable, high-security bolt, or equivalent.

400 Control of Non-Conforming Product

401 The contractor shall include a plan and supporting documentation to 

assure that non-conforming product is not delivered under USDA 

contracts. The plan shall address 1) control and segregation of nonconforming product, 2) removal of any USDA markings, and 3) disposition 

of non-conforming product, including documentation of final disposition 

(e.g., diverted to cooked product or destroyed).

500 AMS Monitoring and Production Assessment

510 The contractor may request to use either AMS’s QAD Grading-based 

Monitoring and Certification service or QAD Audit-based Verification 

service, for assessing contract compliance of the finished product.

510.1 If the contractor uses the AMS QAD Grading-based Monitoring and 

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit A
Approved by DBJ

Date Issued: 04/26/04

Date Revised: 02/15/23 8 

Certification service, it shall be implemented in accordance with Section 

400 of Supplement 212.

510.2 A technical proposal is not required to be submitted when the 

contractor is operating under the QAD Grading-based Monitoring and 

Certification service option. The contractor’s technical proposal shall 

specify that the AMS QAD Audit-based Verification service option will 

be used.

600 Quality Assurance 

610 Warranty and Complaint Resolution

611 Warranty – The contractor shall guarantee that the product complies with 

all specification requirements, technical proposal declarations, and 

provisions set forth in the Master Solicitation. 

612 Complaint Resolution – Customer complaint resolution procedures shall

be included in the technical proposal. These procedures shall include: a 

point of contact, investigation steps, intent to cooperate with AMS, and 

product replacement or monetary compensation. The procedures shall be 

used to resolve product complaints from recipient agencies or AMS.

620 Contractor Checkloading - Under both the QAD Grading-based Monitoring 

and Certification option and the QAD Audit-based Verification service 

option, the contractor shall perform checkloading examinations at the time 

of shipment and issue a contractor’s certificate to accompany each 

shipment that includes all of the following information:

620.1 Purchase Order Number/Purchase Order Line Item Number;

620.2 Sales Order Number/Sales Order Line Item Number;

620.3 Destination of shipment;

620.4 Name of Product and applicable Material Number;

620.5 Shipping Date;

620.6 Production lot number(s) and date each lot was produced along with 

shipping container code(s) and the code used that provides traceability to 

production lot and date;

620.7 Count of shipping containers and total projected net weight in each 

production lot; 

620.8 Identity of car or truck (car numbers and letters, seals, truck license, etc.) 

as applicable;

620.9 Contractor certification that product conforms with the applicable 

specification (FPPS-BB-2023);

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit A
Approved by DBJ

Date Issued: 04/26/04

Date Revised: 02/15/23 9 

620.10 Count and projected net weight verified and;

620.11 Signature of company official responsible for checkloading.

Appendix A 

Data Entry and Process Capability Value

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit A
Approved by DBJ

Date Issued: 04/26/04

Date Revised: 02/15/23 10

Data Entry

The ADL shall record microbiological test results on spreadsheets and make those 

spreadsheets readily available to AMS and its contractors/suppliers. Quantitative (plate 

count) results shall be expressed as colony forming units (CFU) per gram or per ml 

reflecting the original sample measurement. Test results shall be entered as a whole 

number (i.e., no decimal places, no preceding < (less than) symbol). 

The ADL shall provide the calculated process capability values (CPU, Cl) in the 

spreadsheets so that the supplier’s process capability assessment can be determined, 

as described in Appendix B. 

Process Capability Values – CPU or Cpk 

The process capability value (CPU) shall be calculated by the ADL. CPU shall be used 

for microbiological tests, given these requirements only have an upper specification 

limit. Cpk shall be used for fat testing requirements that have an upper and lower 

specification limit (see Section 332). The upper specification limits (USL) for 

microbiological requirements are in Appendix B. The calculations for CPU and Cpk are 

as follows:

Calculation of process capability (CPU) with an 

upper specification limit only

Step 1. The first calculation shall determine the 

Z-value (upper):

Z-value (upper) = (USL – Process Average) /

Standard Deviation

Step 2. The Z-value divided by 3 shall calculate 

the CPU:

CPU = Z-value (upper) / 3

Calculation of process capability (Cpk) with an 

upper and lower specification limit

Step 1. The first set of calculations shall

determine the smaller value of the two 

Z-values (upper or lower):

Z-value (upper) = (USL – Process Average) /

Standard Deviation

Z-value (lower) = (Process Average – LSL) /

Standard Deviation

Step 2. The smaller of the two Z-values (upper or 

lower) divided by 3 shall calculate the 

Cpk.

