Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 1

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M413 Smithfield

Farmland

Corp.

NCA12

080457

11N-1

No 04/10/201

4

04C02 313.2 On the production date of 4/10/14 at 5:56 I

performed HATS Category 2 (truck unloading)

in response to a humane handling concern. 

and I observed in the barn docking area at

the south ramp a live haul driver unloading

hogs from the trailer repeatedly hitting the

animals with a paddle in a degree of force in

excess to the amount normally used to move

aminals. From my observation point I did not

see that any animals was being injuried but

the hogs was moving at a rapid pace and

vocalizing in a loud manner. I entered the barn

office area to inform management of my

observation. There were no supervisory

personnel in the area. I returned to BLT facility

and informed 

 of my observation, in the

livestock area I implemented the regulatory

control action of tagging the livestock

ramp/chute and informed 

 of the noncompliance

due to the establishment’s failure to meet the

regulatory requirement cited in block 6 of this

document “(b) Electric prods, canvas slappers,

or other implements employed to drive

animals shall be used as little as possible in

order to minimize excitement and injury. Any

use of such implements which, in the opinion

of the inspector, is excessive, is prohibited.”

Regulatory control action was released by

 at 20:25 after

management responded with the propose

action to prevent recurrence.

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

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 2

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M1807

9

Smithfield

Farmland

Corp.

VFB582

202350

6N-1

No 02/06/201

3

04C02 313.50 At 19:55 hours, while walking through the A

side of the barn performing HATS- Handling of

Suspect & Disabled Animals, I observed a jack

traveling North West with 5 animals which

were had been stunned with the Captive Bolt

Gun from the suspect pens, I observed one of

the animal on the top showed tail movement,

I stopped the ;

upon further examination; the animal showed

blinking in reaction to stimulus and rhythmic

breathing. I immediately instructed plant’s

 to re-stun the

animal; the hog was rendered insensible to

pain with the second shot. 

 and were

informed of the non compliance. Because this

non compliance involving inhumane treatment

of livestock, in violation of regulatory

requirements of 9CFR part 313.50 (c) which

state ''If the cause of inhumane treatment is

the result of improper stunning, the inspector

shall attach a U.S. Rejected tag to the stunning

area", I immediately initiated a regulatory

control action in accordance with CFR part

500.2(a) (4) and rejected the stunning station

with US Rejected Tags numbers B40121480,

B40121488, B40121487,and B40121481. The

regulatory control action remained in effect

until the plant submitted the following

corrective action at 21:20 hours; a supervisor

will monitor all animals euthanized in

segregation pens for the next 5 days to ensure

they have passed ante-mortem inspection

before being euthanized and sent for harvest,

the animals will also be checked for

insensibility before being loaded into cart and

moved, and retrain the employees.

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

(b) (6)

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 3

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M1807

9

Smithfield

Farmland

Corp.

VFB201

308120

1N-1

No 08/01/201

3

04C02 313.1 At approximately 13:15 while verifying HATS

category IV (Ante-mortem Inspection) in the

CO2 area, I obseved a damaged automated cut

gate. It was the corner gate in the exterior

B-side alleyway. The gate panel had a 3 in. tear

in which the edges were jagged and

protruding roughly 0.5 in. into the alleyway

containing live animals. These gates are used

to help maintain group size in the alleyways

allowing contact of live animals with the gates.

I notified ,

of the establishment's failure to comply with 9

CFR 313.1. This requires pens, driveways, and

ramps to be free from sharp or protruding

objects which may cause injury or pain to the

animals. immediately retracted the

gate to cover the hazard and locked it to

prevent use. As further planned action, the

establishment will have the gate repaired and

prohibit use until repairs are made. No

animals were injured from the disrepair. Since

the establishment took proper immediate

action, no regulatory control action was taken.

(b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 4

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M1807

9

Smithfield

Farmland

Corp.

VFB270

910422

5N-1

No 10/25/201

3

04C02 313.1 At approximately 09:30 while verifying HATS

category IV (Ante-mortem Inspection), I

observed a damage automated cut gate. The

cut gates are used divide groups of animals

into smaller units and keep the groups

separated. The affected gate was located in

the inner alleyway leading to the carbon

dioxide chamber on B-side. The panel of the

gate had roughly a 5 in. by 3 in. tear with

jagged edges protruding about 0.5 in. into the

alleyway. At the time, the affected gate was

separating 2 groups of animals. I observed no

injured animals. I notified 

and of the

establishment's failure to comply with 9 CFR

313.1(a). This requires pens, driveways and

ramps to be free of sharp or protruding objects

which may cause injury or pain to the animals.

As an immediate corrective action, the

establishment retracted the gate and locked it

in place to prevent use until repaired. This also

covered the damaged area protecting the

animals from injury. The further planned

action proposed by the establishment was to

implement a system in which a supervisor

would check the conditions of the gates 

 and take action when unsafe

conditions are observed. A similar

noncompliance was documented on NR

VFB2013081201N/1 on August 01, 2013,

involving sharp metal protruding into the

alleyway from a damaged cut gate. The further

planned action of repairing the gate was

ineffective in preventing recurrence of the

noncompliance. As a result, regulatory control

action (US Reject Tag B38482600) was taken

on the affected gate this time per Directive

6900.2 (Rev. 2), Chapter VII, Section II(F)(2). I

released regulatory control action at 13:15

after verifying repair of the damaged gate.

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 5

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M1807

9

Smithfield

Farmland

Corp.

VFB212

112300

6N-1

No 12/06/201

3

04C02 313.1 On December 6, 2013 while observing the

establishments humane handling procedures,

the following noncompliance was observed. At

approximately 1805 hours in the livestock

barn in the area where hogs are being

unloaded, 

notified me that several trailers were being

unloaded where screws were protruding out

into the trailer. These existing conditions could

potentially allow for live hogs to become

injured by falling into these screws. 

and I observed three trailers that

were being unloaded and found each trailer to

have multiple screws (6 or more) which hold

the water lines to the trailer. These screws

extended out from the trailer walls by as much

as 1⁄4 to 1⁄2 of an inch. Upon further

investigation, each vehicle in the holding area

that was inspected had screws protruding out

with the points of the screws sharp enough to

cause injury to livestock. The trailers inspected

belonged to and

 also had indicated

that on Tuesday December 3, 2013 and

December 4, 2013, that she had notified 

) of

these same issues and On

December 5, 2013. At 1827 hours 

 , and 

were notified of this

noncompliance with FSIS Humane Handling

Directives and regulation 9 CFR 313.1(a). 

stated that he had notified the company

of each hauler and advised them of 

 findings and the need to make

corrections. No regulatory control actions

were taken due to the trucks were making

their last runs for the day and due to no

livestock had displayed no signs of injury at

this time. As a corrective action, 

contacted the companies of the transporters,

notifying them of the issues that exist. As a

preventive measure stated that

starting Monday December 9, 2013, that the

establishment will monitor the incoming

trucks for removal of stated screws and visible

sharp objects. If a trailer is found with sharp

objects not removed, the trailer will either be

rejected at receiving or necessary adjustments

will be made at that time prior to receiving.

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

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

(b) (6)

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

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 6

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M1807

9

Smithfield

Farmland

Corp.

VFB021

208511

3N-1

No 08/13/201

5

04C02 313.2 At approximately 0839 hours while

performing a Livestock Humane Handling task,

the following noncompliance was observed.  I

observed a plant maintenance employee

welding something on the front gate of pen

A9.  The sparks from the metal were going

towards and hitting the hogs in pen A10.  I

saw a few hogs shaking their heads in

response to the sparks hitting their ears and

face.  Others were just flinching in response to

the sparks in the air. 

, was notified of the

establishment's failure to comply with the

regulation listed above.  He then instructed

the employee to stop welding.  During the

week of July 26, 2015, and I had

a discussion about welders being used in the

livestock department.   assured

me that curtains would be used to prevent

sparks from affecting the hogs in adjacent

pens.  The establishment failed to take these

preventive measures.

M995 Swift Pork

Company

RKE050

804580

9N-1

No 04/09/201

4

04C02 313.30 On April 9, 2014 at 0713 while performing

HATS category 8, Electrical stunning I observed

the following noncompliance. A hog exiting

the stunning shoot was dorsal and appeared

conscious and was vocalizing, plant personnel

immediately took corrective action and

stunned the hog using a captive bolt stunner. I

immediately discussed the incidence with

 and he stated they were

immediately going to swap out the wands and

have those checked for defects.

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 7

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M995 Swift Pork

Company

RKE211

108281

9N-1

No 08/19/201

4

04C02 313.1 At approximately 0625 hours on Tuesday,

August 19, 2014, 

observed the following non-compliance:  after

conducting ante-mortem inspection, 

 followed a group of hogs up the tunnel

and into the holding pens.  In the very first

holding pen after exiting the tunnel, 

observed a hog rooting around on the

floor and saw the hog lift up the cover of a

drain plug and pull the plug out of the

drain – leaving the open drain exposed.  The

drain plug was approximately two feet long

with a flat stainless steel top approximately six

inches in diameter. The top of the drain plug

had been partially bent so that it was not

sitting flush on the floor of the pen, which

allowed the hog to lift up the cover with its

snout and mouth. In addition, the drain is

approximately 3.5 inches in diameter and

extends vertically 2 feet straight down into the

floor immediately notified

the area , who

moved the hogs out of the pen and tagged out

the holding pen.  The holding pen remained

tagged out while plant maintenance worked

to repair or replace the existing drain plug. No

animals slipped in the exposed drain or were

injured during the incident. 9 CFR 313.3(a)

states in part that “Loose boards, splintered or

broken planking, and unnecessary openings

where the head, feet, or legs of an animal may

be injured shall be repaired.” While there was

a drain plug for the drain and it was in place at

the time of the incident, the fact that the

cover was bent slightly such that it did not sit

flush on the ground allowed the hog to lift it

up and pull the plug out of the drain leaving

the opening exposed.  Although the animal

exacerbated the deficiency, it is incumbent

upon the establishment to maintain facilities

in order to protect animals.  Had 

 not witnessed the incident and

prompted the establishment to take action,

the open drain could have gone unnoticed and

an animal could have been injured. Plant

maintenance employees placed a new drain

plug with a larger diameter cap and stem in

the drain and secured the cover in place. The

new drain cover appeared satisfactory and the

establishment released the holding pen back

into use at 1000 hours.

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

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

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 8

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M995 Swift Pork

Company

RKE020

504311

7N-1

No 04/16/201

5

04C02 313.1 At approximately 9:48 AM on Thursday, April

16, 2015, I observed the following

non-compliance while conducting HATS

Category 2 (Truck Unloading) verification: a

hog became trapped when both rear legs

slipped into a ten (10) inch gap between the

rear of the trailer and the unloading ramp. The

animal was not injured as a result of the

incident, which is described in greater detail in

the following paragraphs. A truck with a

two-deck trailer (upper and lower decks)

backed up to unloading chute two (2). This

particular model of trailer did not have a ramp

for unloading hogs from the upper deck built

within the interior of the trailer.  When these

trailers arrive, they unload on chute two (2)

which has a pneumatic lift in which the rear of

the unloading ramp elevates to the level of the

upper deck of the trailer – resulting in a

decline during unloading of approximately

40-45 degrees.  Due to the angle of elevation,

the rear of the trailer and the ramp do not

meet – leaving a gap of around ten (10) inches.

To compensate for this fact, the establishment

has provided a three-sided metal bridge to

cover the bottom and sides of the exposed gap

in order to facilitate unloading. This bridge

must be held in place by the establishment

dock monitor during unloading. During the

incident today, three or four hogs ran out of

the trailer at once and became lodged in the

hand-held bridge. The momentum of the hogs

pulled the bridge forward and out of the grip

of the establishment dock monitor, leaving the

gap between the trailer and ramp exposed.

