Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021 1 

Task 

EstNbr EstName MOI # Date Code TaskName Status MOI Agenda 

M15896+ Abbyland TUN111204 01APR2020 04C02 Livestock Finalized 

P15896 Pork Pack, 3601G Humane 

Inc. Handling hogs, so they can be separated out to be further assessed by the PHV. Today at approximately 

8:03AM the pen was occupied by a newly unloaded group of hogs, resulting in a slow hog 

having to rest in the alleyway (where no waterers are installed) for approximately 15 minutes. 

There were no other hogs moving in the alleyway at this time. 

I met with and to discuss the incident 

from this morning regarding the USDA SUSPECT pen. It is designated for slow and disabled 

-

-

-

-

-

-

Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021

(b) (6) (b) (6)

M18079+ Smithfield VFB4914061 30JUN2020 04C02 Livestock Finalized 

P27232 Fresh Meats 930G Humane 

Corp. Handling 

(b) (6)

PREDICATION I observed some issues with the fan banks while verifying HATS category I 

(inclement weather) this morning. OBJECTIVE I met with 

(b) (6)

near the B-side 2000 pen to make him aware of my findings regarding the fans at the 

truck waiting area, SUMMARY I informed that while verifying HATS category I 

(b) (6)

(Inclement Weather), it appeared that some of the fans at the truck waiting area were not 

operating. I counted at least 8 that appeared nonoperational with a truck carrying live animals 

(b) (6) (b) (6)

parked beside them informed he had just inspected the misters at the truck waiting 

area. He stated all misters were functional, but he had not inspected all fans.  stated 

he would go back to inspect every fan and follow up with me later with his findings. No 

humane handling violations were observed. BACKGROUND Est. 18079 is a very large market 

hog slaughtering establishment. Currently, the establishment is slaughtering roughly 

(b) (4)

animals a day. The establishment is recognized as having a robust humane handling program. 

The high for today was 89 degrees Fahrenheit. 

M1996+P Freedom YQM231406 30JUN2020 04C02 Livestock Finalized Water not available for approximately the first 30 minutes cattle were in barn. Management 

8242+V19 Sausage, 5130G Humane notified, water was made available. 

96 Inc. Handling 

M21190 Riverview RLO460905 08MAY2020 04C02 Livestock Finalized 

Meat 2308G Humane 

Company, Handling 

LLC 

On the morning 5/8/2020 at approximately 0935 hours, an ineffective stun attempt was 

observed during the second inspected beef slaughter of the day at C&W Meat Packers, est. 

21190M. The animal was secured in the catch chute when the first stunning attempt from a .22 

magnum rifle occurred.  The animal raised his head and consciously vocalized, remaining on all 

four feet.  With the second stunning attempt, the animal dropped to his front knees, 

consciously vocalized and raised up to stand on all four feet.  With the third stunning attempt 

the animal again dropped to his front knees, brought himself back to a standing position on all 

four feet.  At this point, the animal was tracking movement with his eyes and was consciously 

vocalizing.  With the forth stunning attempt, the animal dropped to the floor and was 

insensible.  There was no conscious tracking of the eyes, no vocalization and no movement 

from the animal.  The animal was observed to remain insensible thereafter. After the animal 

was observed to be insensible,

(b) (6)

 informed Mr. Wayne Courtney and Ms. Carla 

Courtney, co-owners of C&W Meat Packers est. 21190M of this noncompliance.  Retain tag 

number B23822305 was placed on the restrainer.  C&W does have a written robust animal 

handling plan in place. 
-

1111 

-

-

Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021 2 

EstNbr 

M2460+P 

2460 

M32062+ 

P32062+V 

32062 

EstName 

Cimpl's, Inc. 

Washington 

County Meat 

Packing 

MOI # 

PMB230505 

3513G 

RYD091405 

2718G 

Date 

13MAY2020 

18MAY2020 

Task 

Code 

04C02 

04C02 

TaskName 

Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Status 

Finalized 

Open 

MOI Agenda 

On the morning of May 13, 2020, I 

(b) (6)

performed an odd-hours 

inspection of the barn, circle tub, alley, and restrainer. I entered the barn at approximately 

0420. During this inspection I noticed one dead cow in Pen 1. The barn employee said he had 

not noticed her. 

(b) (6)

said that he walked through the barn just before 0400 

and did not see any dead cows at that time. There was one small, sharp point on the gate latch 

on the southwest post of the circle tub. U.S. Rejected Tag B38162971 was applied to the post 

and immediately removed as the barn employee blunted the point with a hand-held grinder. 

On the inside of the head catch in the U.S. Suspect Pen were numerous sharp points due to 

broken welds. U.S. Rejected Tag B38162972 was applied to the head catch. This tag is still in 

place at the time of writing the MOI. 

(b) (6)

was notified of all findings. 

IIC Keri Johnson does not have PHIS access to document this MOI for an egregious inhumane 

(b) (6)

handling incident at Washington County Meat Packing, M32062.  The following is her 

documentation of the events: Today, May 18th, 2020, at approximately 12:00pm, I, 

(b) (6)

, verbally notified Mr. Markus Vaughn, Establishment Manager, of my decision to 

(b) (6)

recommend a suspension of slaughter inspection at Washington County Meat Packing, 

establishment M32062.  I advised Mr. Vaughn that I was contacting 

(b) (6)

who would contact the District Office about the suspension action and that the District 

Office would be following up with a written suspension letter to the establishment.  I am basing 

my decision to recommend suspension on the following:  At approximately 11:10am today, 

the establishment personnel attempted to move a mature Scottish Highland steer into the 

knock box.  The animal’s large horns became lodged in an approximately 8-inch gap between 

the facility wall and the vertical beams at the back of the knock box. 

(b) (6)

The beef could not be 

moved from this position, so establishment employee elected to stun the 

animal in that position.  The first attempt to stun the beef was with a .22 magnum rifle and was 

ineffective.  Four more attempts were made to stun the beef with the same firearm, but all 

were ineffective.  The beef remained conscious, standing with blinking, eye tracking and a 

normal breathing pattern on all attempts.  The kill floor employee retrieved a 12-gauge shotgun 

from his home adjacent to the plant and rendered a 6th attempt.  This attempt was effective. 

The animal’s legs buckled, and it slumped in a downward direction even though the head was 

suspended by the horns.  I immediately took a regulatory control action by placing U.S. Reject 

tag #B24854306 on the knock box to prevent further slaughter.  This was the last inspected 

animal for the day.  I examined the skull for shot location and found that all 6 attempts were in 

the correct location for a successful stun. 

(b) (6)

It appeared the first 5 shots did not penetrate the 

skull.  I contacted my , to notify 

them of the incident.  I located the plant manager, Markus Vaughn, to alert him of this situation 

and it’s egregious nature.  I advised Mr. Vaughn that the regulatory control action to stop 

further stunning would remain in place.  I informed him the plant could continue to process the 

beef slaughtered today.  I advised him that due to the seriousness of this matter, an immediate 

suspension was being recommended and that I was alerting the District Office of incident and 

recommendation. 
-

1111 

-

3 

320 

Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021 

EstNbr 

M320M+V 

M320M+V 

320 

EstName 

Smithfield 

Fresh Meats 

Corp. 

Smithfield 

Fresh Meats 

Corp. 

MOI # 

VWK251205 

3009G 

VWK031305 

2719G 

Date 

09MAY2020 

19MAY2020 

Task 

Code 

04C02 

04C02 

TaskName 

Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Status 

Finalized 

Finalized 

MOI Agenda 

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)

I, , spoke with 

and at 

approximately 1035 hours on 05/09/2020 regarding concerns with humane handling during 

truck unloading.While observing truck unloading at the East bay of the South dock immediately 

prior to the meeting, I observed a truck driver and a plant employee unloading hogs from a 

rear-unload trailer. The truck driver reached his rattle paddle into a group of hogs that were 

piling up and tapped the paddle back and forth quickly in the middle of the pile, making contact 

with several hogs. He was not limiting contact of the paddle and did not take care to avoid 

sensitive areas of the hogs such as the face or genitals. I told the driver to make sure not to hit 

any faces and he stopped tapping the paddle in the middle of the pile. I then observed a plant 

employee come to assist the truck driver. This employee was also not being careful with his 

paddle to avoid hitting a sensitive area of the hog and would invert the rattle paddle to hit the 

tail area of the hog, very close to the genital area. The hogs were not injured during this 

(b) (6) (b) (6)

incident. I told this situation was less than ideal and 

may easily develop into a humane handling noncompliance. stated the situation 

would be addressed and humane handling will improve. 