CPU = Z-value (smaller value of the upper or 

lower) / 3

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit A
Approved by DBJ 

Date Issued: 04/26/04

Date Revised: 02/15/23 11

Appendix B 

AMS Boneless Beef Process Requirements Flow Chart

Quality Control Program – Prior to bidding on 

boneless beef contracts with the USDA, the 

documented quality control program as 

described within the approved technical 

proposal shall have received a satisfactory 

onsite capability assessment by QAD. AMS 

shall audit and monitor the program. The 

quality control program shall specifically 

address management of microbial data to 

comply with the AMS Process Requirements 

Flow Chart and the following descriptions.

Process Assessment Status - A process 

assessment involves sampling and testing of 

20 consecutive lots (which shall include the last 

recorded result as defined within Appendix C) 

of boneless beef (see Section 319.7.4) 

destined for USDA contracts for the organisms

listed within the table below. 

Process Capable? – Flow chart decision step 

that involves test results for up to 20 

consecutive lots (which shall include the last 

recorded result) recorded in spreadsheets, 

where the process capability (CPU) value is 

calculated (See Appendix A) for evaluation. A 

process that is not capable shall be declared to 

the SSD immediately when results are known 

and shall result in switching from process 

assessment status to conditional status or 

switching from conditional status to ineligible 

status when:

 The CPU values do not meet the levels 

specified in the table below;

 Two results exceed any of the critical limits 

in the table below; * or

 After 2 or more results, the CPU value is 

negative.*

*Immediate action shall be taken prior to completion of 20 lots.

Conditional Status –To regain process capable status, the boneless beef 

contractor shall notify the SSD that the process is not capable, and then have 20 

consecutive results that meet the ‘Process Capable’ criteria within 60 calendar 

days or in accordance with a production schedule pre-approved by the SSD. 

Change in status begins after a cause-and-effect analysis has been performed and 

corrective actions have been implemented. The boneless beef contractor may also 

declare itself ineligible at any time.

Quality Control Program 

Approved by AMS

Process Assessment Status

Process 

Capable? 

Conditional Status

Not to exceed 60 calendar days

Process 

Capable

Ineligible Status

Satisfactory 

AMS 

Assessment 

Audit?

Yes

No

No

Yes

Yes

No

AMS Process

Requirements Flow Chart

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit A
Approved by DBJ

Date Issued: 04/26/04

Date Revised: 02/15/23 12

Ineligible Supplier/Contractor – An ineligible boneless beef contractor shall not be 

allowed to supply boneless beef to USDA until a cause-and-effect analysis has been 

performed and corrective actions have been submitted to AMS for review and approved, 

implemented and a satisfactory AMS assessment audit has been completed. Once 

satisfactorily becoming eligible, subsequent production shall be under Conditional 

Status. The AMS SSD reserves the right to declare a boneless beef contractor 

ineligible at any time.

AMS Microbial Requirements for Boneless Beef

Microbial Test USL (cfu) Critical Limits (cfu) CPU

Standard Plate Count 50,000 / gram 100,000 / gram CPU > 1 

Total Coliforms 200 / gram 1,000 / gram CPU > 1 

E. coli 100 / gram 500 / gram CPU > 1 

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit A
Approved by DBJ

Date Issued: 04/26/04

Date Revised: 02/15/23 13

Appendix C 

Glossary of Terms

Cause and Effect Diagrams – A cause and 

effect analysis is used to identify the cause or 

source of non-conformities. It categorizes the 

source as derived from impact on a process 

presented by Human, Machinery, Material, 

Methods, Environment, and Measurement (Test). 

The Cause-and-Effect Diagram shall assist in 

evaluating a process and assigning the 

appropriate control point (see Figure 1).

"Cleanup to cleanup" - Part of a HACCP 

program that the establishment has in place to 

support statistically distinguishing one portion of 

production from another. Production destined for USDA contracts is to be commenced 

on clean equipment. However, "cleanup to cleanup" without other supporting 

documentation may not be adequate to statistically distinguish one portion of production 

from another. If a sample analysis yields a positive result, any product produced in the 

same time frame with the same process or equipment is suspect, unless an intervention 

occurred that would indicate a change in the status of the process/equipment.