The next hog came out of the trailer moving

backwards and both rear legs slipped through

the exposed ten (10) inch gap.  The hog

vocalized and struggled unsuccessfully to pull

itself out of the gap. Once the animal stopped

struggling, the dock monitor and truck driver

were able to gently lift the animal’s rear legs

out of the gap and then they rolled the hog

into a sled. The truck driver stood in the exit of

the trailer to prevent any other animals from

getting near the gap while the establishment

dock monitor used the sled to haul the animal

to the bottom of the ramp. The animal was

gently rolled out of the sled and then it walked

away. I did not detect any apparent injuries or

abrasions as a result of the incident.    The

establishment dock monitor stopped the truck

driver from unloading any other animals from

the trailer and I took a regulatory control

action by temporarily rejecting the unloading
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 9

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

ramp with US Rejected Tag Number

B19066281. I then left the area to notify 

the 

, of the incident, which we

reviewed on video. After reviewing the video,

we returned to chute two (2).  I removed my

tag and

, took control of

unloading the remaining animals from the

upper deck of the trailer. The animals were

unloaded one at a time in order to ensure the

hand-held bridge could be maintained in

place.  The remaining hogs were unloaded

without incident. This load of hogs was

somewhat fractious and they ran out of the

trailer without provocation. At no time did I

observe excessive yelling or paddling by the

truck driver or establishment employees.

However, due to the steep angle of decline

and the speed at which some of the animals

exited the trailer, several animals were

observed sliding down the ramp on their

haunches, despite the waffling of the concrete

which typically prevents slipping when the

ramp is used at the normal angle of descent. 

In a given five-day workweek, Est. M995

receives approximately loads of hogs for

slaughter. The type of trailer involved in this

incident accounts for anywhere from 2 to 7 of

those loads per week. The establishment had

procedures and equipment in place for use

with these types of trailers; however, in this

instance, the preventive measures were not

sufficient in preventing the animal from falling

into the gap between the trailer and unloading

ramp.   Title 9 CFR 313.1(a) states that

“Livestock pens, driveways and ramps shall be

maintained in good repair. They shall be free

from sharp or protruding objects which may,

in the opinion of the inspector, cause injury or

pain to the animals. Loose boards, splintered

or broken planking, and unnecessary openings

where the head, feet, or legs of an animal may

be injured shall be repaired.” Furthermore, 9

CFR 313.1(b) states that “Floors of livestock

pens, ramps, and driveways shall be

constructed and maintained so as to provide

good footing for livestock. Slip resistant or

waffled floor surfaces, cleated ramps and the

use of sand, as appropriate, during winter

months are examples of acceptable

construction and maintenance.”

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

(b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 10

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M995 Swift Pork

Company

RKE161

404212

8N-1

No 04/28/201

5

04C02 313.15

(b)(1)(i)

On Tuesday, April 28, 2015, while conducting

records review related to HATS Category 8

(Stunning Effectiveness) as part of the ongoing

verification of the establishment’s corrective

and preventive actions related to the Notice of

Suspension Held In Abeyance issued

04/10/2015,  the following non-compliance

with 9 CFR 313.15(b)(1)(ii) was observed: the

establishment failed to provide

documentation to support that each of the

captive bolt stun guns in use by plant

personnel received maintenance

inspections and were maintained in good

repair as stated in the response letter

submitted to the Jackson District Office on

04/09/2015 and as required per the

establishment’s “Standard Operating

Procedure for Captive Bolt Stun Gun

Maintenance” dated 04/09/2015. There are

 captive bolt stunners in daily use by

the procurement and production employees.

Procurement employees utilize the following

guns identified by their serial numbers: 29061,

31614, and 29855. Production employees

utilize the following guns as identified by their

serial numbers: 26351, 33462, 25367, 29869,

32626, 26188, and 33461. Review of the

“Daily Stun Gun Inspection” log revealed that

each of those captive bolt stunners

were cleaned and inspected by plant

employees during each day of production

from 04/13/2015 to 04/17/2015, and

04/20/2015 to 04/24/2015. However, review

of the “Maintenance Stun Gun Inspection” log

revealed that three (3) of the captive bolt

stunners either did not receive maintenance or

the maintenance was not documented in the

log for the week of 04/13/2015 to

04/17/2014. Furthermore, review of the log

revealed that one (1) of the captive bolt

stunners either did not received maintenance

or the maintenance was not documented in

the log for the week of 04/20/2015 to

04/24/2014. During discussion with

establishment management, the plant

manager stated that they have elected to use

the “Preventive Maintenance Work

Order” document as the document of record

for verifying compliance with this Verification

Plan action item rather than the “Maintenance

Stun Gun Inspection” log as stated and

provided in the official response letter

submitted to the Jackson District Office on

04/09/2015. Review of the “Preventive

Maintenance Work Order” documents for the

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

Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 12

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M995 Swift Pork

Company

RKE140

805052

7N-1

No 05/27/201

5

04C02 313.1 At approximately 8:45 AM on Wednesday,

May 27, 2015, I observed the following

non-compliance with 9 CFR 313.1(b) while

conducting HATS Category 2 (Truck Unloading)

verification: numerous hogs slipped and slid

down the elevated unloading ramp on chute

two (2) as they were being unloaded from the

trailer. No animals were injured as a result of

the incident. A truck with a two-deck trailer

(upper and lower decks) backed up to

unloading chute two (2). This particular model

of trailer did not have a ramp for unloading

hogs from the upper deck built within the

interior of the trailer.  When these trailers

arrive, they unload on chute two (2) which has

a pneumatic lift in which the rear of the

unloading ramp elevates to the level of the

upper deck of the trailer – resulting in a steep

decline during unloading.  Due to the angle of

elevation, the rear of the trailer and the ramp

do not meet – leaving a gap of around ten (10)

inches. To compensate for this fact, the

establishment has provided a metal bridge to

cover the bottom of the exposed gap in order

to facilitate unloading. This bridge must be

held in place by the establishment dock

monitor during unloading.  I arrived as the

last half of the hogs were being unloaded from

the top deck of the trailer. This load of hogs

was somewhat fractious and they hurried out

of the trailer without provocation. I did not

observe any excessive yelling or paddling by

the truck driver or establishment employees.

However, due to the steep angle of decline

and the speed at which some of the animals

exited the trailer, over 20 animals were

observed sliding down the ramp on their

haunches, and numerous others were

observed to slide down the ramp while

struggling to stay on their feet. The waffling of

the concrete on this ramp typically prevents

slipping when the ramp is used at the normal

angle of descent.  I allowed the remaining

few hogs to be unloaded from the top deck as

there was no other chute or ramp available

that works with this type of trailer. There were

two non-ambulatory animals left in the top

deck and plant employees humanely

euthanized them with a captive bolt stunner. I

then took a regulatory control action by

rejecting the unloading ramp with US Rejected

Tag Number B19066251. As I was tagging the

chute , the establishment

Humane Handling Manager, arrived and I

notified him of the non-compliance.  The

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 13

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

truck was moved to chute one (1) to unload

the animals from the bottom deck of the

trailer.  In a given five-day workweek, Est.

M995 receives approximately loads of

hogs for slaughter. The type of trailer involved

in this incident accounts for anywhere from 2

to 7 of those loads per week.  A similar

non-compliance (NR Number

RKE0205043117N) was written on April 16,

2015, in which animals were also observed

sliding down the elevated unloading chute.

 While a new metal bridge was fabricated, it

appears that the corrective and preventive

measures implemented as a result of the last

non-compliance were not effective in

preventing animals from slipping and sliding

on the elevated unloading ramp. 

M995 Swift Pork

Company

RKE411

307260

7N-1

No 07/07/201

5

04C02 313.1 At approximately 12:35 PM on Tuesday, July

7, 2015, I observed the following

non-compliance while conducting HATS

Category 4 (Handling During ante-mortem

Inspection) verification: the whiteboard which

makes up the main body of the gate to pen 19

was cracked and split from the bottom of the

gate to the top approximately 6 inches from

the hinge. The free end of the gate then

dropped to the ground which twisted the gate

resulting in a large crack wide enough for an

animal to get its foot or leg entrapped. In

addition, the iron that comprised the bottom

frame of the gate was broken near the hinge

and several inches of the metal frame were

protruding into the pen which was full of hogs

at the time.  When I first arrived I observed a

hog standing next to the gate with its foot

extending through the resulting crack in the

gate.  When I approached the gate the animal

pulled its leg out of the crack and walked

away without any evidence of injury.  I

observed plant employees carefully drive the

hogs out of the pen and then tagged pen 19

with US Rejected tag number B40550318.  

This represents non-compliance with 9 CFR

313.1(a) which states that “Livestock pens,

driveways and ramps shall be maintained in

good repair. They shall be free from sharp or

protruding objects which may, in the opinion

of the inspector, cause injury or pain to the

animals. Loose boards, splintered or broken

planking, and unnecessary openings where the

head, feet, or legs of an animal may be injured

shall be repaired.”  

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

(b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 14

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M995 Swift Pork

Company

RKE040

807361

4N-1

No 07/13/201

5

04C02 313.1 At approximately 2:20 PM on Monday, July

13, 2015, I observed the following

non-compliance while conducting HATS

Category 4 (Handling During Antemortem

Inspection) verification: when I entered the

barn I noticed forty-three (43) non-ambulatory

hogs in pen 25 and the majority of the hogs

were panting and breathing heavily through

their mouths. These were hogs that had

previously received ante-mortem inspection

but had become stressed and non-ambulatory

during the drive the slaughter. The hogs had

been segregated into pen 25 and were to be

stunned by captive bolt and transported to the

stick area by the operator. Drinking

water was available in the covered pen and

although there were overhead sprinklers in the

pen, the sprinklers were not being utilized.  I

took the rectal temperature of two (2) hogs

that demonstrated respiratory distress and the

temperature of the first was 108.4 degrees

Fahrenheit and the second was 108.0 degrees

Fahrenheit.  I informed plant personnel of the

situation and the overhead sprinklers were

immediately turned on. I instructed plant

personnel that the two hogs in questions were

considered US Condemned and they were

humanely euthanized and transported out of

the barn.  As I walked through the barn to

conduct ante-mortem inspection I observed

that the fans and overhead sprinklers were on

in all other pens containing hogs. However, it

was still extremely hot and humid in the barn

and I observed an excessive number of dead

hogs lying in the pens that had already been

emptied:  12 dead hogs in pen 17 4 dead

hogs in pen 16 7 dead hogs in pen 33 8 dead

hogs in pen 34  As stated, it was a hot and

humid afternoon. At 2:20 PM the local

temperature was 88 degrees Fahrenheit with

70% relative humidity.  At 2:55 PM I

questioned plant personnel regarding the

number of dead hogs that had been identified

and removed from the pens thus far during the

day and was informed that there had been 79

pen deaths which is significantly higher than

normal. In addition, the counter in the cab of

the revealed that the operator had

euthanized and transported 240 stressed hogs

to the stick area thus far in the production

day – which was also a significant increase

over normal. The increase was due in part to

the fact that approximately hogs had

been held in the barns over the weekend as a

result of production problems. However,

(b) (4) (b) (4) (b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 15

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

despite the high ambient temperature and

humidity, the failure to utilize the overhead

sprinklers for the disabled hogs in pen 25 and

the significant increase in pen deaths within

the barn demonstrate that the plant had not

adequately prepared for nor protected the

animals from the inclement weather.   The

total number of pen deaths recorded for the

entire production day was 121 – normally this

number is less than 10. In addition, there were

20 hogs recorded as Dead on Arrival (DOA) for

the day.  While all the hogs, including the

disabled hogs in question, had been held in a

covered barn, the actions taken by the

establishment to protect the animals from

adverse climatic conditions was not sufficient

as evidenced by the respiratory distress

displayed by the disabled hogs and the

excessive number of deaths.  This represents

non-compliance with 9 CFR 313.1(c).  