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)

I, , spoke with 

at approximately 1145 hours on 

05/19/2020.During today’s record review for verification point 4 (review butina gate alleyway 

verification record) it was noted that on 05/11/2020 and 05/12/2020 there were only two 

verification checks performed, but there were three production periods. The establishment 

reviewed run time records for the dates in question and confirmed there should have been 

three verification checks performed on those dates. Verification point 4 for this establishment 

states:A member of management or designee will perform a random verification each 

production period throughout the entire FSIS verification period. During this check, a minimum 

of 100 hogs will be observed moving through both the North and South alleyways. The 

(b) (4)

verifier will observe both employees and hogs to ensure all animals are up on their feet and 

mobile. In the event a hog is sitting or becomes non-ambulatory in the alleyway the verifier will 

(b) (6)

observe that the employee disengages the gate and address the animal in question in a 

(b) (6) (b) (6)

humane, safe manner.  I informed that I would be recording this 

task as “Unperformed” on the verification plan. I informed 

that I would be issuing this MOI. 
-

-

- • 

Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021 4 

Task 

EstNbr EstName MOI # Date Code TaskName Status MOI Agenda 

M320M+V Smithfield 

320 Fresh Meats 

Corp. 

VWK241405 

0822G 

22MAY2020 04C02 Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Finalized On 05/21/2020, at approximately 1145 hours I was notified by the early morning ante-mortem 

inspector that she had identified a hog in pen 11C this morning as a U.S. Suspect to be moved 

to the designated suspect pen for inspection by the PHV.  She observed the pig to be blind with 

swollen, protruding white eyes and was unsure of the cause. The inspector notified the 

establishment employee that was escorting her for ante-mortem inspection, who stated he 

would make sure the pig was segregated for veterinary inspection. There were no pigs present 

in the designated suspect pen at any time this morning and there was no pig present in the 

(b) (4)

suspect pen at the time I was notified. I took a regulatory control action and rejected the North 

alleyway with US Reject tag #B28258977 at 1158 hours to allow the establishment time 

to locate the pig. The establishment showed me the pen card for pen 11C for 69 pigs with 

tattoo 40, which had been signed by the inspector at 0543 hours. There were no adjustments 

or changes made to the pen card. I removed the U.S. reject tag at 1202 hours to allow the 

establishment to resume operations while they completed an investigation. The plant 

investigation revealed that the identified animal had not been segregated or removed from the 

pen and had been slaughtered in the second push to the 

(b) (4) (b) (6) (b) (6)

within animals 15-28). I 

notified and that no 

animals could enter commerce that had not passed ante-mortem inspection. Pen 11C was 

slaughtered at 0602 hours. The other half of the load, also with tattoo number 40, was 

slaughtered at 0800 hours and was separated by both time and space from the carcasses from 

pen 11C. 

(b) (6)

located 68 carcasses with tattoo #40 in EQ Bay 5 between slots 

172-279. These carcasses were retained with US. Retained tags #B28258702 and B28258978 

(EQ Bay 5, Row 1), and B28258979 and B28258980 (EQ Bay 5, Row 2). An additional 2 

carcasses were found in EQ Bay 5 in between the separated lots. The establishment elected to 

discard the first 28 carcasses as well as 2 stragglers that were separated between the two lots 

and the U.S. Retain tags were removed. The remainder of the carcasses were released back 

into production. All offal produced from 3 minutes prior to the estimated carcass run time until 

3 minutes after the estimated carcass run time (15 minutes total) was discarded by the 

establishment. This included 29 boxes of heads (116 total heads), 4 boxes of tongues (200 

tongues), 4 boxes of tongue trim (300 hogs), 3 boxes of salivary glands (160-180 hogs), 3 

boxes of hearts (160 hearts), 1 box of pancreas (approximately 300 hogs), 7 boxes of stomachs 

(154 stomachs), and 21 bundles of casings (315 runnings). It was determined that product 

intended for pet foods that was produced during the indicated time frame did not need to be 

discarded. A new lockbox was installed near the designated suspect pen in the South barn for 

increased ease of access to U.S. Suspect tags, hog rings, and pliers. To prevent future 

occurrences, discussion between 

(b) (6)

determined that in the future when a pig is identified by an ante-mortem inspector as requiring 

veterinary disposition for ante-mortem, the inspector will halt inspection on that pen until the 

pig is appropriately identified and moved to the suspect pen. 

M3D Swift Beef MXE071706 04JUN2020 04C02 Livestock 

Company 2604G Humane 

Handling 

Finalized Discussed ID collection with 

(b) (6)

and 

(b) (6)

. Tuesday  6/2/2020 

at approximately 11:30 pm floor personnel informed me that ID for carcass on disposition rail 

had been discarded. Spoke with 

(b) (6)

He retrieved the tags, the ID did not 

contain tissue for DNA matching.Wednesday /3/2020 at approximately midnight I was called to 

the floor for a disposition. Upon inspection the head, viscera, and tongue were missing MPD 

(b) (6) (b) (6)

tags. I found them in a tray by the gut table. They had not been applied. Discussed with 

and . 
-

-

Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021 5 

EstNbr 

M40463+ 

V40463 

EstName 

Alaska 

Interior 

Meats, LLC 

MOI # 

NZS1112043 

922G 

Date 

22APR2020 

Task 

Code 

04C02 

TaskName 

Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Status 

Finalized 

MOI Agenda 

At approximately 1:03pm while verifying HATS Category VIII Stunning Effectiveness on the 

slaughter floor I, 

(b) (6)

, observed a sow being restrained in the large 

metal stun box.  I was standing on the kill floor just inside the door between the kill floor and 

utility room.  I observed the stun operator apply a first stun attempt with a firearm.  After the 

first stun attempt, the sow remained standing in the stun box.  The sow actively walked 

forward a couple of steps and swung her head from side to side.  No vocalization was 

observed.  The stun operator immediately applied a second stun attempt with the same 

firearm.  After the second stun attempt, the sow remained standing in the stun box.  The sow 

continued to actively swing her head from side to side.  At this point, due to the change in 

direction of the firearm, I moved off the slaughter floor.  I was now standing outside the door 

between the slaughter floor and utility room.  I continued to observe the body of the sow in the 

stun box through the plastic window on the door.  The stun operator immediately applied a 

third stun attempt.  The third stun attempt was effective in rendering the sow insensible; the 

sow dropped in the stun box and did not actively move.  The stun operator did not need to 

reload the firearm between stun attempts. 

operator. I contacted

(b) (6)

Mr. Chris Miller, Plant Manager, was the stun 

and rejected the stun box.  I applied U.S. 

Reject tag number B37157093.  The sow was the last animal slaughtered for the day.  The 

Denver District Office was contacted via supervisory channels.  I verbally notified Mr. Miller of 

the regulatory control action.  The SPHV and CSI inspected the dressed head and verified three 

stun holes had penetrated the skull. The establishment is not currently operating under a 

robust humane handling systematic approach.  There have been no non-compliance records 

for the same root cause issued within the past 90 days. 

M40463+ Alaska 

V40463 Interior 

Meats, LLC 

NZS5011041 

622G 

22APR2020 04C02 Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Finalized On 4/21/2020 at approximately 1303 hours, the final animal (a sow) for slaughter was brought 

into the stunning box.  Once the animal was in the stunning box, I, , exited the 

(b) (6)

slaughter room since a firearm would be used to stun the animal.  While standing in the 

hallway immediately outside the slaughter floor room, I heard the first discharge from the 

firearm. I continued to wait in the hallway for a few moments and heard a second discharge 

from the firearm. As I approached the door to enter the slaughter floor, I could see a plant 

employee covering his ears through the small plexiglass window in the door.  I waited a few 

more moments and heard a third discharge from the firearm. I waited a few more moments 

and then entered the slaughter floor after no further discharges where heard from the firearm. 

Once I entered the room, the sow was removed from the stunning box and I observed the sow 

to be unconscious. I inspected the dressed head with 

(b) (6)

and verified three 

penetrating stun holes. 
-

1111 

■ 

Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021 6 

Task 

EstNbr EstName MOI # Date Code TaskName Status MOI Agenda 

M4271+P GREISE CZF2010045 03APR2020 04C02 Livestock Finalized 

4271+V42 BROTHERS 103G Humane 

71 PACKING Handling 

INC. 

M44779 Spencer VMV421404 01APR2020 04C02 Livestock Finalized 

County 1701G Humane 

Butcher Handling 

Block 

Today, April 3, 2020, at approximately 1030 hours, I verbally notified Mr. Frank Greise, 

establishment owner/manager, of the Raleigh District Office (RDO) decision to suspend 

slaughter at Establishment 4271.  At approximately 0830 hours, I 

(b) (6)

observed a 

hog that was bought down to slaughter, the use of electric stunner was being used. The owner 

of the establishment (Frank Greise) first sprayed the hog with water and then took the prods 

and placed them behind the ears, he then proceeded to shock the hog. The hog dropped, and 

the chute gate was released the hog slid out of the chute and the other employee 

(b) (6)

proceeded to stick the hog as I came closer to observe the hog being bled I saw the hog began 

to blink and move its eyes and then rising its head and moving the front legs. The hog was 

(b) (6) (b) (6)

bleeding out and there was no extra stunning that took place. I asked Frank Greise if this was (b) (6)

the heaviest pig he has done with the electric shocker he said yes. After speaking with 

, I informed Mr. Greise that slaughter was 

suspended.  I placed US Reject Tag #B37604850 on the knock box. 

