United States Department of Agriculture

September 17, 2023 

Delivered via Electronic Mail

Swift Beef Company 

Establishment M969G 

555 S. Stuhr Rd.

Grand Island, Nebraska 

phillip.buck2@jbssa.com

308-392-9732

Attention: Mr. Phillip Buck, Plant Manager

NOTICE OF SUSPENSION

This letter serves as official notification by the Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) of our decision 

to withhold the federal marks of inspection and suspend the assignment of Inspection Program Personnel 

(IPP) at Swift Beef Company, M969G, located at 555 S. Stuhr Road, Grand Island, Nebraska. This letter 

follows verbal notification of the suspension action, provided by Ms. Jenifer Monteverde, Deputy District 

Manager, to Supervisor, at approximately 2320 MST on September 16, 2023/ 0020 

CST on September 17, 2023. This action includes your Slaughter Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point 

(HACCP) processes employed at your establishment. 

The decision to institute this enforcement action is in accordance with Title 9 of the Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR), Rules of Practice 500.3(b), based on the determination that your establishment did not 

handle or slaughter animals humanely. The evidence demonstrates failure to comply with the Federal Meat 

Inspection Act (FMIA) (21 U.S.C. 603), the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act (HMSA) (7 U.S.C. 1901 et 

seq.), and the regulatory requirements (9 CFR Part 313). 

Background/Authority

The FMIA (21 USC 601 et seq.) provides it is essential to the public interest that the health and welfare of 

consumers be protected, by assuring meat products distributed to them are wholesome, not adulterated, and 

properly marked, and labeled. The Act gives FSIS the authority, as designated by the Secretary of 

Agriculture, to prescribe rules and regulations describing sanitation requirements for inspected 

establishments and provide FSIS program personnel the authority to refuse to allow meat/meat food 

products to be marked, labeled, stamped, or tagged as inspected and passed, to prevent the entry of 

adulterated products into commerce. Furthermore, the FMIA provides FSIS the authority to appoint 

inspectors to examine and inspect the method by which livestock are slaughtered and handled at 

slaughtering establishments. 

The HMSA 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. 

(b) (6)
Mr. Phillip Buck, Plant Manager 

Swift Beef Company, Est. M969G

Notice of Suspension 

September 17, 2023

Under the authority of the Acts, FSIS has prescribed rules and regulations required for establishments 

slaughtering and handling livestock, as required by 9 CFR Part 313. FSIS has also developed the Rules of 

Practice regarding administrative enforcement, 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, and for filing a complaint to withdraw a grant of inspection. 

Specifically, 9 CFR 500.3(b) states that FSIS may impose a suspension without providing prior notification 

due to handling or slaughtering of animals inhumanely. 

Findings/Basis for Action

HATS Category IX: Conscious Animals on the Rail

On Saturday, September 16, 2023, while performing a routine Livestock Humane Handling task, I, the 

SCSI observed the following noncompliance at approximately 2255 hours: 

I was observing stunning hoisting and shackling next to the blood pit railing overlooking the carcass 

takeaway belt near the maintenance toolbox on the south side of the protective metal shield.

At approximately 2255 hours I observed a sensible animal being hoisted. I determined sensibility by the 

observation of a righting reflex, eye tracking, and blinking. When I saw the animal being hoisted off the 

takeaway belt, I saw blinking and the head raise. I followed the animal to the stack, prior to where the 

animals are stuck and bled out and observed eye tracking, a righting reflex, and blinking. The animal 

flexed its head in the dorsoventral plane. I halted production and informed the Superintendent of my 

observations. He brought the knocker to the stack. The knocker asked me which animal was sensible. I 

identified the conscious animal in the stack. I observed that the animal was still exhibiting eye tracking, 

blinking, and attempting to lift its head. The knocker applied a stun after which the animal was 

immediately rendered unconscious. He applied a second security stun. Both stuns were performed with a 

handheld captive bolt instrument. Per 9 CFR 313.15 (a)(3), immediately after the stunning blow is 

delivered the animal shall be in a state of complete unconsciousness and remain in this condition 

throughout shackling, sticking, and bleeding. 