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 16

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M995 Swift Pork

Company

RKE510

509410

9N-1

No 09/08/201

5

04C02 313.2 At approximately 4:10 PM on Tuesday,

September 8, 2015, I observed the following

non-compliance while conducting HATS

Category 3 (Water Availability) verification:

there was no accessible drinking water for

hogs held in unloading chute 4. Several

months ago the plant removed the concrete

water trough from chute 4 and provided two

(2) nipple water sources along the north wall

of the chute. When I checked the two nipple

water sources at 4:10 PM no water was

available. Additionally, there was no water

coming from the overhead sprinklers either.

Although there are two water troughs in the

drive alley adjacent to the chute, the gate

between the chute and drive alley was closed

confining the hogs to the chute without

available drinking water or overhead

sprinklers. I tagged the chute with US Rejected

tag number B19066235.  The ambient

temperature at the time of the incident was

95 degrees Fahrenheit but the hogs did not

show any apparent signs of heat stress and

there were no non-ambulatory hogs in the lot. 

I informed plant personnel of the

non-compliance and the hogs were

immediately removed from chute 4 and

placed in another holding pen with

accessible drinking water. Maintenance

personnel were called to assess the situation. I

checked the water sources in chute 4 at 4:25

PM but they were still non-functional and the

chute remained tagged out under USDA

control. 9 CFR 313.2(e) states in part

that “Animals shall have access to water in all

holding pens.”

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 17

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M221A Smithfield

Farmland

Corp.

KGG55

150100

23N-1

No 01/23/201

3

04C02 313.2 At approximately 0735 hours on Wednesday,

January 23, 2013, I performed the water and

feed availability aspect of the humane

handling task. During this check, I observed

that the water nozzles in pen #13 and pen #27

were frozen. There were hogs in pen #27 at

this time. I also observed that the water

nozzles in the suspect pens on both sides and

all four unloading chutes were frozen as well.

The water trough in the north side suspect pen

had a layer of ice on top of it as well. There

were two hogs in the north side suspect pen

and two of the four unloading chutes

contained hogs. In addition, the last two water

nozzles in pens # 7 and #8 were frozen. Pen #7

still contained hogs. The gate for pen #8 was

opened and it was ready to be loaded. I

informed 

, of the noncompliance and explained

that the hogs did not have access to water as

required by the regulations. 

immediately removed all hogs from the

affected pens and chutes. She assured me that

they would not use the pens or chutes until

the problem was resolved. then

instructed livestock personnel to check all

water nozzles in the pen area, and she called

maintenance to defrost the frozen pipes. At

1115 hours, I went back to the livestock area

to check on the water status. I observed that

all of the water nozzles and pipes had been

defrosted. and 

, explained that they

believed the cause to be running the exhaust

fan during the night pulled all of the ambient

heat from the pens, allowing the pipes on the

exposed end to freeze. The regulatory

requirements cited above, specifically in 9 CFR

313.2(e) were not met.

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

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

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 18

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M221A Smithfield

Farmland

Corp.

KGG18

130538

27N-1

No 05/27/201

4

04C02 313.2 At approximately 1106 hours, on Tuesday May

27, 2014, as I was performing the Water and

Feed Availability component of the Humane

Handling Task, I observed one disabled hog in

the drive alley leading to the North side gas

chamber. This hog was inside an aluminum

cage designed to protect a single downed

animal from getting more seriously injured

during production. At this time, the livestock

personnel moving hogs up to the gas

chambers were on their lunch break. This

animal was left without access to water, a

violation of 9 CFR 313.2(e), which states in

part that, “Animals shall have access to water

in all holding pens”. As the livestock personnel

were on their lunch break, this alley is

considered a holding pen. I notified 

, of the

noncompliance. explained to

me that the department personnel went to

lunch break early, at approximately 1040

hours, due to an issue with the North side gas

chamber. moved the downed

hog back to the recovery pen. The regulatory

requirements cited in line six (6) of this

document were not met.

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 19

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M221A Smithfield

Farmland

Corp.

KGG20

140707

17N-1

No 07/16/201

4

04C02 313.2 At approximately 0751 hours, on Wednesday,

July 16, 2014, as I was performing the Water

and Feed Availability component of the

Humane Handling Task during an extended

breakdown, I observed hogs in the entrance to

the South side gas chamber. There were

twenty-three (23) hogs enclosed in the entry

to the gas chamber. These animals were left

without access to water, a violation of 9 CFR

313.2(e), which states in part that, “Animals

shall have access to water in all holding pens”.

The breakdown occurred at approximately

0716 hours. At the time of the finding it was

73 degrees Fahrenheit outside and the

humidity was 100%. I notified an associate

nearby to open the gate, which allowed the

hogs access to the water nozzles. I then found

and notified 

 of the noncompliance. The

regulatory requirements cited in line six (6) of

this document were not met. A similar

noncompliance for no access to water in the

hog pens was documented on May 27, 2014

(See NR # KGG1813053827N). The plant’s

corrective actions of retraining all livestock

associates and disciplining the responsible

associate were ineffective in preventing the

recurrence of this issue. This document serves

as written notification that continued failure

to meet the regulatory requirements cited in

line 6 above could result in additional

regulatory and/or enforcement actions as

described in 9 CFR 500.4.

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 20

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M221A Smithfield

Farmland

Corp.

KGG01

091144

06N-1

No 11/05/201

4

04C02 313.2 At approximately 1624 hours, while I was

performing the truck unloading component of

the Humane Handling Task (Category II), I

observed a truck driver on the North side

unloading dock; chute “B” beginning to

unload a full trailer of hogs. There were no

plant associates assisting the driver with

unloading. In the second section in the bottom

of the trailer, I observed a hog lying down next

to the gate. As the driver opened the gate, this

hog did not move. The driver used his paddle

and prodded the hog several times. The hog

began to rise and the driver turned his back to

the hog and began unloading that section. The

hog that was lying down never stood on all

four feet and dragged itself approximately

three (3) feet towards the side of the trailer.

The driver continued to unload that section. At

that point, I walked towards the trailer. Once

the driver noted the non-ambulatory hog, he

stopped unloading and prodded the hog with

the paddle a few more times in an attempt to

get it to move. After seeing me, he stopped

completely and began to exit the trailer. I

walked back to the scale house and notified

, of

the noncompliance and this NR. As we exited

the scale house, the driver was getting the sled

to remove the hog from the trailer. Plant

associates then began helping to remove the

non-ambulatory animal. Once the animal was

removed and safely segregated, the plant

associates unloaded the rest of the trailer. The

regulatory requirements cited above,

specifically 9 CFR 313.2(a) and 313.2(d)(1)

were not met.

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 21

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M85B Swift Pork

Company

GYM53

191212

28N-1

Yes 12/28/201

3

04C02 313.2 On 12/28/2013 at approximately 17:18 I was

performing a Humane Handling verification. A

large number of animals (swine) were being

driven by an establishment employee up an

alley normally used for transporting

nonambulatory animals. The employee was

driving the group from the rear of the alley, in

the front half of this group the animals were

balking and getting squeezed or wedged

together being unable to move. I observed

four hogs actually attempting to walk on the

backs of the other hogs. I noted an increase in

vocalization of the distressed hogs. I took

immediate regulatory control action by

stopping the employee from further action. I

placed a US Retain tag #6104615 on the

alleyway. After I stopped the employee’s

action, took immediate

corrective action and assisted the employee in

getting the hogs to move forward in a

nondistressfull way.Then I informed 

 and my immediate 

 Informing 

this was going to be a nonegregious inhumane

handling noncompliance in violation of HATS

Category IV-Ante-Mortem Inspection. I

removed the retain tag after 

reassured me that this alley would no longer

be used to transport large numbers of hogs to

the stunning area.

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

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 22

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M85B Swift Pork

Company

GYM46

000444

26N-1

Yes 04/26/201

4

04C02 313.15 At approximately 2350, while performing

humane slaughter HAT inspection ‘Handling of

Suspect & Disabled’ along with 

 in

the stunning area at Cargill 85B, I observed the

following noncompliance. The initial captive

bolt attempt to stun the final disabled,

stressed hog of the night near the curved

portion of the south alley was not

immediately effective. One employee had a

sort board to assist in containing the animal

while another employee attempted to stun

with the captive bolt. As the captive bolt was

fired, the animal moved its head causing

insufficient penetration and no loss of

consciousness. The animal squealed, got up,

and walked about ten feet to the west down

the alley while at least three employees with

sort boards restrained it. At this point I

observed blood on the cement floor and the

animal’s snout, indicating some degree of skull

trauma. Another attempt was made with the

captive bolt; however, the animal at this point

was backing down the alley wall towards the

east. My view was obscured of this second

attempt by the establishment employees and

restraint gear. As the animal was still mobile, it

was then walked approximately ten feet to a

pass-thru gate immediately adjacent to the

south suspect pen where electricity was then

applied to render the animal unconscious. I

determined that noncompliance with 9 CFR

313.15(a) existed based on the failure to

produce immediate unconsciousness after the

stunning blow. I further determined this was

not an egregious noncompliance because the

establishment attempted immediate

corrective actions in accordance with their

robust humane handling plan. I informed

 as well as

 of the noncompliance.

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 23

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH011

708401

2N-1

No 08/12/201

3

04C02 313.2 HATS Category V- Suspect and Disabled; HATS

Category IV-Antemortem On Monday, August

12, 2013, at approximately 1455 hours 

 observed the following noncompliance

while performing humane handling

verification and ante mortem in the barn.

Upon walking the north drive alley from pen

16 to pen 8, observed a hog that

was lying in the middle of the west drive alley

in front of pen 6 as the team member driving

hogs was heading to pen 4 to drive more hogs

to slaughter. As hogs were being driven to

slaughter out of pen 4 the hog was still lying in

the middle of the alley and did not rise even

after at least one hog stepped on and over the

hog. There was no vocalization at that

moment or when another hog ran into it, but

the hog did try to rise unsuccessfully. The

remainder of the large group of hogs was

driven to slaughter. At no time during this

observation was there an attempt made to

prevent other hogs from stepping on or

walking over the down hog. Immediate

corrective actions were to move the down hog

to the suspect pen using the after the

incident was observed. went to

summon , in

order to address the incident with the team

member of driving a large group of hogs over

and around a slow/downer animal. 

did speak with the team member and then

stated that he would review the video and

further address the incident after the review

was finished. At this point 

summoned ,

to review the video footage just prior to and

including the incident observed in the barn as

the cameras are used as part of the

establishment’s humane handling system. This

review was used to help determine if the

lameness observed was already present or if

the hog was injured by the incident observed.

Upon review of the video footage it was

determined that the hog observed to be lying

the center of the west drive alley was from

pen 3 and was lame while walking with its

original group to slaughter and went down in

the alley. As the team member returned to

drive another group of hogs to slaughter he

used his plastic bat and got the hog to rise and

it took three to five steps, although limping.

The hog at that time was facing the south and

as the team member went around the hog he

swung his bat at it and the hog was startled

and jumped, slipped, and fell down. The team

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 24

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

member did not address the hog at that point

but rather continued to drive hogs to slaughter

as observed and referenced above. The

remainder of the video reflected the above

description of the observed incident

was verbally notified of the

documentation of this NR for the failure to

comply with regulatory requirements for

humane handling. 

, was also notified of this NR

as he had relieved at shift change. 9

CFR 313.2a-Driving of livestock from the

unloading ramps to the holding pens and from

the holding pens to the stunning area shall be

done with a minimum of excitement and

discomfort to the animals. Livestock shall not

be forced to move faster than a normal

walking speed. 9 CFR 313.2d1-Disabled

animals and other animals unable to move

shall be separated from normal ambulatory

animals and placed in the covered pen

provided for in 313.1(c).

