Food Safety and 

Inspection Service May 31, 2023 

Office of Field 

Operations Electronically Submitted on May 31, 2023 

Des Moines 

District Office 

Neal Smith Brandi Krause, Establishment Manager 

Federal Building TTJ Packing Inc. Est. M49532 

210 Walnut Street 

Room 985 

Des Moines, IA 

50309-2123 

2532 Peiper Rd. 

Cottage Grove, Wisconsin 53527 

office@ttjpacking.co 

608-839-8865 

Voice 

515.727.8960 NOTICE OF INTENDED ENFORCEMENT 

Fax 515.727.8991 

Attention: Brandi Krause 

This letter confirms verbal notification by the Des Moines District Office, Food Safety and 

Inspection Service (FSIS) on May 30, 2023, of our intent to withhold the marks of inspection and 

suspend the assignment of inspection program personnel (IPP) at Establishment M45392 TTJ 

Packing Inc., located at 2532 Peiper Rd., Cottage Grove, WI. herein referred to as the/your 

establishment. This action is taken in accordance with the Rules of Practice, 9 Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) Part 500.3(b), which states that FSIS may take a withholding action or impose 

a suspension without providing an establishment prior notification if it is handling or slaughtering 

animals inhumanely. The Notice of Intended Enforcement (NOIE) is being issued to your 

establishment due to the observation of an egregious humane handling incident that occurred at 

your establishment on May 30, 2023, failing to meet the regulatory requirements of 9 CFR 

313.16(a)(1). 

You are required to respond to this notice adequately, in writing, addressing the regulatory 

noncompliance in this notice. Failure to respond adequately within three (3) business days from 

the date of receipt of this notice may result in the suspension of the assignment of inspectors at 

your establishment. FSIS will evaluate your response and will determine if any further 

administrative enforcement action will be necessary. 

Background 

The Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) (Title 21 of the United States Code {21 U.S.C.} 603 et 

seq.) provides that for the purpose of preventing the inhumane slaughtering of livestock, the 

Secretary shall cause to be made, by inspectors appointed for that purpose, an examination and 

inspection of the methods by which cattle, sheep, swine, goats, horses, mules, or other equines are 

slaughtered and handled in connection with slaughter in the slaughtering establishments inspected 

under this Act. The Secretary may refuse to provide inspection to a new slaughtering establishment 

or may cause slaughtering to be temporarily suspended at a slaughtering establishment if the 

Secretary finds that any cattle, sheep, swine, goats, horses, mules, or other equines have been 

slaughtered or handled in connection with slaughter at such establishments by any method not in 

Page 1 of 4 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Brandi Krause, Establishment Manager Notice of Intended Enforcement 

TTJ Packing Inc. Est. M45392 May 30, 2023 

accordance with sections 1901 to 1906 of Title 7 until the establishment furnishes assurances, 

satisfactory to the Secretary, that all Slaughtering and handling in connection with livestock shall 

be in accordance with such a method. 

The Humane Methods of Slaughter Act of 1978 (7 U.S.C. 1901 et seq.) provides that Congress 

finds that the use of humane methods in the slaughter of livestock prevents needless suffering; 

results in safer and better working conditions for persons engaged in the slaughtering industry; 

brings about improvement of products and economies in slaughtering operations; and produces 

other benefits for producers, processors, and consumers which tend to expedite an orderly flow of 

livestock and livestock products in interstate and foreign commerce. It is therefore declared to be 

the policy of the United States that the slaughtering of livestock and the handling of livestock in 

connection with slaughter shall be carried out only by humane methods. 

FSIS has also developed Rules of Practice regarding enforcement prescribed in 9 CFR Part 500. 

The Rules of Practice describe the types of enforcement actions that FSIS may take and include 

procedures for taking a withholding action and or suspension, with or without prior notification, 

as well as the procedures for filing a complaint to withdraw a Grant of Federal Inspection. 