Control Charts – A control chart is a 

run chart with statistically derived 

upper and lower control limits (ucl 

and lcl). The control chart 

demonstrates if a process is in 

statistical control. When properly 

designed, control charts provide an 

early warning of problems allowing 

for adjustments to be made before

production of non-conforming 

products. Microbial test results may 

be plotted on control charts for 

individual measurements and fat test 

results may be plotted on control charts featuring average and range of the fat test 

results (See Figure 2). 

Figure 2

AMS Microbial and fat Results 12-7/20

Total Coliform Count

COMPANY = Noname's Packing

Individ.: cl: 47.7419 ucl: 179.465 lcl: -83.9811 * Rule violation Subgrp Size 1

O

O O

O

O

O

O O O O O O

O

O

O

O O O

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

O

Individ.

cl

lcl

ucl

-100

-50

0

50

100

150

200

5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Effect

Cause Cause

Cause Cause

Cause

Cause

Cause

Cause

Cause

Cause

Cause

Cause

Cause

Cause

Cause

Cause

Cause

Cause

Cause

Figure 1

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit A
Approved by DBJ 

Date Issued: 04/26/04

Date Revised: 02/15/23 14

Cpk – Process Capability Value (Cpk) is a capability analysis index used to determine if 

a process can meet specification limits. A Cpk value of 1 indicates that the process is 

producing at least 99.73% within the specification limit. Cpk values of 1 for many 

organizations have become the minimum requirement. However, the larger the Cpk 

values the better. Cpk differs from other process capability analyses since it considers 

the process average along with the distribution of test results. Since there is no lower 

specification limit for USDA microbial requirements, the calculation for Cpk shall not 

involve relating the process average with a lower 

specification limit. 

CPU - Process Capability Value (CPU) is the 

same as Cpk except that there is no lower 

specification limit. The process performance 

index is correctly known as a Centered Process 

Capability Upper Specification Limit only (CPU) 

(See Figure 3).

Excellent Condition - All product shall be in 

excellent condition (e.g., exposed lean and fat 

surfaces shall be of a color and bloom normally 

associated with the class, grade, and cut of meat 

and typical of meat which has been properly 

stored and handled). Cut surfaces and naturally exposed lean surfaces shall show no 

more than slight darkening or discoloration due to dehydration, aging, and/or microbial 

activity. The fat shall show no more than very slight discoloration due to oxidation or 

microbial activity. No odors foreign to fresh meat shall be present. Changes in color 

and odors characteristically associated with vacuum 

packaged meat in excellent condition shall be acceptable. 

Also, product shall show no evidence of mishandling. Beef 

shall be maintained in excellent condition through 

processing, storage, and transit. 

Flow Charts – Flow charts depict all of the steps of a 

process. Standard symbols are used to identify the start, 

finish, processing steps and decision steps. It can be used 

to simplify a complex process so that it can be analyzed 

(Figure 4). 

Histograms – The histogram shows a pictorial 

representation of the frequency of distribution of microbial 

test results over time. Sometimes referred to as process 

capability charts, histograms compare the distribution of 

the test results with AMS specification requirements. Use 

histograms along with control charts to better understand 

process capability (See Figure 3). 

Start

Process Step

Decision

Finish

No

Yes

Figure 4

AMS Fat Data

Average Fat

Company = B

Samples: 20 Mean: 15.3664 Std Dev: .8421Cpk: 1.042 Spec Lim: ( 12, 18)

Est % out: ( .0032012, .088179) Act % out: ( .0000, .0000)

Mean

-3sp +3sp

LSL USL

Target

0

2

4

6

8

10

12 13 14 15 16 17 18

Figure 3

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit A
Approved by DBJ 

Date Issued: 04/26/04

Date Revised: 02/15/23 15

Figure 5

Pareto Diagrams – The Pareto diagram ranks the importance of different nonconformities. Typically, non-conformities are measured against frequency of 

occurrence. The Pareto analysis is helpful 

in identifying and justifying which problems 

shall need to be solved first (see Figure 5).