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 25

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH081

503160

6N-1

No 03/06/201

4

04C02 313.15 HATS Category VIII- Stunning Effectiveness On

Thursday, March 6, 2014, at approximately

1339 hours observed the following

noncompliance while performing humane

handling verification of the captive bolt

stunning procedures in the suspect pen. 

, was stunning the

hogs which had either been suspected or

passed ante-mortem by the PHV in the suspect

pen. had earlier passed a hog on

ante mortem inspection which was now

showing some signs of respiratory distress and

asked to stun the animal in order to

not cause undue stress on the animal. While

attempting to stun the animal with the captive

bolt gun appropriately restrained

the animal and positioned the captive bolt gun

on the forehead correctly. Upon pulling the

trigger the hog lowered its head slightly in an

attempt to breathe and the first shot was

ineffective and slightly displaced dorsally. The

hog was exhibiting clear signs of consciousness

but was not vocalizing out in pain. 

immediately stepped out of the way of the

back up shooter and continued to restrain the

hog to prevent further injury or distress. The

back up shooter with the preloaded back up

captive bolt gun in hand did not immediately

re-stun the hog until after being instructed

multiple times. When the back up stunner

applied the re-stun the shot was effective and

the hog was immediately rendered insensible.

 and were verbally

notified immediately and now in writing of the

noncompliance. The establishment’s

immediate corrective actions at the time were

to replace both the stunner and the back up

stunner for the remainder of the suspect pen.

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

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 26

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH002

003202

6N-1

No 03/25/201

4

04C02 313.2 On Monday, March 24, 2014, while

performing antemortem inspection of the

plant segregated hogs in the “Canadian sub

pen”, noticed that there were

several large sows, with back tags, and a

couple of boars in the shipper pen. The pen

was not overcrowded and all animals had

access to the waterer. The following evening,

Tuesday, March 25, 2014, while conducting

antemortem inspection, noticed

that these same animals were still in the same

pen and it appeared that they had not been

fed. Upon double checking the time that the

previous night’s sub pen had been signed, it

was determined that these pigs had been held

over 24 hours without feed. This specific issue

had been discussed during the March 18, 2014

Establishment Awareness Meeting. 

 was notified verbally

and now in writing that this was a non

compliance and would be documented

 in turn, notified 

 and

who then came out to the barn. At that time,

barn records were examined. The hogs in

question had been weighed in at 10:02pm

March 24, 2014; they were weighed out at

11:04pm March 25, 2014. 

 was contacted via

telephone to verify that the hogs had not been

fed during A shift and also to confirm that the

facility that the hogs were being shipped to

did give them access to feed. Immediate

corrective actions by the plant were to ship

these hogs to that local facility in

 miles away) to get fed and to

start feeding any hold over shipper hogs

during A shift. Further action planned by the

establishment was to conduct an Animal

Welfare Team meeting to address the

situation.

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

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

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (4) (b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 27

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH211

605513

0N-1

No 05/29/201

4

04C02 313.2 HATS Category IV - Ante-Mortem Inspection

On May 29, 2014 at approximately 0715

hours observed the following

noncompliance while performing

ante-mortem inspection and humane handling

verification tasks. Upon walking to pen 12 it

was readily observed that the hogs in this pen

were overcrowded. Pen 12B was the first half

pen observed and approximately 95% of the

hogs were laying down resting and the

remaining hogs were forced to either stand or

lay on top of other hogs as there was no free

space in the pens. The hogs also were not

provided free access to the water at all times

as required by 9 CFR 313.2(e). 

looked at 12A and it also was observed to be

overcrowded. She immediately asked 

 his opinion of the

stocking density of the pen. agreed

that the pen appeared to have too many hogs

and did not contain the number of hogs that

was recorded on the pen card as presented for

ante-mortem. and 

 were both verbally and

now in writing notified of this noncompliance

report for being in violation of 9 CFR 313.2(e).

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

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 28

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH222

108050

5N-1

No 08/05/201

4

04C02 313.2 At the end of 2nd shift on August 4, 2014

 (I) noted on Tyson 244I

barn paperwork that there were 4 “sort-off”

hogs that were not shipped out that evening. 

They were to be held over until shipment on

2nd shift August 5, 2014.  Upon entering the

barns around 6:15 pm today, I performed a

HATS feed and water availability task and

proceeded to observe the holding pen used for

the sort-off animals; I observed no evidence of

feed or remnants there of.  I checked the same

pen at different times later in the shift and

there were still no signs that any feed had ever

been placed into the pen.  After performing

ante-mortem inspection on the B-Hog slow

and subject animals at approximately 9:30

pm, I asked if he

was aware that the plant had held hogs

overnight in the sort-off pen from the prior

day’s second shift.  stated that he

was not aware that any animals had been held

over and that he would check the barn

paperwork to verify what time the hold-overs

were placed into the pen.  Tyson paperwork

confirmed that the 4 animals that were held

overnight had been penned since 8 pm on

August 4th (marking 25.5 hours) and there

was no documentation that they had received

any feed.  9 CFR 313.2 (e) states “Animals

shall have access to water in all holding pens

and, if held longer than 24 hours, access to

feed.

(b) (6)(b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 29

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH470

008332

1N-1

No 08/20/201

4

04C02 313.15 On August 20, 2014 at approximately 11:10

PM (I) was performing

the HATS verification task Handling of Suspect

and Disabled at Tyson Fresh Meats (244I).

While 

and I were assessing the slow and

non-ambulatory hogs in the “Russian suspect

pen”, and 

were observed to be using a captive bolt gun

to stun hogs in the Shipper pen.  

successfully stunned the first hog and then

moved onto the second hog.  I heard the

captive bolt gun fire and then immediately

heard loud squealing coming from that area.  I

then performed a HATS Stunning Effectiveness

verification and I walked approximately eight

feet to look over the wall that separated the

two pens.  I observed a hog with a captive bolt

wound in its forehead that was gushing blood

and the hog continued to squeal.  ,

 and did have a back-up

captive bolt gun with them but were unable to

restrain the hog after the initial stun attempt. 

No sort boards or other methods of restraint

were visible in the pen.  The hog walked away,

still squealing and dripping blood while the

men attempted to restrain it.  They were

finally able to restrain it against the concrete

wall of the pen approximately 20 yards from

where the initial first attempt occurred.  The

second shot was made with the same captive

bolt gun, rendering the hog unconscious.     

 I notified that a non-compliance

report would be issued and that he should

notify 

of the mis-stun.  Examination of the

head of the hog, revealed both shots to be in

the acceptable location for stunning of a

market hog.  made the comment, “I

want this gun checked because sparks flew out

of the back end when I fired the second shot.”

The gun in question is number 32664.   I

discussed the occurrence with 

when he came to the barn and showed him

where both shots had taken place in the

Sort-Off pen.  accompanied me

to examine the hog and we were able to

determine that the first shot never fully

penetrated the skull but the second one did.  I

asked if the maintenance

department kept records of repairs on

individual captive bolt guns.  

 was called to the barn

and confirmed that maintenance records are

recorded for each gun.  9 CFR 313.15(a) (1)

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

(b) (6)

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

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 30

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

states “The captive bolt stunners shall be

applied to the livestock in accordance with

this section so as to produce immediate

unconsciousness in the animals before they

are shackled, hoisted, thrown or cut. The

animals shall be stunned in such a manner

that they will be rendered unconscious with a

minumom of excitement and discomfort.” 9

CFR 313.15(b) (iii) states in part “The stunning

area shall be so designed and constructed as

to limit the free movements of animals

sufficiently to allow the operator to locate the

stunning blow with a high degree of

accuracy.”
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 31

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH011

510280

8N-1

No 10/06/201

4

04C02 313.1 HATS Category II-Truck Unloading On

October 6, 2014 at approximately 1018 hours

while performing humane handling

verification of truck unloading 

observed the following noncompliance.  A

semi trailer full of hogs on the upper deck was

backed up to the high unloading (upper deck)

chute and the driver was calmly unloading the

hogs.  It was observed that multiple hogs as

they were exiting the trailer appeared to lose

their footing on the uppermost (approx. 3-4

ft.) portion of the ramp that is approximately

30 feet in total length.  They were then able to

regain their footing and proceed down the

ramp.  It was also observed that two hogs

completely slipped and fell to the ramp

surface.  One slipped and fell at the base of the

rubber mat that was placed over

approximately half of the door opening and

immediately got up and appeared to be

unhurt.  The other hog slipped and fell at the

top of the ramp just after exiting the trailer

and did not immediately get up.  After a short

period of time the hog did get up and

appeared to be unhurt. The issue was

immediately addressed with 

 who was standing right

with and made the same

observations.  attempted to address

the situation of the hog at the exit of the

trailer that had not gotten up yet only after 

 brought the issue to his attention.  It

was also addressed that this issue was

previously addressed with Barn Management

the week prior.  At that time no hogs fell, but

slippage was observed and was

told that it would be addressed.  

verbally notified at that time that an

NR was to be documented and that the chute

was going to be tagged and was no longer to

be used until the issue was corrected.  The

chute is tagged with US Reject tag no.

B41490058, pending correction of the issue. 

 addressed the issue with 

 later in the USDA Office and verbally

notified him of the pending NR.The unloading

chute does have a brick style pattern stamped

in the concrete to assist in providing footing

for the hogs.  It is however determined that

the chute is too steep at the top 3-4 feet as

observed by the degree of incline and the

footing of the animals as they are moving

down it.

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

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

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (6)(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 32

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH121

111542

0N-1

No 11/19/201

4

04C02 313.15(a)(1) HATS Category VIII- Stunning Effectiveness On

November 19, 2014 at approximately 1752

while performing a humane handling task,

stunning effectiveness of captive bolt

stunning in the suspect pen

observed the following noncompliance. A hog

was properly restrained using a board and

shot with captive bolt gun #32650. The bolt

did not completely penetrate the skull and the

hog vocalized. While the hog was still properly

restrained, the establishment re-stunned the

hog immediately with the pre-loaded back-up

gun and rendered the hog unconscious.

Following the incident, 

 was notified and

stunning of the suspect pen was stopped until

a replacement captive bolt gun was brought to

the pen. The establishment began

implementation of their humane

handling program to increase monitoring

of the stunning of the suspect to 100%.  

verbally informed the

 of the pending NR.

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 33

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH331

401350

8N-1

No 01/08/201

5

04C02 313.15(a)(1) HATS Category VIII-Stunning Effectiveness On

January 8, 2015 at approximately 0905 hours

 observed the following

noncompliance while performing a stunning

effectiveness evaluation of the captive bolt

stunning of the suspect pen animals.  A Tyson

management support member was restraining

and captive bolt stunning the hogs in the

suspect pen which had recently been passed

on ante mortem in preparation for slaughter. 

After properly restraining a hog the captive

bolt gun was placed in what appeared to be

the proper position and the stun was

administered to the animal.  The hog

remained on the floor of the pen in a

recumbent position and did not move.  The

employee stepped away and immediately

assessed and observed the animal for signs of

consciousness.  The eyes of the hog had rolled

ventral lateral position and were oscillating.  A

sluggish spontaneous blink was observed and

immediately the team member shot the hog a

second time, which was effective in rendering

the animal unconscious with the preloaded

back up captive bolt gun that was being

carried by the back up shooter in the pen.  

The captive bolt gun #34330 appeared to be

operating normally prior to this ineffective

shot, but was shooting with a muffled sound. 

Due to this the gun was removed from service

and taken to the maintenance shop for

evaluation.  One a replacement back up device

was brought to the suspect pen the remainder

of the pen was effectively stunned under 100%

monitoring by the plant as part of their

"robust" systematic approach.

 was

present during the incident and was

immediately notified of the pending

documentation of the establishment being

noncompliant with 9 CFR 313.15(a)1.  

 was summoned to the

suspect pen as well as 

  Both and 

were notified both verbally and now in

writing of this NR of the establishment's

failure to comply with the regulatory

requirements of 9 CFR 313.15(a)1.