(b) (6)

On March 31, 2020 at approximately 0930 hrs. EDT, 

(b) (6)

and 

(b) (6)

were observing conditions in the 

holding pens at Spencer County Butcher Block (M44779) Taylorsville, KY. The following 

observations were made: ·  A densely populated pen of sheep was found to have flooring 

covered in approximately 1-2 inches of wet bedding and areas of liquid manure; no visibly dry 

bedding was observed in the pen. ·  The swine holding pen housing animals from roughly 30 

pounds to 300 pounds was found to have soupy liquid feces covering approximately one third 

of the flooring, sloppy manure/bedding covering approximately one third of the flooring, and 

wet bedding covering the remainder of the flooring. One dead pig was observed. No visible 

food source observed. ·  The automatic waterer in a holding pen housing mostly goats was 

observed dangling from the wall; plant personnel had placed a 5-gallon bucket of water in the 

pen which the SVMO observed being promptly overturned by a goat. Plant personnel later 

secured the bucket. ·  The beef holding pen was observed with the automatic waterer 

dangling from the wall; plant personnel had placed the bottom of a plastic drum in the pen 

which was observed to hold water. ·  A large pen holding lambs in number too numerous to 

count (TNTC); it was questionable all animals had the ability to lie down and questionable the 

one-gallon capacity (?) automatic waterer was sufficient to provide access to water considering 

the stocking density of the pen. 

(b) (6)

was notified of the above 

observations and the forthcoming documentation. The establishment engaged in federally 

inspected slaughter activities this day. The management of Spencer County Butcher Block 

considers all animals being held in the pens as custom exempt until such time they are declared 

for federal inspection. The animals involved in the above observations had not been declared 

for federal inspection at the time noted. The establishment is reminded that the Federal Meat 

Inspection Act (FMIA) and the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act (HMSA) applies to custom 

exempt animals. 
-

-

-

Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021 7 

Task 

EstNbr EstName MOI # Date Code TaskName Status MOI Agenda 

M45314 Korte Meat 

Processing 

Inc. 

LDR5513062 

230G 

30JUN2020 04C02 Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Finalized Humane Handling MOI for Korte Meat ProcessingDate: 6/30/2020Attendees: Owners Dave 

Korte and Kyle Korte and 

(b) (6)

During slaughter operations at Korte Meat Processing 

on 6/30/2020 at approximately 1:00pm, Owner Kyle Korte informed 

(b) (6)

of a 

deceased swine in the holding pen. The pens had been inspected for other humane handling 

tasks prior to slaughter beginning. Prior to and during slaughter operations there were no 

humane handling violations observed. During antemortem performed on the swine at 

approximately 10:00am it was observed that the swine had ample room to move and lay down 

in the pen, water was available, there was no overcrowding, no extreme heat, properly 

sheltered from inclement weather and no dangerous surfaces. Owner Kyle Korte then removed 

the deceased swine from the pen and cut into the core muscle groups to apply denaturant. The 

expired swine was then placed with other inedible material and loaded onto the rendering 

truck. 

M45629+ Andy's DJP1013050 04MAY2020 04C02 Livestock 

V45629 Meats Inc. 304G Humane 

Handling 

Finalized At approximately 9:45 AM on May 4, 2020, I, 

(b) (6)

, was asked by plant manager 

Andy Zubek to perform antemortem inspection on two steers that had arrived at the 

establishment.  Instead of being placed in the usual pen for cattle with high steel bar barriers, 

the steers had been placed temporarily in one of the empty swine pens, presumably because 

swine were still in pen 3 preventing the steers from being able to be placed in the cattle pens.

 Since the walls on the swine pens are low, one of the steers jumped out of the pen and into 

the alleyway on the other side.  The steer was not injured in any way, clearing the wall easily. 

It was then guided into the now empty pen 3 and into the usual cattle holding pen.  I told Mr. 

Zubek that given the potential for injury to animals and people, cattle should not be placed 

even for a couple of minutes in the swine pens.  If an animal was injured by jumping out of the 

pens intended for swine it would at minimum result in the issuance of an NR.  Mr. Zubek 

agreed and said that in the future cattle would be placed only in pens like the usual cattle pens 

that have barriers at least 6 feet tall. 

M45629+ Andy's DJP1814061 04JUN2020 04C02 Livestock 

V45629 Meats Inc. 104G Humane 

Handling 

Finalized On June 3, 2020 around 9:30 AM, a heifer got loose while being unloaded from a trailer at 

Andy’s Meats.  She was loose on the establishment property for about 30 minutes before she 

was captured.  The door on the building is wider than the trailers usually used to haul the cattle 

and the opened door of the trailer is used to fill in the gap.  In this case, according to those 

present, the heifer kept going back into the trailer and wouldn’t go in through the small door 

leading to the cattle pens in the barn.  In order to keep her from reentering the trailer, they 

closed the trailer door and then closed the overhead door on the building.  However, the door 

on the building is operated by an electric opener and doesn’t move particularly fast.  Before the 

overhead door was completely closed, the heifer saw the opening and got her head into it, 

lifted the door and got outside.  The heifer suffered no injuries and no people were harmed.  In 

a letter dated June 3, 2020, Faith said that they had talked to Andy about the problem and that 

he would put more gates in the cattle unloading area to help guide the cattle to the door to 

(b) (6)

enter the cattle pens and to prevent access to the building door to get outside. 

(b) (6) (b) (6)

We also 

discussed this concern at the weekly meeting held June 4 with 

Plant Manager Andy Zubek and 
- -

Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021 8 

EstNbr 

M46070+ 

P46070 

EstName 

Marble City 

Meats LLC 

MOI # 

KLE5510052 

505G 

Date 

05MAY2020 

Task 

Code 

04C02 

TaskName 

Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Status 

Finalized 

MOI Agenda 

DATE:5/05/2020TO: 

(b) (6)

Jackson District ManagerFROM

 Inspector-In-Charge (IIC)SUBJECT: IIC Bi-weekly Verification ReportDate: 

(b) (6)

05/05/2020Marble City Meats, LLCEstablishment #M46070, Sylacauga, AL Verification Plan 

This Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) Verification Plan (VP) is designed to verify that 

the establishment fully implements the revisions to its humane handling of animals and other 

corrective actions stated/proffered in the establishment’s corrective action responses to its 

September 9, 2019 Humane Handling failure. Those establishment responses and proffered 

corrective actions have been utilized to develop this (VP) as stipulated in the verification 

activities below. This VP will be utilized by Inspection Program Personnel (IPP) and the Jackson 

District Office to evaluate the effectiveness of the revisions and corrective actions in assuring 

future regulatory compliance. The establishment was issued a Notice of Suspension on 

September 9, 2019. The establishment was placed into Abeyance on September 12, 2019. This 

FSIS Verification Plan (VP) identifies the establishment’s proffered corrective action 

statements, the relevant regulatory requirement(s) for each, and the PHIS Task under which 

FSIS officials will verify the implementation and effectiveness of each proposed corrective 

action. Revision- the establishment entered a period of Voluntary Suspension of Federally 

Inspected Slaughter while in the Abeyance period, referenced above. Upon request to resume 

inspected slaughter activities, the establishment has requested an alteration in the proffered 

corrective actions, to eliminate .22 caliber stunning as a backup and has proffered written 

intent to utilize electrical stunning of swine as a primary stun method and/or a captive bolt as 

an alternative stunning method. The following Verification Plan steps have been so modified to 

reflect these changes. These tasks can be performed as a directed task if the task is not a 

routine task scheduled on the Task calendar in PHIS.  Handling of Livestock Issue/Action Plan: 

Verify that the establishment utilizes an SOP to not accept hogs with an “atypical head 

formation”. Regulations: 9 CFR § 313.15(a)(1), 9 CFR § 313.15(a)(3), 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(1), 9 

CFR § 313.30(a)(3), PHIS Task:  HATS CATEGORY VIII (8) Findings: on Tuesday, May 5, 2020 

Establishment slaughter one (1) market hog. Based upon direct observation and review of 

establishment records, the animal slaughtered was within acceptable parameters of 

establishments SOP for not accepting “atypical head formation” Issue/Action Plan: Verify that 

the establishment maintains and utilizes an electrical stunning device and/or a captive bolt 

stunning device for 1st stun effectiveness, and that both stun devices are maintained near the 

stun area during stunning operations. Regulations: 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(1), 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(3), 

9 CFR § 313.15(a)(1), 9 CFR § 313.15(a)(3) PHIS Task:  HATS CATEGORY VIII (8) Findings: Based 

upon verification activities, stun devices were maintained near the stunning area in the 

slaughter room during stunning and slaughter operations. Furthermore, Establishment 

performed 1st stun effectiveness with Electric stun device; the backup stun device was not 

needed. Issue/Action Plan:  Verify that the establishment is utilizing and completing the 

“Testing of Electric Stun...” Log, as stated in their revised and newly proffered corrective 

actions. Regulations: 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(1), 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(3), 9 CFR § 313.30(b)(3) PHIS 

Task:  HATS CATEGORY VIII (8) Findings: Based upon direct observation establishment 

performed electric stun testing with an amperage voltage meter. Establishment tested the 

Ohm’s resistance by testing the plug pins against each other. All readings were clear. 