Process – For the purpose of this 

specification, a single process involves the 

input of a raw material on a production line 

with a value-added activity resulting in a 

output that can is be further processed or 

meet a customer’s need. A complex 

process involves output being another 

processes input. The production of ground beef is a complex process.

Process Capability Assessment on 20 consecutive lots – For the purpose of this 

specification, process capability assessments are conducted on data results from each 

lot for fat and microbial requirements. A process assessment involves sampling and 

testing of 20 consecutive lots (which always includes the last recorded result). 

Information from each lot shall be evaluated with information from the preceding 19 lots 

(i.e., while in process assessment of the first 20 lots, the process was found to be 

capable, then assessment shall continue on lot numbers 2-21). This has often been 

referred to as a ‘Rolling 20’. This assessment takes into account process variations that 

may be attributed to product, management, sources, and time (see Figure 6). 

Random Sampling – A process of selecting a sample from a lot whereby each unit in 

the lot has an equal chance of being selected and is representative of the lot’s 

production.

Statistical Process Control (SPC) – SPC is the primary analysis tool of quality 

improvement. The objective of any quality improvement strategy is to identify and 

reduce the amount of variation. SPC analyzes the variation in a process and is the 

applied science that assists suppliers to collect, organize and interpret microbial and fat 

test results on processing of ground beef destined for USDA. 

Figure 6

Boneless defects

Frequency (%) - Samples 1 to 9

CONN TIS

LYMPH

BONE

FATINT

BLOOD CL

Category

35

21

20

10

4

Count

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit A
Approved by DBJ

Date Issued: 04/26/04

Date Revised: 02/15/23 16

SPC provides tools to help measure, identify, and eliminate variation from customer 

requirements (see Table 1). 

Tools for Statistical Process Control

Flow Charts Scatter Diagrams

Pareto Diagrams Run Charts

Cause and Effect Diagrams Control Charts

Histograms Capability Assessment

Upper and lower control limits (ucl and lcl) – Control limits are statistical calculations 

of the distribution of test results. Upper and lower control limits represent +/- 3 standard 

deviations of the process results. Data plotted outside the limits represent special 

causes of variation. A process may be considered “out of statistical control” when 

results are outside these limits. Upper and lower control limits are not to be confused 

with specification limits. A supplier wishing to be an eligible participant in the Boneless 

Beef Program shall have a process that is capable of producing within the specification 

limits (See figure 2). 

Upper and lower specification limits (USL and LSL) – Normally, the customer sets 

the specification limits. The objective of the Boneless Beef Purchase Program is to 

procure from boneless beef processors that are statistically capable of meeting the 

upper specification limits specified within the FPPS-BB. The specification limits reflect 

customer needs (See Figure 3). 

Table 1

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit A
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit B

APPROVED 

Federal Purchase Program

Specification (FPPS) for

Animal Handling and 

Welfare 

Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) 

Livestock and Poultry (LP) Program 

Standards and Specification Division (SSD) 

Room 2628-S, STOP 0258 

Phone: (202) 690-3148 

Supersedes: FPPS-AHW-2020 November 2020 – 

Changes from previous requirements in blue 

Effective: March 2021 

100 General 

101 This document is for use by the Department of Agriculture (USDA), AMS, LP 

Program to ensure that the animal handling and welfare requirements for 

Federal nutrition assistance programs reflect industry best practices. 

110 Program Approach 

111 All animal harvest facilities that supply raw materials from bovine, porcine and 

ovine species for the production of AMS destined finished products must 

develop and implement a written program that is consistent with a systematic 

approach to humane animal handling and welfare as outlined in 69 FR 54625. 

The program will ensure proper animal handling and welfare techniques are 

conducted from the time the transportation conveyance enters the facility’s 

premises through the stunning and exsanguination of the animal. 

120 Program Submission 

121 The program will be submitted as a supporting document to the organization’s 

approved technical proposal and must address the requirements outlined in 

Section 200 – Program Components. 

200 Program Components 

201 The contractor must ensure that any facility that harvests animals has a: 

210 Management Commitment 

211 Steering Committee (internal) which is ultimately accountable for animal 

handling and welfare initiatives within the organization. 

Approved by 

Date Issued: 08/11/08 

Date Revised: 03/15/21 

DBJ 
 

 

 

 

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit B

212 Mission Statement on animal handling and welfare that is distributed to all 

employees and conspicuously displayed at the premises. 