(b) (6)

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

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 34

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH251

201531

6N-1

No 01/16/201

5

04C02 313.15(a)(1) HATS Category: VIII Stunning Effectiveness On

January 16, 2015 at approximately 0925 hours

 observed the following

noncompliance while performing a stunning

effectiveness evaluation of the captive bolt

stunning of the suspect pen animals.  A Tyson

management member was properly

restraining and captive bolt stunning the hogs

in the suspect pen which had recently been

passed on ante mortem in preparation for

slaughter.  After properly restraining a hog the

captive bolt gun was placed in what appeared

to be the proper position.  At the same time

the stun was being administered the hog

reared its head and hit the captive bolt gun on

the pen wall causing the shot to deflect

toward the right side of the forehead.  The hog

began vocalizing and was trying to get up from

the sitting position; however, the restraint was

maintained and the hog was unable to get up

and away from the shooter.  Immediately the

Tyson management support member that was

holding the pre-loaded backup captive bolt

gun moved into position and administered a

second stun that was effective in achieving

unconsciousness.  

 was present during the incident.

After allowing the hog to kick out in the pen

the observed the head of the hog

and found the account and observations of the

incident to be accurate as there was a

penetrating hole in the forehead of the hog

that appeared to be properly placed (second

shot) and a second hole immediately adjacent

to it in the skin of the forehead but the

penetrating hole through the skull was

deviated to above the right eye. Additional

corrective actions were to go into category C

for the establishment's monitoring program as

part of their "robust" systematic approach,

which includes 100% monitoring by a member

of management from the kill floor.  

also stated that the remainder of the hogs

would be placed in the bucket prior to

being stunned in order to minimize movement

and maximize restraint.  The rest of the hogs in

the suspect pens were effectively stunned. 

The gun was determined to be functioning

correctly at the time of the incident and the

cause was from the movement of the hog so

the gun was not pulled from service and

replaced prior to resuming stunning. 

was immediately notified both verbally

and now in writing with this NR of the

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

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 35

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

establishment's failure to comply with the

regulatory requirements of 9 CFR 313.15(a)1.
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 36

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH291

501362

7N-1

No 01/27/201

5

04C02 313.2,

313.30 (a)(2)

HATS Category VI-Electric Prod/Alternative

Object Use On January 27, 2015 at

approximately 0822 hours 

observed the following noncompliance in the

guillotine area of the kill drive.  While

performing ante mortem inspection around

pen 7 and pen 8 in the barn could

hear quite a bit of noise coming from the

guillotine area including the plastic bats

hitting something creating loud noises and

immediately following there was loud

vocalization from the hogs.  At this point 

 went to the back door at the guillotine

area to observe the driving process.  Upon

entering the back door observed a

Tyson team member using the plastic bat and

hitting the hogs in an effort to move them

forward to kill.  The team member struck a

hog with enough force to create excessive

excitement as evident by the loud

vocalization but not bodily injury or harm as

the hog moved away unhurt.  Immediately

after this the same team member took a step

and again struck another hog on the side and

ham area with enough force to create

excessive excitement but did not cause bodily

injury or harm to the hog.  There did not

appear to be any ill intent during this

observation.  At this time asked

the team member to stop driving the hogs and

go summon 

to the area for discussion of the issue and to

address the employee. While waiting for 

 to arrive continued to

observe the driving process upstream from the

incident and witnessed another team member

using his plastic bat and hitting the hogs

multiple times in an effort to drive the hogs

towards the irons.  The force he was using was

considered to be creating excessive excitement

in the hogs but not causing injury or harm.  

 at that time took a regulatory control

action and asked that the stunning process be

stopped until the issues could be addressed

with .  Immediately following this

 arrived and both observations were

discussed and the down hogs that were

present were properly taken care of prior to

resuming stunning operations.  

discussed what was witnessed and the team

members involved.  Immediate corrective

actions were to pull the team members

responsible out of the area and place a

supervisor in the area for further monitoring. 

The establishment also went into category C

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

(b) (6)

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

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 37

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

for their Animal Handling monitoring program

as a result of their robust systematic approach.

 was notified both verbally and now

in writing with this NR of the establishment

being in noncompliance with 9 CFR 313.2(a), 9

CFR 313.2(b), and 9 CFR 313.30(a)2.

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH261

202431

2N-1

No 02/12/201

5

04C02 313.15(a)(1) HATS Category:  VIII Stunning Effectiveness On

February 12, 2015 at approximately 0748

hours observed the following

noncompliance while performing a stunning

effectiveness evaluation of the captive bolt

stunning of the suspect pen animals.  A Tyson

management member was properly

restraining and captive bolt stunning the hogs

in the suspect pen which had recently been

passed on ante mortem in preparation for

slaughter.  After properly restraining a hog the

 captive bolt device #15952 was

placed firmly on the forehead of the hog in

what appeared to be the proper position. 

When the stun was administered the device

had a muffled discharge sound instead of a

normal sound but the bolt was discharged as

normal.  There was a penetration mark from

the bolt through the forehead skin but a clear

penetration was not observed through the

skull of the hog.  The hog went down as

expected and the team member immediately

performed an assessment for consciousness on

the hog.  The hog exhibited an open blank

stare initially but then did display a

spontaneous blink.  Following the first

stunning attempt the hog did not vocalize and

remained properly restrained.  At that time

the Tyson management support member who

was holding the pre-loaded  back

up captive bolt device and administered a

second stun, which immediately rendered the

hog unconscious.  

was present during this

incident.  Following this incident 

called for maintenance to come remove the

 from service and perform a

maintenance check on it to ensure it is

working properly.  After a replacement 

 was brought to the suspect pen the

remainder of the hogs in the pen were

effectively stunned. was notified

both verbally and now in writing with this NR

of the establishment's failure to comply with

the regulatory requirements of 9 CFR

313.15(a)1. Additional corrective actions and

preventative measures will be outlined in the

establishment's response to this NR.

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

(b) (6)

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

(b) (4)

(b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 38

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH121

503380

4N-1

No 03/04/201

5

04C02 313.2,

313.30 (a)(2)

HATS Category VI- Electric Prod/Alternative

Object Use  On March 4, 2015 at

approximately 1152 

while performing antemortem inspection in

the barn observed the following

noncompliance. Upon walking out to pen 2 in

the barn an employee was observed to be

bent over swinging a plastic bat at what

appeared to be either the wall or hogs. Upon

further observation observed

the same employee follow a hog around the

corner of pen 8 and proceed to strike the hog

with unacceptable force with a plastic bat

multiple times. The hog was attempting to run

away from the employee as he continued to

strike it. The hog ran away uninjured, but with

increased excitement. At that time 

 got the attention of

the employee to stop what he was doing and

informed that he would address

the situation with the employee. 

verbally notified of the

pending noncompliance. The employee was

instructed to stop moving hogs and wait in the

barn office until his direct supervisor could

address the issue. 

 was called out to address the

employee. At that time the employee was

counseled, received disciplinary action, and

was removed from the position of driving

hogs. In accordance with the establishment’s

robust humane handling program this location

of the barn was put into Category C

monitoring, which requires 100% monitoring

of the movement of hogs from the barn into

the kill drive. Review of video footage the

following day confirmed that the employee

did in fact strike the hog multiple times, once

including a strike to the face. The video also

confirmed the hog running away uninjured.  

Tyson Fresh Meats (244I) is noncompliant with

9 CFR 313.2(a), which states “Driving of

livestock from the unloading ramps to the

holding pens and from the holding pens to the

stunning area shall be done with a minimum

of excitement and discomfort to the animals.

Livestock shall not be forced to move faster

than a normal walking speed.” Tyson Fresh

Meats (244I) is noncompliant with 9 CFR

313.2(b), which states “Electric prods, canvas

slappers, or other implements employed to

drive animals shall be used as little as possible

in order to minimize excitement and injury.

Any use of such implements which, in the

opinion of the inspector, is excessive, is

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

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

(b) (6)

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 39

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

prohibited...” Tyson Fresh Meats (244I) is

noncompliant with 9 CFR 313.30(a)(2), which

states “The driving or conveying of the animals

to the place of application of electric current

shall be done with a  minimum of excitement

and discomfort to the animals. Delivery of

calm animals to the place of application is

essential to ensure rapid and effective

insensibility...”
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 40

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH551

303540

6N-1

No 03/06/201

5

04C02 313.1 HATS Category I-Inclement Weather On

March 6, 2015 at approximately 0850 hours

 observed the following

noncompliance while performing ante mortem

inspection and assessing the condition of the

animals in the suspect pen.  The ambient

temperature was -6 degrees Fahrenheit

according to the weather application on my

iphone and was reported to be 3 degrees

without the windchill on AccuWeather.  Upon

entering the barn at approximately 0835

 informed

 that there were 32 total head in

the main suspect pen and that he had already

after he called me at 0815 hours assessed the

hogs in the pen and all appeared to be in good

condition.  and went to

the suspect pen where all of the animals were

presented for ante mortem and the pen card

was filled out.  While performing ante mortem

in the main suspect pen observed

two separate hogs in the first 1/3 of the pen

that appeared to be stressed and adversely

affected by the extremely cold conditions. The

suspect pen was bedded with shaving and the

rest of the hogs appeared to be resting

comfortably. immediately stopped

performing antemortem and further assessed

the affected hogs.  Hog #1 was tattoo XX67,

which means it is a subject hog that went

down or was slow prior to being scaled.  It had

a body temperature of 96.6 degrees

Fahrenheit, had a very faint weak squeal, was

observed to be shivering, would not move

from left lateral recumbency, and had

frostbitten ears that were hard and stiff.  This

hog arrived with the rest of its group which

was scaled in at approximately 2254 to

2259 hours the previous night. Hog #2 was

tattoo 2704, which means it was a slow

animal that was segregated and placed in the

suspect pen after it was scaled and prior to

going in the door for slaughter.  It had a body

temperature of less than 96 degrees

Fahrenheit as it would not register on the

thermometer.  The hog was in sternal

recumbency with a hunched up appearance

and would not move when prodded.  This

animal was also observed to be shivering, not

very alert, and had frostbitten ears that were

hard and stiff.  This hog arrived with the rest of

its group which was scaled in at approximately

2235 hours the previous night. was

immediately notified verbally of the

noncompliance and asked to summon 

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 41

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

 and 

 to the suspect

pen for further discussion.  then

proffered corrective actions to promptly plant

condemn and euthanize the two hogs to

which agreed and allowed the

designated trained yards employees to come

shoot the two hogs with the captive bolt gun. 

 came to the suspect pen and 

discussed the issue with him.  The two

hogs were effectively euthanized and removed

from the pen prior to antemortem resuming. 

The remainder of the hogs were antemortem

inspected and passed for slaughter. 

and were notified both verbally

and now in writing with this NR of the

establishment's failure to comply with the

regulatory expectations of 9 CFR 313.1(c). The

issue of assessing the conditions of both the

suspect pen in general and the overall

condition of the animals placed in the suspect

pen to be held for an extended period of time,

like overnight, was previously discussed with

the establishment at the weekly meeting on

January 6, 2015.  also inquired

with , who is covering the night shift

and she stated that upon the completion of

kill all of the hogs in the barn appeared to be

in good condition.

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

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

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 42

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH201

403251

7N-1

No 03/17/201

5

04C02 313.15(a)(1) HATS Category: VIII Stunning Effectiveness 

 On March 17, 2015 at approximately 1150

while observing stunning of hogs in the

suspect pen, observed the

following noncompliance. Two employees

properly restrained a hog with a sort board.