Establishment also documented this being performed on the “Electric stunner Pre-operational 

Test Check log.” Issue/Action Plan: Verify that the stun operators are trained and have 

successfully passed the establishment’s testing, prior to the stun operator being allowed to 

resume the actions of stunning. Regulations: 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(1), 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(3), 9 

CFR § 313.30(b)(1), 9 CFR § 313.15(a)(1), 9 CFR § 313.15(a)(3), 9 CFR § 313.15(b)(1)(iv) PHIS 

Task:  HATS CATEGORY VIII (8) Findings: Based upon review of establishment records, 
-

(b) (6)

Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021 9 

Task 

EstNbr EstName MOI # Date Code TaskName Status MOI Agenda 

Establishment owner Matthew Lawrence successfully took and passed the required testing 

material. Test was taken on 5/4/2020 at 5:21pm and was proctored by establishment 

employee . Issue/Action Plan: Verify that the establishment has verifiable 

procedures for stun weapon cleaning, maintenance, and charge selection and usage and verify 

that electrical stun device is routinely cleaned and maintained and logged on the newly 

submitted B&D Electric Stun “Cleaning Record” Log. Regulations: 9 CFR § 313.15(b)(1)(iv), 9 

CFR § 313.15(b)(1)(ii), 9 CFR § 313.30(b)(2), 9 CFR § 313.30(b)(3) PHIS Task:  HATS CATEGORY 

VIII (8) Findings: Based upon review of Equipment Cleaning and maintenance records, 

Establishment performed and documented necessary maintenance on 5/4/2020 for Electric 

stun and 5/5/20 for Captive Bolt stun #1 & #2. Issue/Action Plan: Verify that the establishment 

has provided and posted stunning “landmark charts” and that such are clearly posted in 

slaughter room and near stun area. Regulations: 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(1), 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(3), 9 

CFR § 313.15(a)(1), 9 CFR § 313.15(a)(3), PHIS Task:  HATS CATEGORY VIII (8) Findings: Based 

upon direct visual observation, Establishment placed two (4) landmark charts in the slaughter 

room near the knocking box. Two of the four charts were the landmark charts from previous 

proffered material before the revision “procedures for Humane Euthanasia of Beef located on 

the wall near the scalder, Anatomical site for Livestock Euthanasia.” The new Landmark charts 

for the correct placement for Electric stunning was place on the Southeast wall near the 

slaughter exit door. Summary/Recommendation:Based on the plants adherence to their 

revised corrective action plan and regulatory compliance, Inspection personnel recommend 

the abeyance continue without any further action at this time. Inspection program personnel 

will perform the PHIS Inspection Task to verify the adequacy and effectiveness of the 

establishment’s Humane Slaughter program including all procedures specified therein. 
-

-

- ■ 

Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021 10 

EstNbr 

M46070+ 

P46070 

EstName 

Marble City 

Meats LLC 

MOI # 

KLE5211052 

121G 

Date 

21MAY2020 

Task 

Code 

04C02 

TaskName 

Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Status 

Finalized 

MOI Agenda 

(b) (6)

DATE:5/21/2020 TO: Dr. Larry A. DavisJackson District Manager FROM: 

(b) (6) . 

SUBJECT: IIC Bi-weekly Verification Report (Revised) Date: 

5/21/2020Marble City Meats, LLCEstablishment #M46070, Sylacauga, AL Verification PlanThis 

Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) Verification Plan (VP) is designed to verify that the 

establishment fully implements the revisions to its humane handling of animals and other 

corrective actions stated/proffered in the establishment’s corrective action responses to its 

September 9, 2019 Humane Handling failure. Those establishment responses and proffered 

corrective actions have been utilized to develop this (VP) as stipulated in the verification 

activities below. This VP will be utilized by Inspection Program Personnel (IPP) and the Jackson 

District Office to evaluate the effectiveness of the revisions and corrective actions in assuring 

future regulatory compliance. The establishment was issued a Notice of Suspension on 

September 9, 2019. The establishment was placed into Abeyance on September 12, 2019. This 

FSIS Verification Plan (VP) identifies the establishment’s proffered corrective action 

statements, the relevant regulatory requirement(s) for each, and the PHIS Task under which 

FSIS officials will verify the implementation and effectiveness of each proposed corrective 

action. Revision- the establishment entered a period of Voluntary Suspension of Federally 

Inspected Slaughter while in the Abeyance period, referenced above. Upon request to resume 

inspected slaughter activities, the establishment has requested an alteration in the proffered 

corrective actions, to eliminate .22 caliber stunning as a backup and has proffered written 

intent to utilize electrical stunning of swine as a primary stun method and/or a captive bolt as 

an alternative stunning method. The following Verification Plan steps have been so modified to 

reflect these changes. These tasks can be performed as a directed task if the task is not a 

routine task scheduled on the Task calendar in PHIS.  Handling of Livestock Issue/Action Plan: 

Verify that the establishment utilizes an SOP to not accept hogs with an “atypical head 

formation”. Regulations: 9 CFR § 313.15(a)(1), 9 CFR § 313.15(a)(3), 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(1), 9 

(b) (6)

CFR § 313.30(a)(3), PHIS Task:  HATS CATEGORY VIII (8) Findings: On Thursday, May 21, 2020 

establishment slaughtered one (1) Market hog. Based upon Direct observation of

(b) (6)

 and review of establishment records, the 

animal slaughtered was within acceptable parameters of establishments SOP for not accepting 

atypical head formation. Issue/Action Plan: Verify that the establishment maintains and utilizes 

an electrical stunning device and/or a captive bolt stunning device for 1st stun effectiveness, 

and that both stun devices are maintained near the stun area during stunning operations. 

Regulations: 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(1), 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(3), 9 CFR § 313.15(a)(1), 9 

CFR § 313.15(a)(3) PHIS Task:  HATS CATEGORY VIII (8) Findings: Based upon verification 

activities, stun devices were maintained near the stunning area in the slaughter room during 

stunning and slaughter operations. Furthermore, Establishment performed 1st stun 

effectiveness with Electric stun device; the backup stun device was not needed.Issue/Action 

Plan:  Verify that the establishment is utilizing and completing the “Testing of Electric Stun...” 

Log, as stated in their revised and newly proffered corrective actions. Regulations: 9 

(b) (6)

CFR § 313.30(a)(1), 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(3), 9 CFR § 313.30(b)(3) PHIS Task: 

(b) (6)

HATS CATEGORY 

VIII (8) Findings: Based upon direct observation by and 

, establishment performed electric stun testing with an amperage voltage meter. 

(b) (6)

Establishment tested the Ohms resistance by testing the plug pins against each other. All 

readings were clear. Establishment also documented this being performed on the Electric 

Stunner Pre-Operational Test Check log.Issue/Action Plan: Verify that the stun operators are 

trained and have successfully passed the establishment’s testing, prior to the stun operator 

being allowed to resume the actions of stunning. Regulations: 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(1), 9 

CFR § 313.30(a)(3), 9 CFR § 313.30(b)(1), 9 CFR § 313.15(a)(1), 9 CFR § 313.15(a)(3), 9 
-

(b) (6)

Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021 11 

Task 

EstNbr EstName MOI # Date Code TaskName Status MOI Agenda 

CFR § 313.15(b)(1)(iv) PHIS Task:  HATS CATEGORY VIII (8) Findings: Establishment owner 

Matthew Lawrence successfully took and passed the required testing material. Test was taken 

on 5/4/2020 at 5:21pm and was proctored by establishment employee . No 

additional employees have taken training course. Issue/Action Plan: Verify that the 

establishment has verifiable procedures for stun weapon cleaning, maintenance, and charge 

selection and usage and verify that electrical stun device is routinely cleaned and maintained 

and logged on the newly submitted B&D Electric Stun “Cleaning Record” Log. Regulations: 9 

CFR § 313.15(b)(1)(iv), 9 CFR § 313.15(b)(1)(ii), 9 CFR § 313.30(b)(2), 9 CFR § 313.30(b)(3) 

PHIS Task:  HATS CATEGORY VIII (8) Findings: Based upon review of Equipment Cleaning and 

maintenance records, Establishment performed and documented necessary maintenance on 

5/20/20 For Electric Stunner and Captive Bolt. Issue/Action Plan: Verify that the establishment 

has provided and posted stunning “landmark charts” and that such are clearly posted in 

slaughter room and near stun area. Regulations: 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(1), 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(3), 9 

CFR § 313.15(a)(1), 9 CFR § 313.15(a)(3), PHIS Task:  HATS CATEGORY VIII (8) Findings: Based 

upon direct visual observation, Establishment placed two (4) landmark charts in the slaughter 

room near the knocking box. Two of the four charts were the landmark charts from previous 

proffered material before the revision procedures for Humane Euthanasia of Beef located on 

the wall near the scalder, Anatomical site for Livestock Euthanasia. The new Landmark charts 

for the correct placement for Electric stunning was place on the Southeast wall near the 

slaughter exit door. Summary/Recommendation: Establishment needs to become more 

efficient on good sticking method to ensure an effective bleed out of animal. Based on the 

plants adherence to their revised corrective action plan and regulatory compliance, Inspection 

personnel recommend the abeyance continue without any further action at this time. 