220 Training Program 

221 Training program on Animal Handling and Welfare that: 

221.1 is provided to all employees interacting with animals; 

221.2 covers the North American Meat Institute (NAMI) Recommended Animal 

Handling Guidelines & Audit Guide: A Systematic Approach to Animal Welfare. 

221.3 is facilitated by an employee that has earned and maintained a certification of 

animal handling and welfare training, such as that offered through the 

Professional Animal Auditor Certification Organization (PAACO) or an 

equivalent. 

221.4 is conducted no less frequently than once a year for each designated 

employee; and, 

221.5 requires signed documentation from each employee and confirmation by 

signature of the designated, certified trainer upon successful completion of 

training. 

230 Quality Management Plan 

231 Written quality management plan (internal) which addresses all provisions of 

Chapter 4: Transportation Audit Guidelines, 7 Core Criteria and Chapter 5: 

Auditing Animal Handling and Stunning, 7 Core Criteria, of the NAMI 

Recommended Animal Handling Guidelines & Audit Guide: A Systematic 

Approach to Animal Welfare, found at the following web site address: 

231.1 http://animalhandling.org/producers/guidelines_audits 

232 This internal quality management plan must also provide for routine 

assessment and monitoring of humane handling through the use of a numerical 

scoring system conducted by a trained employee. 

233 All animal harvest facilities that supply raw materials from bovine, porcine and 

ovine species for the production of AMS destined finished products must have 

a fully functioning back-up stunning device onsite wherever animal stunning is 

performed. 

240 Regulatory Oversight 

241 For all species, animals/carcasses that are inspected and passed by the Food 

Safety Inspection Service (FSIS) are eligible for AMS purchase programs. 

Approved by 

Date Issued: 08/11/08 

DBJ 

Date Revised: 03/15/21 2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit B

300 Program Evaluation and Eligibility 

301 The program will be audited (external) by AMS or a firm accredited by AMS. 

The accreditation of the firm will be conducted by the Quality Assessment 

Division (QAD) through the USDA ISO Guide 17065 Program. 

302 Audit findings will be communicated to the establishment’s Food Safety and 

Inspection Service (FSIS) Inspector in Charge (IIC) or designee. 

310 Audit Format 

311 Audits will be conducted utilizing the following format: 

312 Transportation Segment (Chapter 4: NAMI Recommended Animal Handling 

Guidelines & Audit Guide: A Systematic Approach to Animal Welfare). 

312.1 Audited organizations must pass Core Criteria 1 and 6 with a minimum scoring 

of excellent, Core Criteria 2 through 5 with a minimum scoring of acceptable 

and Core Criteria 7 must be adhered to with full compliance (zero tolerance) 

each time an audit is performed. 

313 Animal Handling and Stunning Segment (Chapter 5: NAMI Recommended 

Animal Handling Guidelines & Audit Guide: A Systematic Approach to Animal 

Welfare). 

313.1 Audited organizations must adhere to Core Criteria 1, 2, 6 and 7 with full 

compliance (zero tolerance) and to Core Criteria 3, 4 and 5 with a minimum 

scoring of Acceptable each time an audit is performed.1/ 

313.2 The auditor shall inform FSIS and organization officials in writing of all audit 

findings, including any observations of missed stuns and/or animals regaining 

sensibility following stunning, upon completion of the audit during the exit 

interview. 

320 Initial Audit 

321 Initial audit must be performed prior to award of contracts. 

330 Audit Failure 

331 If an audit is failed for any of the Core Criteria, the organization is not eligible to 

provide product until such a time that corrective and preventative actions are 

approved by SSD, implemented and proven effective. 

1/Religious harvest (Kosher and Halal) shall be exempt from the AMS auditing of Core Criteria 6: Effective Stunning. 

Approved by 

Date Issued: 08/11/08 

DBJ 

Date Revised: 03/15/21 3 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit B

340 Audit Frequency and Status 

341 Standard - Until four (4) consecutive successfully passed audits are attained, 

an audit must be conducted within 3 months of the previous audit. 