The primary shooter placed the captive bolt

gun to the skull of the hog and activated the

gun. After the gun went off the hog began

vocalizing. The backup shooter

immediately noticed that the hog was not

effectively stunned. The preloaded backup gun

he was holding was used to immediately apply

a second shot, which rendered the hog

unconscious. The primary shooter explained

that he could tell the gun did not fire normally

stating that the bolt did not penetrate the

skull. Inspection of the skull after the hog was

stunned revealed proper placement of the

captive bolt gun with one complete hole

penetrating the skull and an adjoining crescent

shaped marked from the bolt penetrating only

the forehead skin. The captive bolt gun was

taken out of service to be inspected and

serviced by maintenance and was replaced

with an additional gun. 

 was called out to the

barn following the incident. He was notified

verbally and now in writing with this NR of the

establishment’s failure to comply with the

regulatory requirements of 9 CFR 313.15(a)1.

At that time the barn was placed into Category

C status, which requires 100% monitoring of

the stunning process.

(b) (6)

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 43

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH451

503292

0N-1

No 03/20/201

5

04C02 313.15(a)(1) HATS Category: VIII Stunning Effectiveness On

March 20, 2015 at approximately 1351 while

observing stunning of hogs in the suspect pen,

 observed the following

noncompliance. Two employees properly

restrained a hog with a sort board. The

primary shooter placed the captive bolt gun to

the skull of the hog and activated the gun,

which made an abnormal muffled sound. After

the gun went off the hog began vocalizing. The

backup shooter immediately noticed that the

hog was not effectively stunned. The

preloaded backup gun he was holding was

used to immediately apply a second shot,

which rendered the hog unconscious. The

primary shooter explained that he could tell

the gun did not fire normally stating that the

bolt did not penetrate the skull. Inspection of

the skull after the hog was stunned revealed

proper placement of the captive bolt gun with

one complete hole penetrating the skull. The

captive bolt gun was taken out of service to be

inspected and serviced by maintenance and

was replaced with an additional gun

 was called out to

the barn following the incident. He was

notified verbally and now in writing with this

NR of the establishment’s failure to comply

with the regulatory requirements of 9 CFR

313.15(a)1. At that time the barn was placed

into Category C status, which requires 100%

monitoring of the stunning process.

(b) (6)

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 44

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH231

703152

4N-2

No 03/24/201

5

04C02 313.15(a)(1) HATS Category: VIII Stunning Effectiveness 

 On March 24, 2015 at approximately 1403

while observing stunning of hogs in the

suspect pen, observed the

following noncompliance. Two employees

restrained a hog with a sort board. The

primary shooter placed the captive bolt gun

(#11) to the skull of the hog and activated the

gun, which made an abnormal muffled sound.

After the gun went off the hog began

vocalizing. The hog got up from its sternal

position and moved away from the shooters. A

member of management was able to

immediately restrain the hog into the 

bucket which was located directly next to the

hog. At that time the preloaded backup gun

that the secondary shooter was holding was

used to immediately apply a second shot,

which rendered the hog unconscious.

Inspection of the skull after the hog was

stunned revealed proper placement of the

captive bolt gun with one complete hole

penetrating the skull. Removal of the skin over

the skull revealed one complete hole into the

skull with one adjacent crescent shaped

indentation of the skull. The captive bolt gun

(#11) was taken out of service to be inspected

and serviced by maintenance and was

replaced with an additional gun. At that time

A requested a

meeting with 

 and Plant Manager Wayne Kies prior to

proceeding with stunning of the remainder of

the hogs in the suspect pen.  

 was present at the

time of the incident and was notified verbally

and now in writing with this NR of the

establishment’s failure to comply with the

regulatory requirements of 9 CFR 313.15(a)1.

A similar NR was documented earlier in the

day on 3/24/15 NR#GEH5614032824N/1.

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

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

(b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 45

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH561

403282

4N-1

No 03/24/201

5

04C02 313.15(a)(1) HATS Category:  VIII Stunning Effectiveness On

March 24, 2015 at approximately 0850 hours

 observed the following

noncompliance while performing a stunning

effectiveness evaluation of the captive bolt

stunning of the suspect pen animals.  Upon

completion of ante mortem inspection the pen

contained all of the animals that had passed

and two hogs that were condemned on ante

mortem.  A team of two designated trained

Tyson management support members were in

the suspect pen to captive bolt the animals. 

Beginning with the two condemned hogs, the

team members loaded two 

and proceeded by effectively stunning the first

hog and moved to the second hog.  This hog

was in lateral recumbency and showing signs

of respiratory compromise.  When the first

stun was administered the hog was properly

restrained and the gun (#6) sounded as if it

fired appropriately, but the hog began to

vocalize.  The back-up shooter holding the

pre-loaded back-up device immediately

administered a second stun to the hog and

effectively rendered the hog unconscious. 

 was present

during the incident. Once it was safe, the head

of the hog was examined for placement and

penetration of the skull by and 

.  It was observed that there were two

holes in the forehead of the hog.  One hole

was slightly displaced to the left of center

while the other hole was in the proper

location.  The hole that was slightly to the left

had a corresponding hole in the skull that did

not completely penetrate and was angled to

the right toward center and slightly upward. 

The hole in the center of the forehead has a

corresponding hole in the skull directly behind

it that was fully penetrating. 

was summoned to the suspect

pen at this time.  After a brief discussion about

the incident, gun #6 was

removed from service and another back-up

device was brought to the suspect pen in order

to stun the remaining hogs.  The remainder of

the hogs in the pen were effectively stunned

with one shot.  The establishment entered into

Category C for their RACE category and

increased monitoring will occur for the

timeframe specified in the establishment's

program. and were

notified both verbally and now in writing with

this NR of the establishment's failure to

comply with the regulatory requirements of 9

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

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

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (4) (b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 46

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

CFR 313.15(a)1. A similar NR

#GEH2014032517 was documented on March

17, 2015.  This NR is still pending

establishment response.

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH571

104350

7N-1

No 04/07/201

5

04C02 313.15(a)(1) HATS Category: VIII Stunning Effectiveness 

 On April 20, 2015 at approximately 1126

while observing stunning of slow hogs in pen

8B, observed the

following noncompliance. Two employees

properly restrained a hog with a sort board.

The primary shooter placed the captive bolt

gun to the skull of the hog. The hog abruptly

threw its head back which caused the gun to

fire the bolt through the skull at an angle that

went towards the nasal cavity instead of the

brain.  The hog immediately began to vocalize.

The backup shooter immediately noticed that

the hog was not effectively stunned. The

preloaded backup gun he was holding was

used to immediately apply a second shot,

which rendered the hog unconscious. A 

was notified verbally

and now in writing with this NR of the

establishment’s failure to comply with the

regulatory requirements of 9 CFR 313.15(a)1.

At that time the barn was placed into Category

C status, which requires 100% monitoring of

the stunning process.  A

similar noncompliance GEH2512015316N-1

was written on January 16, 2015.

(b) (6)

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 47

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH491

205560

5N-1

No 05/05/201

5

04C02 313.2 HATS Category II-Truck Unloading On May 5,

2015 at approximately 0920 hours while

observing truck unloading at the livestock

trailer dock #1 observed the

following noncompliance.  A gooseneck trailer

with hogs on it was backed into dock #1 and

was unloading hogs upon arriving

and it was observed that the driver was using

only a hot shot prod as his means of prodding

the hogs to move off of the trailer.  The driver

was repeatedly shocking multiple animals

indiscriminately from outside of the trailer in

the attempt to get the hogs off loaded.  The

hogs were vocalizing in response to the shock

and were jumping then turning around and

exiting the trailer.  This created excessive

excitement in the hogs but did not appear to

cause bodily injury.  At this time there was no

Tyson employee present to address the issue

immediately as the dock monitor was

observing docks #5-7 unloading.  

addressed the driver and informed him that

the expectation was that the hot shot was to

be used minimally and that the current use of

the hot shot was considered more than

acceptable.  To this the driver responded by

going and retrieving the rattle paddle out of

his pick-up truck in order to continue to

unload the hogs.  informed 

 of the observation

and the conversation with the driver. 

 and both observed the

unloading process.  The driver was having

some troubles getting the pigs to off load the

trailer using the rattle paddle and proceeded

to put down the rattle paddle and pick up

again the hot shot and look through the side

of the trailer and place the hot shot on the

vulva of a gilt on the trailer and energize the

hot shot.  The gilt responded with mild

vocalization and immediately turned and

exited the trailer.  who was standing

there at the time of this observation did not

address the driver  allowing the unloading

process to continue.  At that time 

immediately stepped in and addressed the

driver again by halting the unloading process

and informing the driver of the observation

and the unacceptable nature of his hot shot

usage to which the driver replied, "I did not

know that I couldn't do that."

went on to explain the regulatory

requirements of electric prod usage to the

driver.  then went on the trailer and

unloaded the remaining hogs which calmly

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

(b) (6)

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

(b) (6)

Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 49

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH261

605370

6N-1

No 05/06/201

5

04C02 313.2 On May 6, 2015 at approximately 1408 

 (I) was performing the HATS

Category V- Handling of Suspect and Disabled

task; observing the stunning of hogs with the

captive bolt gun in the USDA Suspect Pen.  

 had successfully

stunned a hog in the southwest corner of the

pen that was lying adjacent to sub hog XX1X,

which I had suspected due to its inability to

rise on its rear legs.  No external evidence of

injury had been visible on the hog during

antemortem inspection.  While 

) and Tyson A

 continued

to stun other hogs in the suspect pen, 

) entered the suspect

pen operating the skid loader.  drove

to the southwest corner of the pen with the

machine, dropped the bucket to the floor level

and proceeded toward a dead hog and the live

Suspect Hog.  As drove the loader

forward, the back quarter/ ham area of the

Suspect Hog was pinched between the vertical

portion of the loader bucket and the wall and

was slightly raised as the loader bucket was

tilted backward.  The Suspect Hog vocalized

loudly and I stepped toward ; waving

my arms and vocalizing to get his attention.

 then lowered the bucket and backed

the loader away from the hogs.  I instructed

 to shoot the hog with the captive

bolt.  I notified the of

the non-compliance and then placed USDA

Rejected Tag B41976387 on the restrainer.  I

encountered in

the area of the stunner and informed her that

the hogs that were currently in the irons could

continue through to be stunned but all of the

animals in the guillotine area could not move

forward.  I also notified 

 that slaughter operations

were postponed pending direction from

Chicago District Office.  The District Office

determined that a non-compliance report

would be issued.  The USDA Rejected Tag was

removed at approximately 1535 and slaughter

operations resumed at 1605 for second shift.

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

(b) (6)

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

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6)(b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 50

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH061

005121

3N-1

No 05/13/201

5

04C02 313.2 HATS  Category VI At approximately 1705

hours, was

conducting observations associated with the

Humane Handling requirements during the

60-day verification for the NOS currently held

in abeyance.  was accompanied by

establishment management representatives

 and 

  A group of

approximately 10 hogs were being driven into

a single file line leading to the stunning area.

  observed the employee driving the

hogs was using a rattle bat. The employee was

striking each animal with a consistent cadence

in an attempt to move them in the desired

direction.  Some of the hogs were observed to

balk and reverse direction at this time. The

employee did not change position or make

attempts to move or redirect the animals by

any other means, and without interrupting the

cadence of the rattle bat, continued to strike

them as they turned.  The employee did not

react to the consequence of the hogs

attempting to reverse direction, and by

continuing to implement the same strategy of

driving, the employee was observed striking

two different hogs in the face with the rattle

bat.  One hog was struck just above the snout

and the other between the eyes.  

observed that no one in the immediate area

reacted to these observations, so he addressed

, identified that he had seen the

employee strike two hogs in the face with the

bat, and asked if the employee

was aware that it was not acceptable to strike

hogs in the face as a means of driving.  

 replied that the employee was

aware and immediately removed the

employee from the area.  After a brief

discussion with the employee, the employee

was returned to the area and resumed driving

animals without further incident.  9 CFR

313.2(b) specifies that “... implements

employed to drive animals shall be used as

little as possible in order to minimize

excitement and injury.  Any use of such

implements, which in the opinion of the

inspector, is excessive, is prohibited.”  Striking

animals in any sensitive area, e.g. the face,

with a rattle bat is inconsistent with the

regulatory requirements as set forth in 9 CFR

313.2(b) and considered excessive.  This has

been identified as noncompliant with the

regulatory requirements as set forth in 9 CFR

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

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

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

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 51

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

313.2(b). This NR is being linked to NR

GEH4912055605N, which was issued on May

5, 2015 and NR GEH1215033804N, which was

issued on March 4, 2015.  Both of these

previous NRs were to document

non-compliance with 9 CFR 313.2(b).