Inspection program personnel will perform the PHIS Inspection Task to verify the adequacy 

and effectiveness of the establishments Humane Slaughter program including all procedures 

specified therein. Inspection program personnel will perform the PHIS Inspection Task to verify 

the adequacy and effectiveness of the establishment’s Humane Slaughter program including all 

procedures specified therein. 
                    -

-

-

Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021 12 

EstNbr 

M46070+ 

P46070 

EstName 

Marble City 

Meats LLC 

MOI # 

KLE5809061 

605G 

Date 

05JUN2020 

Task 

Code 

04C02 

TaskName 

Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Status 

Finalized 

MOI Agenda 

(b) (6)

DATE: Friday, June 5, 2020 TO: Dr. Larry A. Davis 

(b) (6)

Jackson District Manager FROM: 

SUBJECT: IIC Bi-weekly Verification Report 

(b) (6)

(Revised) Date: 6/5/20 Marble City Meats, LLC Establishment #M46070, Sylacauga, AL

 Verification Plan This Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) Verification Plan 

(VP) is designed to verify that the establishment fully implements the revisions to its humane 

handling of animals and other corrective actions stated/proffered in the establishment’s 

corrective action responses to its September 9, 2019 Humane Handling failure. Those 

establishment responses and proffered corrective actions have been utilized to develop this 

(VP) as stipulated in the verification activities below. This VP will be utilized by Inspection 

Program Personnel (IPP) and the Jackson District Office to evaluate the effectiveness of the 

revisions and corrective actions in assuring future regulatory compliance. The establishment 

was issued a Notice of Suspension on September 9, 2019. The establishment was placed into 

Abeyance on September 12, 2019. This FSIS Verification Plan (VP) identifies the 

establishment’s proffered corrective action statements, the relevant regulatory requirement(s) 

for each, and the PHIS Task under which FSIS officials will verify the implementation and 

effectiveness of each proposed corrective action. Revision- the establishment entered a period 

of Voluntary Suspension of Federally Inspected Slaughter while in the Abeyance period, 

referenced above. Upon request to resume inspected slaughter activities, the establishment 

has requested an alteration in the proffered corrective actions, to eliminate .22 caliber stunning 

as a backup and has proffered written intent to utilize electrical stunning of swine as a primary 

stun method and/or a captive bolt as an alternative stunning method. The following 

Verification Plan steps have been so modified to reflect these changes. These tasks can be 

performed as a directed task if the task is not a routine task scheduled on the Task calendar in 

PHIS.  Handling of Livestock Issue/Action Plan: Verify that the establishment utilizes an SOP to 

not accept hogs with an “atypical head formation”. Regulations: 9 CFR § 313.15(a)(1), 9 

CFR § 313.15(a)(3), 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(1), 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(3), PHIS Task:  HATS CATEGORY 

VIII (8) Findings: On Friday, June 5, 2020 establishment slaughtered one (1) Market hog. Based 

upon Direct observation of 

(b) (6)

, the animal slaughtered was within acceptable 

parameters of establishments SOP for not accepting atypical head formation. Issue/Action 

Plan: Verify that the establishment maintains and utilizes an electrical stunning device and/or a 

captive bolt stunning device for 1st stun effectiveness, and that both stun devices are 

maintained near the stun area during stunning operations. Regulations: 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(1), 9 

CFR § 313.30(a)(3), 9 CFR § 313.15(a)(1), 9 CFR § 313.15(a)(3) PHIS Task:  HATS CATEGORY 

VIII (8) Findings: Based upon verification activities, stun devices were maintained near the 

stunning area in the slaughter room during stunning and slaughter operations. Furthermore, 

Establishment performed 1st stun effectiveness with Electric stun device; the backup stun 

device was not needed. Issue/Action Plan:  Verify that the establishment is utilizing and 

completing the “Testing of Electric Stun...” Log, as stated in their revised and newly proffered 

corrective actions. Regulations: 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(1), 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(3), 9 

CFR § 313.30(b)(3) PHIS Task:  HATS CATEGORY VIII (8) Findings: Based upon direct 

observation establishment performed electric stun testing with an amperage voltage meter. 

Establishment tested the Ohms resistance by testing the plug pins against each other. All 

readings were clear. Establishment also documented this being performed on the Electric 

Stunner Pre-Operational Test Check log. Issue/Action Plan: Verify that the stun operators are 

trained and have successfully passed the establishment’s testing, prior to the stun operator 

being allowed to resume the actions of stunning. Regulations: 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(1), 9 

CFR § 313.30(a)(3), 9 CFR § 313.30(b)(1), 9 CFR § 313.15(a)(1), 9 CFR § 313.15(a)(3), 9 

CFR § 313.15(b)(1)(iv) PHIS Task:  HATS CATEGORY VIII (8) Findings: Establishment owner 
-

-

- • 

Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021 13 

EstNbr 

M46070+ 

P46070 

EstName 

Marble City 

Meats LLC 

MOI # 

KLE2807063 

619G 

Date 

19JUN2020 

Task 

Code 

04C02 

TaskName 

Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Status 

Finalized 

MOI Agenda 

successfully took and passed the required testing material. Test was taken 

(b) (6) (b) (6)

on 5/4/2020 at 5:21pm and was proctored by establishment employee . No 

additional employees have taken training course. Issue/Action Plan: Verify that the 

establishment has verifiable procedures for stun weapon cleaning, maintenance, and charge 

selection and usage and verify that electrical stun device is routinely cleaned and maintained 

and logged on the newly submitted B&D Electric Stun “Cleaning Record” Log. Regulations: 9 

CFR § 313.15(b)(1)(iv), 9 CFR § 313.15(b)(1)(ii), 9 CFR § 313.30(b)(2), 9 CFR § 313.30(b)(3) 

PHIS Task:  HATS CATEGORY VIII (8) Findings: Based upon review of Equipment Cleaning and 

maintenance records, Establishment performed and documented necessary maintenance on 

6/5/20 For Electric Stunner and Captive Bolt. Issue/Action Plan: Verify that the establishment 

has provided and posted stunning “landmark charts” and that such are clearly posted in 

slaughter room and near stun area. Regulations: 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(1), 9 CFR § 313.30(a)(3), 9 

CFR § 313.15(a)(1), 9 CFR § 313.15(a)(3), PHIS Task:  HATS CATEGORY VIII (8) Findings: Based 

upon direct visual observation, Establishment placed two (4) landmark charts in the slaughter 

room near the knocking box. Two of the four charts were the landmark charts from previous 

proffered material before the revision procedures for Humane Euthanasia of Beef located on 

the wall near the scalder, Anatomical site for Livestock Euthanasia. The new Landmark charts 

for the correct placement for Electric stunning was place on the Southeast wall near the 

slaughter exit door. Summary/Recommendation: Based on the plants adherence to their 

revised corrective action plan and regulatory compliance, Inspection personnel recommend 

the abeyance continue without any further action at this time. Inspection program personnel 

will perform the PHIS Inspection Task to verify the adequacy and effectiveness of the 

establishments Humane Slaughter program including all procedures specified therein. 

Inspection program personnel will perform the PHIS Inspection Task to verify the adequacy 

and effectiveness of the establishment’s Humane Slaughter program including all procedures 

specified therein. 

On Friday, June 19, 2020 at 6:50am, while

(b) (6)

 and 

(b) (6)

where 

observing establishment owner Matthew Lawrence performing slaughter operations on a 

market hog, Inspection personnel observed animal regaining consciousness and vocalizing 

during the sticking step. The establishment initially stunned a hog with a head then heart 

electrical stun, which rendered the animal insensible. The animal subsequently regained 

consciousness. The establishment then did not re-stun but rather stuck the conscious animal 

until it bled out. That was only animal for federal slaughter today. IIC tagged stun box with US 

REJECT TAGG # B-45 308605. 