342 Monthly - If at any time an audit identifies any of the Core Criteria not meeting 

the pass requirements while in the Standard phase, auditing will be required to 

be conducted on a monthly basis once corrective and preventative actions have 

been approved by SSD, implemented and proven effective. This schedule will 

be for a period of time until four (4) successive audits are found to meet the 

passing requirements noted in Section 310 – Audit Format; at which time 

audits shall be conducted on the Standard basis. 

343 If four successfully conducted audits are sequentially completed within a oneyear period while in Standard auditing phase, the facility may move to a SemiAnnual audit basis. 

344 Semi-Annual - Semi-annual audits may continue until such time that a failed 

audit is reported or a period of greater than six months has elapsed without any 

audits being performed; at which time the audits must resume as described for 

Standard audits. 

345 For-Cause – Any official enforcement actions issued by FSIS for missed stuns 

or for an animal regaining sensibility following stunning shall result in an 

immediate for-cause animal handling and welfare audit by AMS. Subsequent 

audit frequency will be determined by results of the AMS audit, as described 

above. 

400 SSD 

401 SSD can declare an organization’s Animal Handing and Welfare Program out of 

compliance at any time. 

402 The organization shall immediately notify SSD when any animal handling and 

welfare official enforcement action is issued by FSIS. 

Approved by 

Date Issued: 08/11/08 

DBJ 

Date Revised: 03/15/21 4 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit C 

Cover Page: 

Company Name 

Company Address 

Contact Person, including title, phone number, including emergency contact information, email address (shall be authorized to represent the company). 

Technical Proposal for: [Supplement Number] and [FPPS] 

Table of Contents (all pages and attachments shall be number and identified – any 

attachments shall be identified and referenced in the Technical Proposal). 

The technical proposal should document a quality control program that includes procedures, 

records, forms, pictures, etc., which demonstrates conformance with the following checklist of 

requirements: 

100 Scope 

200 Applicable Documents 

300 Checklist of Requirements 

310 Materials 

311 Domestic Origin and Harvest Requirements 

312 Domestic Origin 

313 Humane Handling 

314 Spinal Cord Removal 

315 Pathogen Intervention 

316 Residue Prevention 

317 Boneless Beef Requirements 

317.1 Traceability 

317.2 Handling 

317.3 XF Trimmings 

317.4 Objectionable Materials 

Approved by 

Date Issued: 05/10/12

Date Revised: 02/15/23 

DBJ 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

317.5 Mechanical Separation 

317.6 Lot 

317.7 Microbial Testing 

320 State of Refrigeration 

330 Fat Limitations 

331 Requirements 

332 Process Capability 

333 Documentation 

340 Packaging and Packing 

341 NMFR and FSIS Regulations 

342 Packaging and Packing 

343 Net Weight 

344 Marking of Containers 

345 Delivery Unit 

346 Sealing 

400 Control of Non-Conforming Product 

401 Plan 

500 Quality Assurance 

510 Warranty and Complaint Resolution 

511 Warranty 

512 Complaint Resolution 

520 Contractor Checkloading 

Attachments or Appendixes - Please attach all referenced documents with the applicable 

document name and reference number. 

Approved by 

Date Issued: 05/10/12

Date Revised: 02/15/23 

DBJ 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Supplement 212 to AMS Master Solicitation Exhibit D 

United States Department of Agriculture 

Agricultural Marketing Service 

Livestock and Poultry Program 

Certificate of Conformance for 

the Procurement of Fresh Chilled Boneless Beef Items 

Certificate of Conformance 

I certify the following: 

(1) On [delivery date(s)], [Supplier’s name] furnished the (insert the appropriate 

commodity description) called for by Purchase Order Number ___________via 

[Carrier] under Sales Order Number/Item number(s): . 

(2) The (insert the appropriate material name) is of the quality specified and 

conforms in all respects with the purchase order requirements, including [Supplier’s 

name] Technical Proposal as approved by the AMS, LP Program, Standards and 

Specification Division. 

(3) Product identification, (i.e. production lot number(s)) is in the quantity shown 

on the attached acceptance document. 

(4) Supplier assures all meat or meat products used in fulfilling this contract was 

produced in the United States as defined in the AMS Master Solicitation Section I.E. 

Date: 

Signature: 

(Signed by an officer or representative authorized to sign offers) 

Title: 

Approved by DBJ 

Date Issued: 05/10/12

Date Revised: 02/15/23