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH301

405122

8N-1

No 05/28/201

5

04C02 313.15(a)(1) HATS Category: VIII Stunning Effectiveness On

May 28, 2015, at approximately 1110 hours

EST,  observed the

following noncompliance.  The PHV observed

2 establishment employees restrain a hog

between the iron gates and a sort board. Both

employees were carrying a captive bolt gun.

The primary shooter placed the captive bolt

gun against the skull of the hog and activated

the gun.   observed the initial

stunning attempt to be ineffective as the hog

remained standing and ambulatory, walking a

few steps as the sort board restraint was

removed. There was no immediate or

determined action taken by the employees at

that time.  then walked

down the stairs from the stand where she had

viewed the initial failed stun to arrive at the

hog which was near the irons and at that

time the second stun was applied and

observed to be effective.

arrived at

the area at the same time as .

 notified of the

event and took regulatory control by applying

U.S. Reject tag #B41490113 to the back of the

restrainer. After taking the regulatory control

action, the skin was removed from the hog’s

skull which revealed 2 distinct holes through

the skin and skull. One shot was centrally

located aimed downward toward the sinus of

the hog. The other shot was centrally located

with an appropriate aim. 

notified the of the

incident and due to the nature of the incident

the District Office was called for further

collaboration.  After review of video footage

for further details the District Office

determined that a non-compliance report

would be issued.  District Office notified Plant

Manager, Mike Bryant verbally and now in

writing of the establishment's failure to

comply with regulation 9 CFR 313.15(a)(1).

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

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 52

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH101

706081

1N-1

No 06/11/201

5

04C02 313.2,

313.30 (a)(2)

HATS Category VI - Electric Prod/Alternative

Object Use On June 11, 2015 at

approximately 1635 hours while performing a

routine humane handling task and monitoring

the handling of animals in the stick area 

 observed the following

noncompliance.  Upon arrival to the stick 

 went to the top of the stairs and was

observing all aspects of the stunning process

when it was observed that the team member

stationed at the front of the irons was

indiscriminately prodding nearly every hog

into the entrance to the restrainer with the

electric prod to which some of the hogs were

observed to flinch in response.  The team

member put the prod down upon noticing 

 watching and then only used it when

the hog would not move forward after being

prodded with the brush. At that time 

 observed an area further back in the

stick that she wanted to see closer so she left

in order to get a blue frock on and then came

back into the stick area.  Once again the team

member at the front of the irons was observed

prodding nearly every hog in the entrance to

the restrainer with the electric prod.  The team

member yet again put the prod down after

noticing observing him.  

 took an immediate regulatory control

action and stopped the electrical stunning of

hogs in order to stop the movement of hogs

through the irons to the restrainer and

summoned for a supervisor to come to the

stick area, which the stunner went to get a

supervisor. 

came to the stick and 

explained her observations of the

overuse of the prod by the team member

leading to increased excitement in the hogs. 

 immediately pulled the team

member off of the irons and replaced him with

another trained team member as a corrective

action in order to fully address the situation. 

At this time released the

regulatory control action and allowed

movement of hogs through the irons and

stunning operations to resume. 

asked to review the video footage as a follow

up to the observations made.  It was observed

that the team member used the electric prod

as a primary implement for moving the hogs

through the irons on more than one occasion

for a short period of time.  The voltage of the

electric prod was also verified to be at 

Volts. was notified both verbally

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

(b) (6)

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

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 53

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

and now in writing with this NR of the

establishment’s failure to comply with

regulatory requirements of 9 CFR 313.2(a),

313.2(b), and 313.30(a)2.

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH181

607492

2N-1

No 07/21/201

5

04C02 313.15(a)(1) HATS Category: VIII Stunning Effectiveness On

07/21/2015, at approximately 22:42, during

the process of stunning of the suspect pen, the

following noncompliance was observed by 

.  The hog was

appropriately restrained at the back of the

pen, using two sort boards. The primary and

secondary shooters in position with loaded

captive bolt stunners. The primary shooter

placed the stunner on the hog’s skull and fired.

After the stunner discharged, the hog did not

vocalize, but struggled against restraint. The

two shooters and two other employees noted

that the hog was not effectively stunned.

While restraint was maintained, the secondary

shooter applied his loaded stunner to the

hog’s skull and activated it. The hog was

immediately rendered unconscious. 

Inspection of the skull revealed a crescent

shaped flap of skin in an appropriate

placement for stun. The flap of skin partially

obscured a diagonal penetration into the

frontal sinus. A second penetration, closer to

the nose, but still within appropriate

placement for stun, was noted perpendicular

to the surface of the skull. It was

concluded that the angle that the captive bolt

stunner was position against the skull changed

suddenly, during the shot. Plant Manager

Kelly Reed was called out to the barn after this

occurred. He was notified verbally and now in

writing with this NR of the establishment’s

failure to comply with regulatory

requirements of 9 CFR 313.15(a)1. At that

time, the captive bolt stunner was sent to

maintenance for evaluation. The barn was

placed in Category C status, requiring 100%

monitoring of the stunning process. 

was told that the employee would be

retrained.

(b) (6)

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 54

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH361

507262

3N-1

No 07/23/201

5

04C02 313.2 HATS Category II—Truck Unloading On July

23, 2015 at approximately 0740 hours while

observing truck unloading 

observed the following noncompliance.  Hogs

were being unloaded in both docks #6 and #7

when the driver in dock 6 stated that he had

one hog in the nose of the trailer that he could

not get out.  A Tyson management member

from the barn went onto the trailer to assist so

 went outside to observe the

unloading process from outside the trailer and

to assess the condition of the hog as the group

had a number of stressed animals. 

Immediately after the hog was moved out of

the nose of the trailer heard the

driver in dock #7 raising his voice with

frustration to the hogs while unloading the

bottom nose section.  then

observed the driver open the man gate beside

the ramp that went to the top deck and a hog

was driven off and approximate 3 ft. deck from

the nose onto the hogs in belly of the trailer

without injury.  The hog did not appear to be

hurt and did not fall to the bottom of the

trailer.  immediately had the dock

monitor stop the driver from unloading his

trailer in order to address the incident.  

 was

summoned to the area by who

discussed her observations.  

immediately summoned 

 to dock #7 to discuss the

incident.  Immediate corrective actions were

to not allow the driver to unload the

remaining hogs off of the trailer but rather

have the hogs unloaded by Tyson team

members. was notified both

verbally and in writing with this NR of the

establishment’s failure to comply with the

regulatory requirements of 9 CFR 313.2

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

(b) (6)

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

(b) (6)

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 55

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH271

608471

2N-1

No 08/11/201

5

04C02 313.2 HATS Category III - Water and Feed Availability

On August 11, 2015 at approximately 0650

hours observed the following

noncompliance while performing

ante-mortem inspection prior to the start of

slaughter operations.  Upon approaching pen

8 it was observed on the west side of the isle

in 8B that there was little to no empty space in

the pen and there were multiple hogs that

were lying on top of others with a couple

beginning to rise and/or stand up.  The east

side of the alley in 8A there was an

approximately 8-10 foot circle where the

sprinklers were spraying that was empty floor

space and many hogs of the hogs were piled

on top of each other as well.  Upon arousal the

hogs spread out and comfortably filled the

pen.  The hogs in pen 8 were the first pigs to

arrive at the establishment the previous night

that were held overnight for the next day of

slaughter.  was walking

with in order to unlock the pens

and placed the signed pen cards on the pens. 

 informed of her

observations and explained that not only was

pen 8B overcrowded to the extent that the

hog in the furthest corner would not be able

to freely access the water trough, which had

pigs lying on top of it, but that the pigs had

been held overnight in this overcrowded state

and there fore were not provided adequate

room to lie down without lying on top of one

another.  It was also discussed that there was

not enough room in 8A to alleviate the

overcrowding. immediate

corrective actions were to unlock and drive the

hogs out of pen 8 to slaughter in order to

alleviate the overcrowding issue.  

then signed the pen card for ante-mortem and

verified the hogs were driven to kill. Again at

approximately 1020 hours and 

were walking the barn performing

ante-mortem inspection and upon arriving at

pen 7 it was observed that the same type of

overcrowding issues were present in 7B.  At

this time though 7A was not overcrowded and

had ample space to move a portion of the pigs

across the isle in order to alleviate the

overcrowding to ensure free access to water. 

Upon verification of moving the hogs

across the isle and shutting the gates to the

pen again signed the pen card for

pen 7. It was also discussed that there was a

previous MOI issued on March 27, 2015 for

the same incident of overcrowding in the pens

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

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 56

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

observed at ante-mortem that had been held

overnight. was notified both

verbally and now in writing of this NR for the

establishment's failure to comply with the

regulatory requirements of 9 CFR 313.2(e).

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH120

908062

6N-1

No 08/25/201

5

04C02 313.30(a)(1),

313.30(a)(3),

313.30(b)(3)

Category VIII- Stunning Effectiveness On

August 25, 2015 at approximately 1545 while

performing humane handling verification tasks

 observed the following event.

After assessing for consciousness on the rail

 looked up from the floor to

observe the hogs being electrically stunned in

the restrainer by the establishment’s stunning

operator. At that time, observed

the employee place the electrical prods onto

the hog in the front of the restrainer and the

hog responded by squealing loudly and

opening its eyes wide. The hog was also

blinking and looking around. At no time did

the hog exhibit signs of seizure or

unconsciousness (such as rigidity, eyes closed,

tongue sticking out). The employee then

placed the prods on the hog again, and the

hog was silent but continued to exhibit the

same facial expressions. At this time the hog

again did not exhibit any signs of seizure or

unconsciousness.  Finally, after the third

placement of the prods onto the hog, the hog

squeezed its eyes shut and became rigid, as is

typically seen with an appropriately

electrically stunned hog. The animal was

rendered unconscious and remained in that

state throughout shackling, hoisting, and

bleeding. Regulatory control action was taken

and U.S. Reject tag# B41976304 was applied

to the entrance of the restrainer. The district

office was notified of the event and after

further discussion was determined to not be

egregious. Regulatory control was relinquished

after receiving the following immediate

corrective actions and preventative measures:

1) Electrical stunning equipment check once

per session 2) Calibration of box that is used to

verify the electrical prod voltage/amperage

output 3) 100% monitor in place to observe

and verify proper placement of electrical prods

4) Captive bolt gun to be placed behind

electrical stunner in the event that the

electrical stunner is not functioning.  Plant

Manager Mike Bryant was notified of the

aforementioned noncompliance and the

establishment’s failure to comply with the

regulations prescribed in 9 CFR 313.30(a)(1),

313.30(a)(3), 313.30(b)(3).