M46240 Light Hill MKE201306 18JUN2020 04C02 Livestock 

Meats, LLC 0518G Humane 

Handling 

Open Stun Failure at Light Hill Meats M46240 6/16/2020At 0755 hours on this date, a large Angus 

Bull ( approximately 2000lb) was broughtinto the kill floor stun chute to be render 

unconscious. A rope halter was applied toanimals head and tied to stun box by employee . Two 

shots were fired from a .357rifle using 158 grain soft point ammunition. After Shots were fired, 

FSIS observedanimal was standing (conscious) with head held upward. Animal did not make 

anyvocalization. Kill floor employee had to proceed to front office to get extra .357ammunition 

to finalize the stun. Employee reloaded rifle and fired one additional shotbefore the animal was 

(b) (6)

render unconscious. A fourth security shot was fired after theanimal was observed down.FSIS 

applied US Reject Tag # B37373740 to stun chute and notified Light Hill MeatsEmployees

(b) (6)

 and 

(b) (6)

was notified 

Immediately 
-

-

-

- ..... - ■ 

--

-

-

Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021 14 

Task 

EstNbr EstName MOI # Date Code TaskName Status MOI Agenda 

M4653A+ 

P4653A+V 

4653A 

Agri Star 

Meat and 

Poultry, LLC 

HRJ2006050 

922G 

22MAY2020 04C02 Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Finalized At approximately 9:40am a steer was released from the restraining box prior to receiving the 

ritual cut (either due to operator error or mechanical malfunction) and ran onto the 

evisceration floor, knocking over the head inspection rack and several gut buggies and running 

into a USDA inspector before rounding through to the offal room. It remained behind the offal 

auger for several minutes before running into the hoof room. By this time the gun had been 

retrieved and management and QA were present and had verified adequate ammunition was 

available. Once a designated employee from the barn arrived he rendered the animal 

unconscious with a single stunning attempt. Corrective actions offered by the establishment 

were to clean up and dispose of all parts in evis that were either knocked to the floor or may 

have come in contact with the live animal. The head rack and gut buggies were washed down 

with 180 degree water. To prevent or slow another animal from entering the evis floor the man 

door going under the first legger stand was to be kept shut and latched, and the sliding gate to 

the blood pit was to be kept shut when not moving a shackled carcass through.Later the same 

day, at approximately 1:30pm, a steer that had received the ritual cut got up after being 

released from the restrainer and made it past the blood pit gate into the staging area for 

skinning, where it expired naturally. When I asked how the animal made it past the blood pit 

gate the shackler said it was too hard to shut the gate so he hadn't been doing it. Corrective 

actions at this time were for 

(b) (6)

to remain in the blood pit area to 

man the gate. Maintenance would look into ways to improve ease of use of the gate for the 

next day's operation. I spoke to the restraining box operator about checking for consciousness 

prior to releasing cattle from the restrainer. He described the signs he looks for while the 

animal is still restrained on its back. I pointed out that checking again after the animal has been 

righted and before releasing is important since blood and the presence of the second cut 

employee may obscure signs while the animal is still upside down. 

M46547 Gourmet 

Natural 

Meats LLC 

UAV541204 

4917G 

17APR2020 04C02 Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Finalized At approximately 8:00am

(b) (6)

 went to the area adjacent to the truck unloading site to 

verify the prompt denaturing of multiple bob veal calves which had been discarded as plant 

rejects prior to the arrival of Inspection Program Personnel on site. The time of the 

corresponding truck unloading event was 7:39am, as reported on the establishment’s 

monitoring form. According to a plant manager, Aaron Lancaster, these rejected calves were all 

(b) (6)

euthanized with a hand-held captive bolt (HHCB) device prior to being unloaded and stacked on 

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)

a palate. When arrived, he noted that a calf in the middle of the pile and buried 

underneath about 5 dead calves was moving and breathing rhythmically. As 

examined this calf’s head, which was sticking out from the pile, observed that the 

calf was blinking and exhibiting conscious eye tracking. immediately informed 

of the finding, and a nearby plant employee headed to the stunning area within the 

slaughter floor to retrieve the establishment’s HHCB device. then elicited an intact 

palpebral reflex from the calf, observed the calf lift its head, and went to alert of 

the situation. As arrived at the area, a conscious vocalization was heard. IPP 

observed a successful first stunning attempt being applied, and the calf was rendered 

effectively unconscious. A second, ‘security’ stun was then applied. IPP examined the dead 

calf’s skull and verified two skull defects where the captive bolt device had been applied. IPP 

also discovered that this calf’s hide had been cut and reflected on the left lateral surface of its 

body wall prior to the observed stunning. Skin was absent from the area of the calf’s left hip to 

(b) (6)

the calf’s left caudal shoulder, and denaturant was present on the underlying tissue. IPP placed 

(b) (6)

US Reject tag #B37310249 on the stunning area and informed 

(b) (6)

, that slaughter will not be allowed to commence until the tag is removed by IPP.The 

Denver District office was contacted via supervisory channels. 
- - -

-

Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021 15 

EstNbr 

M46877+ 

P46877 

EstName 

Seven Hills 

Abattoir 

MOI # 

NOA391206 

4705G 

Date 

05JUN2020 

Task 

Code 

04C02 

TaskName 

Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Status 

Finalized 

MOI Agenda

(b) (6)

 does not have PHIS access to document this MOI for an egregious 

(b) (6)

inhumane handling incident at Seven Hills Abattoir, M46877. 

(b) (6) (b) (6)

The following is her 

documentation of the events: Today, June 5, 2020, at approximately 8:50 AM, I, 

(b) (6)

verbally notified , the establishment that I had taken a 

(b) (6)

regulatory control action in the stunning area for improper stunning resulting in an egregious 

inhumane treatment of a heifer.  I notified plant management that the 

(b) (6)

would be contacting the District Office to discuss and recommend the issuance of a 

notice of intended enforcement (NOIE) action rather than a suspension, unless the DO 

determines otherwise. I based this decision on the following circumstances: At approximately 

8:50 AM today, I observed a heifer on the rail was still conscious. I walked over to the animal 

and there was still eye tracking movement and breathing. In addition, the heifer’s tail was still 

in an upward position and she was lifting her head back as if she were trying to stand, 

indicating a righting reflex. I noticed the throat area was moving, trying to vocalize. At this time, 

the associate immediately reloaded the 25 caliber captive bolt gun, also used for the initial stun, 

and delivered an effective stun at the back of the head/poll. The animal was then stuck to bleed 

out. I did not observe the initial stun or shackling.  However, examination of the skull revealed 

that the initial stun, delivered to the front of the head, was in the incorrect location, just to the 

left of center.  The second stun was delivered behind the poll.  I observed the consciousness 

approximately one minute after the animal was pushed on the rail away from the knock box. I 

placed a “U.S Rejected” tag (#899697) on the entrance to the stunning area and left the 

stunning area to inform establishment management of this incident and enforcement action 

taken. My decision to recommend an NOIE to the District Office is because the establishment 

has a written animal handling program and has effectively implemented a robust systematic 

approach to human handling resulting in the high rate of compliance exhibited over the last 6 

months. The events observed today and recorded above appear to be unintentional random 

occurrence that resulted in an egregious inhumane handling incident. 

(b) (6)
- -

1111 

--

-

--

-

--

-

-

-

-

Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021 16 

EstNbr 

M46877+ 

P46877 

EstName 

Seven Hills 

Abattoir 

MOI # 

NOA251206 

2212G 

Date 

12JUN2020 

Task 

Code 

04C02 

TaskName 

Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Status 

Finalized 

MOI Agenda 

Today, June 12, 2020, at approximately 9:20 am, I verbally notified Mr. Danta Coleman, 

(b) (6)

Establishment Manager, of my decision to recommend re-suspending inspection at 

Establishment M46877.  I advised Mr. Coleman that I was also contacting our 

(b) (6)

and in turn, the District Office about my 

recommendations and that the District Office would be following up with a written 

(b) (6)

reinstatement of the suspension to the establishment. 

(b) (6)

I based my decision to on the following: 

While working the slaughter floor at establishment 46877 at approximately 8:30am I, 

(b) (6)

observed the following: While located behind the gutting area of the kill floor I 

observed kill floor employee on the platform above the knock box. The bovine in the 

knock box appeared to be moving around a lot and banging into the box creating lots of noise. 