Findings / Basis for Action 

At approximately 14:30 hours, while observing HATS Category VIII- Stunning Effectiveness, 

IPP observed the following noncompliance: IPP observed that the 7th animal to be stunned, a 

steer with backtag: 35AM0 735, was in the stunning restrainer but was not head restrained. The 

animal had very abnormal skull anatomy, so the establishment decided to use the .22 caliber rifle 

instead of the hand-held captive bolt (primary stunning apparatus). For rifle discharge safety, IPP 

was behind the partition adjacent to the stunning area. IPP heard the first gunshot then the 

vocalization of the animal, and the noise of the animal kicking on the sided of the restrainer. The 

establishment employee applied a second stun with the rifle, and IPP heard more vocalization 

and kicking. At that time, IPP moved away from the partition and saw the animal was down and 

trying to rise. The animal was distressed and was vocalizing. IPP went back behind the partition 

and when the establishment employee applied a third stun with the rifle, the animal’s 

vocalization and coordinated movements ceased. A fourth stun from the same rifle was applied 

at the back of the poll. After the animal was confirmed insensible, IPP took regulatory control 

action to halt stunning operations. IPP placed a reject tag on the closed door from the barn to the 

restrainer. IPP then notified interim Plant Manager, Ms. Brandi Krause of the noncompliance 

with 9CFR 313.16 (a)(1), and that IPP would need to inform the district office through 

supervisory channels. 

Upon inspection of the dissected skull of the steer, IPP found that the forehead had an 

approximately 1.5” in diameter open wound that communicated with the frontal sinus that was 

not inflicted by a .22 caliber rifle. There was excessive bone-growth and inflamed tissue 

surrounding this wound and extending throughout the sinuses and skull bones. Multiple areas of 

bullet-caused tissue damage were noted in the sinuses and brain, but due to the preexisting skull 

abnormalities, specific entry wounds were obscured, except for one wound from a stun applied 

behind the poll. 

2 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Brandi Krause, Establishment Manager Notice of Intended Enforcement 

TTJ Packing Inc. Est. M45392 May 30, 2023 

Conclusion 

After consideration of the facts surrounding this incident, the Des Moines District Office has 

determined that a NOIE be issued for your slaughter operations, in lieu of a Notice of Suspension 

(NOS), as per the Rules of Practice 9 CFR Part 500.3(b) and 9 CFR Part 313.50(b). This decision 

is based on information that your establishment has developed and implemented a humane 

handling program that meets the criteria described in the Federal Register Notice of September 9, 

2004, for a systematic approach to handling of livestock for slaughter and that program was being 

implemented at the time of the observed incident. Additionally, the compliance history concerning 

humane handling at your establishment has consistently been compliant with the humane handling 

regulations. 

According to the FSIS Rules of Practice laid out in regulation 9 CFR Part 500.3(b), FSIS may 

impose a suspension without providing prior notification because an establishment is handling or 

slaughtering animation inhumanely. Alternatively, FSIS may issue a withholding action or 

suspension with prior notification in certain cases based on considerations of establishment history 

of compliance with the humane handling regulations, demonstration of implementation of a robust 

systematic approach to humane handling, whether suspension is necessary to prevent inhumane 

handling from continuing, and whether the egregious noncompliance represents a rare finding or 

an anomaly in an otherwise well-functioning system. 

In accordance with FSIS’ Rules of Practice, regulation 9 CFR Part 500.3(b), we are affording you 

the opportunity to demonstrate why a determination should not be made that your slaughter process 

is inadequate or to demonstrate that you have achieved regulatory compliance. Please provide this 

office with a written response to this NOIE within three (3) working days from the date of your 

receipt of this letter. We will determine if any further actions are necessary based on your response. 

The corrective actions and preventive measures in your response should address the following: 

1. An initial assessment of incident/determine the cause. 

2. Immediate corrective actions taken. 

3. Preventive measures to prevent reoccurrence. 

4. Any training of employees and materials used. 

5. Type of monitoring activity, along with a documentation record. 

Your proposed corrective actions and preventive measures should include any times and/or dates 

for completion of these proposed activities. 

Appeal and Hearing Rights 

You have the right to appeal this matter and can do so by contacting: 

Sherri N. Johnson, Executive Associate for Regulatory Operations 

Office of Field Operations 

Food Safety and Inspection Service 

United States Department of Agriculture 

3