The SPHV was called to the floor by the establishment, at my request, and informed the establishment 

that the knocking box would remain tagged, and we would be contacting the Denver District Office 

immediately for further instruction. Regulatory control of the production line was released at 

approximately 2258 hours, and the establishment was informed that they could proceed with processing 

the cattle on the line. No further stunning was allowed. U.S. Reject tag B-45836026 was applied to the 

restrainer.

The SPHV went to the floor and located the head, which was tagged and saved at the head chain and 

examined it with the faceplate skinned to the bone. The SPHV was able to verify that there were 3 holes 

in the skull and no more. Two knock holes were penetrating. One knock hole indicates an area of the skull 

that was fractured/fragmented into 4-5 fragments, but was not penetrated. There was no distinct hole and 

the SPHV could not probe into it. The cracked skull was depressed less than 1⁄4”. This area was located 

approximately 1” dorsocaudal to the left eye and 1 – 1.5” laterally.

On September 9, 2004, FSIS published "Humane Handling and Slaughter Requirements and the Merits of 

a Systematic Approach to Meet Such Requirements" in the Federal Register (69 FR 54625). On September 

24, 2020, FSIS released FSIS Directive 6900.2 Revision 3, entitled, "Humane Handling and Slaughter of 

Livestock." Additionally, on October 23, 2013, FSIS introduced new guidance, titled "FSIS Compliance 

Guide for a Systematic Approach to the Humane Handling of Livestock." Within the guidance material is
Mr. Phillip Buck, Plant Manager 

Swift Beef Company, Est. M969G

Notice of Suspension 

September 17, 2023

information intended to better ensure the humane treatment of livestock presented for slaughter. The 

guidance material provides a set of practices designed to minimize excitement, discomfort, and accidental 

injury regarding the humane handling of livestock to include the four components of a robust systematic 

approach to humane handling. 

When an establishment maintains a robust humane handling program, FSIS can exercise regulatory 

discretion when an inhumane handling or slaughter incident is observed. Your establishment currently 

maintain a written humane handing program for consideration. 

Summary and Conclusion

Provisions of the FMIA outline FSIS’ ability to refuse to render inspection and indefinitely withdraw 

inspection from an establishment, provided the establishment is afforded the right to an administrative 

hearing, when conditions exist where the slaughter and/or handling of livestock was not by a method in 

accordance with the Act(s). Evidence demonstrates your failure to meet regulatory requirements addressed 

in 9 CFR 313.15(a)(3), constituting a violation of the humane slaughter requirements, and supporting the 

conclusion that your handling of livestock violated the provisions of the FMIA and HMSA. 

Please provide a written response, inclusive of written corrective action and preventative measures, by 

addressing the following: 

• Evaluate and identify the nature, cause of the incident.

• Describe the specific actions taken to eliminate the cause of the incident and prevent future 

recurrences.

• Describe specific monitoring activities planned to ensure future compliance.

• Provide any supporting documentation and records maintained and/or associated with the 

proposed corrective actions and preventative measures.

A determination of further administrative action will be made upon receipt and review of your submitted 

corrective actions and preventative measures. You are reminded that, as an operator of a federally inspected 

establishment, you are expected to comply with FSIS regulations and to take appropriate corrective actions 

to prevent the production of or adulterated products at your establishment. Please be advised that your 

failure to respond adequately to these issues may result in our initiating action to withdraw inspection from 

your establishment. 

Appeal and Hearing Rights

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

William Griffin

Executive Associate for Regulatory Operations 

Office of Field Operations

Food Safety and Inspection Service 

United States Department of Agriculture 

SB, Room 3164 

1400 Independence Avenue, SW 

Washington, DC 20250 

Email: William.Griffin1@usda.gov

Phone: (202) 961-7156 

Mr. Phillip Buck, Plant Manager 

Swift Beef Company, Est. M969G

Notice of Suspension 

September 17, 2023