(b) (6) (b) (6)

This caught my attention and I watched moving his hand around with a .25 caliber captive 

bolt device in an attempt to knock the animal. rendered a knock with the captive bolt gun 

but the animal did not drop. The animal remained standing with no vocalization but remained 

agitated. Dante came up into the knock box area to assist and reloaded the same captive bolt 

and attempted a second time to knock the animal. Dante was able to render a successful 2nd 

attempt with the captive bolt gun. After the animal was shackled and on the rail, I approached 

(b) (6)

the bleed pit to speak with Dante and about the incident. I questioned them as to whether 

or not the first attempt made contact with the skull. At this point, they were unsure. We 

observed the unskinned head and I was able to locate 2 holes in the skull. One hole was low, to 

the right and above the eye and the other was on target. I asked Dante if the lower right hole 

was from the first attempt and he stated that it was. I informed them that the head would have 

to be skinned out for confirmation. I called 

(b) (6)

to inform her of the 

incident. She instructed me to place a tag on the knock box until the head could be skinned and 

examined for confirmation. I placed USDA Reject tag B30899664 on the knock box and 

(b) (6)

informed Dante that no more animals could be killed until the head of the animal in question 

was skinned out and examined to confirm an initial ineffective stun. He notified manager 

(b) (6)

and upon skinning the head it was observed that there were 2 separate holes 

penetrating the skull. One hole was misplaced above the right eye and slightly low with bruising 

(b) (6)

present and did not penetrate as deeply as the second hole that was in the proper location.

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)

 and both verified the incorrect location of the initial stun attempt. 

Upon verification of the initial ineffective stun, and advised 

establishment owner, Ryan Ford, that due to the establishment being under a Suspension Held 

in Abeyance and a second stunning effectiveness non-compliance occurring, a reinstatement of 

the suspension was being recommended to the District Office. 

(b) (6) (b) (6)

M46969 TN Slaughter CDM550805 22MAY2020 04C02 Livestock 

House, Inc. 1722G Humane 

Handling 

Open At approximately 1500 hrs., 

(b) (6)

observed a steer being loaded into the knock box at 

Tennessee Slaughterhouse Inc (est. 46969).  Using an inline captive bolt stunning device, the 

plant employee administered 1 stunning attempt to the forehead wherein the animal remained 

standing and consciously breathing.  A second stun attempt was immediately administered to 

the forehead using the .22 revolver back up stunning weapon wherein the animal remained 

standing with noticeable eye tracking movements.  The plant employee immediately 

administered a successful third stun to the forehead rendering the animal unconscious.  It 

remained unconscious and insensible to pain throughout shackling, sticking and bleeding. The 

knock box was rejected and tagged with Tag number B28164810.  Plant manager Bob Thrash 

was notified of the regulatory control action. Tennessee Slaughterhouse Inc. (est. 46969) is not 

currently operating under a Robust Systematic Humane Handling Program. 
-

-

- -

79 

Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021 17 

Task 

EstNbr EstName MOI # Date Code TaskName Status MOI Agenda 

M4979+P 

4979+V49 

Mountain 

Meat 

Packing Inc. 

GXF111404 

2229G 

29APR2020 04C02 Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Finalized On Wednesday April 29, 2020 at approximately 7:30 am while performing inspection duties at 

Mt. Meats, est. 4979 I, 

(b) (6)

observed an egregious act of inhumane handling. 

During slaughter operations, the stun operator had been using a firearm to stun the 12 pigs at 

the establishment under inspection. The firearm being used was a 17 HMR rifle. The stun 

operator had been bringing in two pigs at a time and each time the firearm appeared to jam. I 

notified the establishment owner, Gary Baysinger that there was an issue with the firearm and 

that Mr. Baysinger may need to speak with the stun operator about replacing the stunning 

device. Mr. Baysinger brought the stun operator a handgun and recommended the stun 

operator use this stunning device for the remainder of the animals to be slaughtered. The stun 

operator then ran two more pigs into the stun box. I vacated the slaughter floor and stood in 

the hallway as the firearm was discharged. Within moments, I heard the firearm discharge 

once. I then heard a second discharge from the firearm and stuck my head in the door to see if 

it was safe to enter.  The stun operator indicated that it was not safe to enter the slaughter 

floor by shaking his head no. I observed the stun operator trying to fix the 17 HMR rifle as it 

appeared to have jammed. I observed the second pig in the stun box vocalizing, breathing 

rhythmically, and moving in an attempt to stand up. I proceeded to the front office to notify the 

establishment owner, Gary Baysinger, but the establishment owner was no longer available. I 

returned to the slaughter floor and observed the animal was still conscious and vocalizing while 

the stun operator was still trying to fix the 17 HMR rifle. There was further delay before the 

stun operator was able was able to attempt another shot and render the pig unconscious. 

(b) (6)

I 

was able to verify stun holes on the carcass. I called , to notify him of my 

findings and I applied US Reject Tag B11002418 to the stun box.  Est. 4979 Mountain Meat 

Packing does not maintain a robust Humane Handling program. 

M4979+P 

4979+V49 

79 

M5622+P 

5622+V56 

22 

Mountain 

Meat 

Packing Inc. 

Albion 

Locker 

GXF270806 

4724G 

XDH451106 

1329G 

24JUN2020 

29JUN2020 

04C02 

04C02 

Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Finalized 

Finalized 

While performing a regularly scheduled Livestock Humane Handling task at Mountain Meats 

#4979, I noticed a holding pen with a broken metal divider. Pen 2 contained two custom 

exempt hogs today however, this facility is also used for inspected animals. The broken divider 

has large bolts and sharp edges so the pigs could be hurt while trying to climb through to the 

next holding pen. The bolts were approximately 1 1/2 to 2 inches in length. I mentioned the 

issue to plant employee . He did not move the animals upon my suggestion. I did 

(b) (6)

not take regulatory control action due to the fact the current animals in the holding pen were 

custom exempt.  In the future, if federally inspected animals were in a pen with broken railing it 

would be a violation of 9 CFR 313.1(a). 

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)

FSIS IPP Present:  Establishment Personnel: 

discussed with that water sprinklers can be used to help 

(b) (6)

during inclement weather (heat) for cooling of live hogs while they wait.  We discussed that 

comments were made earlier that morning to the CSI on site that hogs would "be allowed to 

die in the sun" before a sprinkler would be used.  After further discussion concerns were 

addressed regarding steps that could be taken to handle any "sloppy" conditions that might 

result from having water sprinklers on.  It was explained that hosing off a carcass with the 

intention to remove fecal matter was not appropriate sanitary dressing procedures, but it is 

appropriate to use water with living animals to help them cool off. Comments made about 

letting animals die in stressful conditions are taken very seriously and such actions can lead to 

humane handling regulatory control actions taken by FSIS IPP. 
1111 

Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021 18 

Task 

EstNbr EstName MOI # Date Code TaskName Status MOI Agenda 

M5729+P Twin Loups ZRB0214052 29MAY2020 04C02 Livestock Finalized 

5729+V57 Quality 229G Humane 

29 Meats Handling 

M5900 Niblock's HLD411304 01APR2020 04C02 Livestock Finalized 

Pork 3501G Humane 

Products Handling 

M6636+P Pete's USB401206 11JUN2020 04C02 Livestock Finalized 

6636 Country 3911G Humane 

Meats Handling 

M791C Clemens QCF281106 15JUN2020 04C02 Livestock Finalized 

Food Group, 0715G Humane 

LLC Handling 

On May 29, 2020, at approximately 1100 hours, while standing in a safe location as the 

establishment was using a 22-caliber rifle to render a heifer insensible, I heard a total of six 

stun attempts.  In-between the firearm discharging I could hear heavy breathing from the 

animal, but I did not hear the animal vocalize.  After the sixth stun attempt, the establishment 

stunning employee came up the stairs where I was standing.  I asked him what was happening, 

and the stunning employee told me the rounds were not penetrating the animal’s skull. The 

stunning employee said he was going to go get the 30-30 caliber rifle.  As the stunning 

employee vacated the stunning area, I looked around the corner into the stunning area at the 

animal and observed it standing upright, moving its head and breathing heavily.  The stunning 

employee returned with the larger caliber rifle.  I heard one stun attempt, and then a call from 

the stun employee, inviting me into the stunning area.  I observed the animal insensible and 

(b) (6)

continued to observe the animal remain insensible until sticking was complete.I contacted the 

, and applied US Rejected tag number B38-606376 to the 

restraining area. The plant Manager Robert Strong was advised to proffer corrective actions 

and proffer measures to prevent recurrence. 

On 03/31/2020 at 1130 while observing a Custom kill of a mature swine, I observed a Humane 

Handling issue. A plant employee attempted to “stun” the animal on two separate instances 

with a .22 rifle. However, the animal was not rendered unconscious nor insensitive to pain. It 

remained standing, fully aware and visually tracked the movements of individuals in the room. 

The employee then attempted to use a 9mm pistol to “stun” the animal. After a second attempt 

with the 9mm pistol the animal fell to the ground unconscious. I spoke with management 

about how their procedure did not meet standards for Humane Handling. This is a written 

notification of the plant’s failure to meet Human Handling standards set forth by the agency. 

And continued failure can lead to further enforcement action. 

At approximately 0945 hrs., I observed a heifer being loaded into the knock box at Pete’s 

Country Meats (est. 6636).  Using a .22 mag Long Rifle ammunition, the plant employee 

administered 1 stunning attempt to the forehead wherein the animal remained standing and 

consciously breathing.  A second stun attempt was immediately administered to the forehead 

using the same device and size ammunition wherein the animal remained standing.  A second 

plant employee immediately administered a successful third stun to the forehead using a 

back-up 9 mm pistol rendering the animal unconscious.  It remained unconscious and 

insensible to pain throughout shackling, sticking and bleeding. The knock box was rejected and 

tagged with No. B25008661.  Plant owner Chris Jones was notified of the regulatory control 

action. Pete’s Country Meats (est. 6636) is not currently operating under a Robust Systematic 

Humane Handling Program. 

I met briefly with 

(b) (6)

alongside Pen # 1 near the serpentine from 

approximately 1214-1216 hours to relay  concerns that 

(b) (6)

had conveyed to 

me a few minutes earlier. Those concerns were that while she was doing ante-mortem 

accompanied by she observed a white hat/new CFG serpentine employee use his rattle 

(b) (6)

paddle in a somewhat aggressive (although not clearly non-compliant) manner. She also 

observed him use his feet to move a hog along, also not clearly non-compliant, but just using 

his feet to apply pressure (not by kicking) to encourage a hog to move along. She pointed this 

out to Trevor and he said that he would take care of this. Ben also said that he would speak 

with Trevor and also speak with and work with this new employee. 
-

Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021 19 

EstNbr EstName 

M85B Swift Pork 

Company 

MOI # 

GYM491606 

3730G 

Date 

30JUN2020 

Task 

Code 

04C02 

TaskName 

Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Status 

Finalized 

MOI Agenda 

At approximately 18:20 on June 29, 2020, I met with 

(b) (6)

, to 

discuss observations I had made while observing truck unloading at unloading dock #3. When I 

had arrived to observe unloading at approximately 18:06, the trucker was in the belly of the 

trailer pushing a large group of hogs up from the belly to the truck unloading door. I could see 

that this group held greater than ten hogs and that the hogs were balking at going through the 

truck doorway onto the unloading dock. The trucker continued to push from the back of the 

group by repeatedly striking hogs with his rattle paddle. At times, I could see he would hit a 

single hog several times in a row and he occasionally raised the paddle above his head before 

striking. I then noted that several lead hogs at the doorway had turned completely around and 

were facing back into the truck. The trucker then started trying to strike hogs by reaching 

forward from the back of the group. Again, he was occasionally repeating strikes on the same 

hog and occasionally the paddle would be raised over his head. The dock monitor passed by 

and then took a paddle into the truck. I could see hogs getting past the trucker, back into the 

belly of the trailer. These hogs would come to the spot where the belly of the truck would 

begin, then hesitate, and then suddenly disappear from my view. Approximately a minute after 

the dock monitor entered the truck, I saw him bend over and lift up the cover for ramp that 

extends from the belly up to the back of the trailer. This caused me to be concerned that hogs 

had been leaping off the cover to the belly of the trailer when they had been suddenly 

disappearing from view, since the ramp would have been covered up. However, I since I had 

not seen when the cover was put down I was unsure if hogs had been jumping off of the cover 

or quickly going down the ramp into the truck. I explained to 

(b) (6)

that I was 

concerned by the pushing of a large group of hogs at one time combined with the truckers 

technique with the rattle paddle leading to unnecessary excitement and distress for the hogs. I 

also asked that information be gathered and assessed to see if hogs had been driven off of the 

drop off, from cover of the ramp, to the belly of the truck. He stated that he would look into 

(b) (6)

the situation and would notify the 

(b) (6)

of these 

issues as well. I advised that I would create an MOI to document the observed 

issues and our conversation. 
- -

Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021 20 

Task 

EstNbr EstName MOI # Date Code TaskName Status MOI Agenda 

M85O+P1 

7775+V85 

O 

Swift Pork 

Company 

HEM401805 

0822G 

22MAY2020 04C02 Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Finalized At approximately 20:55 on 5/21/20 I was headed out to do ante mortem inspection.  As I was 

passing the 90 degree turn in the central alley I noticed a stressed-out hog standing just 

beyond the gates along one of the side walls.  I stopped to watch how the employee handled 

the situation.  At first he isolated the stressed hog and tried to get it to walk to the gates behind 

it; however, it got more stressed out and sat down.  With the hog still in the sitting position the 

employee tried to get it to stand again with his rattle paddle, and when that didn’t work he 

grabbed one of the hog’s ears in each hand and pulled the hogs head away from the wall.  The 

hog had to shift its front feet a little, but I was unable to determine if the vocalizations during 

this time were from the hog being stressed or from pain or discomfort from the employees 

actions. 

(b) (6)

Upon seeing this I immediately stepped into the alley way and told the employee to 

(b) (6)

When

(b) (6)

stop what he was doing.  I called for since I could see him by 

the card box by pen 41.  came around 20:59 I described my observations to 

him.  then took over trying to get the hog to stand, and after failing to do so decided 

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)

to humanely euthanize the hog with captive blot.  He said he was going to inform Livestock 

who oversees the area but was working the line; then he was going to 

watch the video with and the employee.  At this time, I 

also explained to that I stopped the action as soon as I saw it to make sure it didn’t 

escalate into the employee attempting to drag the hog.  We discussed the applicable 

regulations 9 CFR 313.2(d)2&3 which state:(d) Disabled livestock and other animals unable to 

move. (2) The dragging of disabled animals and other animals unable to move, while 

conscious, is prohibited. Stunned animals may, however, be dragged. (3) 

Disabled animals and other animals unable to move may be moved, while conscious, on 

equipment suitable for such purposes; e.g., stone boats.If the employee would have 

proceeded to this action, it may have resulted in a humane handling non-compliance situation.I 

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)

informed that I was going to be issuing a Humane Handling MOI about this situation.I 

spoke to at the end of shift on Friday about the 

employee involved and said the employee received a written warning and will go 

through the entire livestock training program again and won’t be allowed back in that area until 

he completes it all. 

M9265+P Marks Meat CFJ1213041 16APR2020 04C02 Livestock 

9265 Inc. 016G Humane 

Handling 

Finalized While in the M9265 government office on April 15, 2020, at approximately 8:56 AM 

heard a handheld captive bolt (HHCB) stun device discharge followed by a pig squealing and an 

(b) (6)

immediate second discharge from a HHCB device proceeded to the slaughter floor 

(b) (6)

and observed an unconscious market swine and an establishment tag on the stun box. 

Establishment management investigated the incident and provided written corrective actions 

prior to resuming slaughter. 
-

-

- -

Table: MOIs in Response to FOIA2020-435 17:19 Wednesday, July 14, 2021 21 

EstNbr EstName 

M9265+P Marks Meat 

9265 Inc. 

M969G Swift Beef 

Company 

MOI # 

CFJ5513060 

616G 

NDH501206 

2227G 

Date 

16JUN2020 

27JUN2020 

Task 

Code 

04C02 

04C02 

TaskName 

Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Livestock 

Humane 

Handling 

Status 

Finalized 

Finalized 

MOI Agenda 

On 6/16/2020 at approximately 0830 hrs FI Heiser, while performing on-line inspection duties, 

observed establishment employees administer two stun applications in quick succession to a 

lamb in the stun box. 

(b) (6)

, informed

(b) (6)

that 

the first stun attempt was ineffective and that the establishment will immediately cease 

slaughter to conduct an investigation and implement corrective actions. The establishment 

determined the cause of the ineffective first stun was due to the lamb not properly loaded in 

the restraint system. The establishment retrained responsible personnel prior to resuming 

slaughter operations. Due to the establishment’s immediate effective corrective actions, no 

regulatory control action was taken. 

At approximately 1050 hours on June 27th 2020, after completing ante mortem inspection, I 

was informed that the establishment was going to euthanize a steer who was too stubborn to 

walk up the drive alley and into the restrainer. The animal was located in pen 25C (which can 

hold approximately 20 head of cattle). I stood on the catwalk above the pen to observe the 

establishment employee stun the steer. Every time an establishment employee lifted the 

hand-held captive bolt (HHCB) device, the steer would turn its head and walk away. At 1057 

hours, the establishment employee applied the first stun attempt with the HHCB device. I 

observed the steer remain standing, turn and walk away. I observed blood on the right cranial 

(b) (6)

aspect of the skull, which had not been observed prior to the stun attempt. I informed

 that I would be issuing a non-compliance. At this point, 

(b) (6) (b) (6)

circled with the steer in the same pen looking for an opportunity to apply a second stun. 

(b) (6)

After 

5 minutes, I informed that he needed to find a better way to restrain the animal.

 then moved the animal to the alleyway, penned the steer between two gates, and 

applied a second stun attempt which rendered the steer unconscious. The time elapsed 

between the first ineffective stun and the second stun that rendered the steer unconscious was 

13 minutes. While 

(b) (6) (b) (6)

was moving the steer, I called for 

(b) (6)

to tag 

the stun box. placed USDA reject tag B38606404 at 1105 hours. The Denver 

District Office was contacted via supervisory channels. The establishment is currently 

operating under a robust systematic approach.