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 57

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH191

709530

4N-1

No 09/04/201

5

04C02 313.15(a)(1) HATS Category VIII-Stunning Effectiveness On

September 4, 2015 at approximately 1025

hours observed the following

noncompliance while observing stunning

effectiveness while captive bolt stunning the

suspect and disabled hogs.  A hog was

properly restrained in pen 4 using two sort

boards and the captive bolt gun #7 was placed

firmly on the forehead of the hog in the proper

placement and depressed the trigger.  When

the captive bolt gun fired it sounded extremely

muffled and the hog reacted simply by

standing up, but was unable to move about

freely due to the proper restraint.  Upon

observation of the hog at that time it was

noted that there was a circular area of the

forehead that was bleeding in the area where

the captive bolt device was placed and

discharged.  The backup shooter who was

carrying a pre-loaded backup device

immediately moved into position and firmly

placed the captive bolt device firmly on the

forehead of the hog and effectively stunned

the hog. was

present at the time of the incident and the

observations were discussed with him.  

 at that time informed of the

noncompliance. Immediate corrective actions

were to remove the captive bolt device #7 and

have maintenance fully inspect it for proper

function and go into category C for the

establishment’s CARE program with 100%

monitoring of the affected area.  

also elected to place the hog in the dead pile

in order to fully evaluate the skull. Upon

further evaluation of the forehead skin and the

skull with the skin removed.  The skull only

had one penetration hole.  The forehead skin

had one large hole that fully penetrated and

on the upper perimeter of the hole was

another crescent shaped partial thickness

penetration.

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 58

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH071

609402

6N-1

No 09/26/201

5

04C02 313.2 HATS Category IV-Ante-Mortem On

September 26, 2015 at approximately 0640

hours while performing ante mortem

inspection and humane handling verification

tasks observed the following

noncompliance.  Upon arrival at pen 3 it was

readily observed that the hogs in pen 3A were

overcrowded.  Pen 3A was observed and all of

the hogs were lying down resting with no

free space available in the pen and

approximately 5% of the hogs were laying on

top of the other hogs.  The hogs had arrived at

the plant the previous night.  It was also

observed that the stocking density was such

that the hogs in 3A were not able to freely

access the water at all times as required by 9

CFR 313.2(e).  The total inventory in all of pen

3 was 233 head.  looked at

pen 3B and determined that there was

adequate room for the hogs in that pen to

freely access water and they had sufficient

room to lay down overnight, but there was not

enough room to accommodate the hogs that

needed to be removed from 3A to alleviate the

overcrowding.  immediately

asked  his

opinion of the stocking density of the pen. 

 agreed that the pen appeared to be

too crowded and that 3B did not have enough

room to accommodate any more hogs.  The

immediate corrective action was to drive the

pen to slaughter.  At this time 

signed the pen card for ante-mortem. 

 was notified both verbally and now

in writing of the noncompliance for the

establishment's failure to comply with the

regulatory expectations of 9 CFR 313.2(e).

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 59

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244I Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

GEH101

710490

1N-1

No 09/28/201

5

04C02 313.1 On September 28, 2015 at approximately

0655 hours while performing ante mortem

inspection  observed the following

facility noncompliance.  Upon completion of

ante mortem inspection in pens 2 through 8

 walked to the east half of the barn

to finish ante mortem inspection.  After

walking through Pen 12A went to

pen 10 to verify the appropriate repairs had

been made to the pen that were brought to

the attention of maintenance on Saturday,

September 26, 2015 in order to get it released

as an acceptable holding pen.  Upon

inspection of the center alley way gate and

steel wall observed that the

bottom round pipe on pen 10B was rusted

through and had a sharp jagged edge at the

level of the feet of the hogs.  

 was accompanying 

at the time was immediately made aware of

the observations and he immediately notified

maintenance of the issue. At this time 

 applied a US Reject tag number

B41490475 to the alley gate that separated

pen 10 and 11 until the proper repairs could

be made to the pipe. was notified

both verbally and now in writing with this NR

of the establishment's failure to comply with

the regulatory requirements of 9 CFR 313.1(a).

9 CFR 313.1(a) states in part, "Livestock pens,

driveways and ramps shall be maintained in

good repair.  They shall be free from sharp or

protruding objects which may, in the opinion

of the inspector, cause injury or pain to the

animals."

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

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

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 60

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M717M Smithfield

Farmland

Corp.

UYI200

810012

3N-1

No 10/22/201

4

04C02 313.2 At approximately 1715 hours on 10/22/2014

while conducting Humane Handling

verifications at Smithfield/Farmland, 

 observed a truck driver using excessive

force with his rattle paddle while unloading

market hogs. observed the hogs

herding together on the upper deck ramp and

the truck driver hitting the hogs with excessive

force in order to get them to move down the

ramp. In frustration, the truck driver stepped

back and then attempted to move the hogs

again with excessive force. When the hogs still

resisted moving down the ramp the truck

driver yelled for help to the establishment

employee who was tattooing the hogs at the

exit to the trailer. At this time the employee

entered the trailer and assisted the driver in

moving the hogs down the ramp. The driver

then entered the lower section of his trailer

and began moving hogs. A group of

approximately 10 to 12 hogs herded together

and moved away from the driver. The driver

then began hitting the hogs with excessive

force on the backs again. When they would

not move toward the off ramp, he appeared to

single out one hog which he began beating on

the head and face with his paddle in a violent

manner causing the affected hog and the

entire group to vocalize loudly. As soon as 

 witnessed this behavior he

immediately went to the scale house to inform

a management representative of the truck

driver’s actions. All unloading chutes were

subsequently rejected with US Rejected tags

numbered B43279551-554 and B43279547

for a temporary halt to livestock unloading

until the appropriate USDA authorities could

be reached for consultation and decision

making. Following direction from the Chicago

District DVM-S and humane handling subject

matter expert, , and the fact

that no hogs suffered bodily injury, a decision

was made that the incident did not qualify as

egregious in nature. Establishment

management representatives have been

notified verbally and in writing via this

noncompliance report of the establishment’s

failure to comply with 9 CFR 313.2(a) and

313.2(b). Immediate corrective actions

included the placement of a more experienced

livestock receiving employee to act as “yard

boss” for the rest of the evening and the

appointment of a cold side supervisor to make

frequent checks throughout the night to

ensure the establishment’s livestock handling

(b) (6)

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

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 61

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

and animal welfare guidelines were being

followed by both establishment employees

and truck drivers. A truck driver incident

report detailing the driver’s actions and the

subsequent disciplinary action taken towards

the driver and his employer is pending.

Afterwards, at approximately 2030 hours, the

regulatory control was removed and the

establishment was allowed to resume

livestock unloading operations. Further

preventative measures have yet to be

discussed.

M1756

4

Indiana

Packers

Corporation

MLO29

090212

20N-1

No 02/20/201

3

04C02 313.2, 313.5 At approximately 9:30 am on February 20,

2013, I observed an inhumane handling

non-compliance. Pigs were being loaded into

the west CO2 stunner. A mechanized gate

moves the pigs into a basket within the

stunner. One pig popped his head above this

gate at the last minute. The pig then became

tightly caught by its head and throat between

the movable gate and the CO2 stunner. This

caused distress to the pig. It cried repeatedly

and showed some difficulty breathing, as the

operators of the CO2 stunner attempted

several times to release the gate. Because of

the positioning of the captured pig, it took

minutes to reverse the gate and free the pig. I

then took regulatory control and stopped the

line. I spoke with 

 and informed him of the

impending non-compliance. The plant's

immediate corrective action was to place a

man at each movable gate to monitor and

assist loading of the CO2 baskets. Kill was then

resumed. According to the Plant Manager,

Mr.Randy Fehlberg, their long term corrective

action will involve consulting with the CO2

manufacturer, , with the aim at

installing a type of overriding "quick release"

for each of the movable gates.

(b) (6)

(b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 62

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M1756

4

Indiana

Packers

Corporation

MLO25

121110

05N-1

No 11/04/201

3

04C02 313.2 At approximately 1405 on 11-4-13 while

observing stunning/sticking operations I

noticed a previously stunnned hog delivered

from the suspect pen to the landing between

the East and West CO2 stunners had started to

move. Establishment staff also observed the

movement and hesitated to release the hog to

the shackle belt. After waiting 15-20 seconds

while the hog continued to move they allowed

it to proceed onto the belt wherein I observed

rhythmic breathing, slow controlled

movement of the legs and blinking of the eyes.

At that time the shacklers ceased shackling,

stopped the belt and proceeded to observe the

hog. When they failed to shoot the hog a

second time I motioned them to do so. At this

time approximately 30 to 40 seconds had

passed since the delivery to the landing. I then

motioned for them to shoot the hog a second

time by placing my index finger to my

forehead. They said they couldn’t shoot it

again because it had already been shot. While

waking in the directin of the shackle belt, I

told them verbally to shoot it. The employee

then started to place the captive bolt gun just

behind the right eye of the hog at which point

I instructed him to stop and use the captive

bolt gun according the establishment policy

which dictates placement at the point

intersection of two imaginary lines drawn

from the base of the ear to the medial canthus

of the opposite eye. The employee then shot

the hog a second time at which point the hog

continued to breath but had ceased blinking.

When the cornea was touched, there was a

positive corneal response at which point I

instructed a third shot to the head. A

supervisor was in place at that time and

touched the hog’s skull at the proper point.

The employee then shot the hog a third time

at which point the hog commenced

uncontrolled spastic leg motion typically seen

after a properly placed shot with a captive

bolt. At this point, because the hog was still

moving, the supervisor instructed the use of

the electrical stunner. This apparatus was

placed, but failed to activate. By that time the

hog had ceased to move and failed to respond

to corneal stimulation. Satisfied the hog was

rendered unconscious, I informed

 I determined that the incident

constituted a humane handling violation and

took regulatory control of the stunning

operation by placing USDA Reject/Retain tags

(B34 786709 and B34 786710) on the gate to

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 63

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

each stunner. After consultation with superiors

at the Chicago District Office and

consideration of the establishment’s robust

systematic approach to humane handling and

slaughter program, it was decided to issue a

non-compliance report to allow the

establishment to perform appropriate

corrective actions.

M1756

4

Indiana

Packers

Corporation

MLO18

141113

11N-1

No 11/11/201

4

04C02 313.2 At approximately 1445 on 10-11-14, the

following noncompliance was observed by 

, in the suspect pen at

Indiana Packers, Inc. of Delphi, IN. During the

process of performing ante mortem inspection

of suspects in the pen, it was noted there were

two hogs missing back numbers and tattoos. 

During the course of the conversation with

 regarding the need for

maintaining accurate complete identification

of all hogs in the suspect pens at all times, one

of the barn employees placed the wrong

number and wrong tattoo on one of the hogs

in question.  At that time, informed

 and of the

non compliance with 9CFR 309.2(a). 

 then informed that

the corrective action was to destroy the

improperly identified hog and send it to

rendering which was completed immediately.

M1756

4

Indiana

Packers

Corporation

MLO41

211240

19N-1

No 12/19/201

4

04C02 313.1 On 12/19/14, at approximately 9:15 pm, 

 observed the following

non-compliance while inspecting the

alleyways in the east (old) barn.   While

watching the handling of livestock, I noticed a

pig slip in the area of Alleyway 3.  Observing

the alleyway flooring more closely,

I noticed, contained in the wet pig waste,

multiple pig hoof prints, and multiple pigs

(>10) had slipped and lost their footing.  US

Reject tags # B34785462 was placed on

Alleyway 3.  ,

was informed of the impending

non-compliance with 9 CFR 313.1 (b).

(b) (6)

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

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 64

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M1756

4

Indiana

Packers

Corporation

MLO49

160150

05N-1

No 01/05/201

5

04C02 313.2 On 01/05/14, observed

the following non-compliance while

performing ante-mortem inspection of pens

on the odd numbered side of the old

(north) barn.  At approximately 5:00 pm, I was

signing pen cards in the suspect pen.  In the

odd side alleyway, a pig 30 feet from the scale

was crying loudly and shaking.  It eventually

sat down and quieted.  I motioned to one of

the IPC employees that there was a down

animal.  Within a few minutes, a different IPC

livestock handler encouraged this downed

animal to stand back up and walk with the

other ambulatory Lot 13 pigs.  Shortly

thereafter, that same pig walked only another

40 feet before it was again crying loudly, only

to collapse down before quieting.  As I then

walked further along the odd side alleyway,

I observed another down pig from Lot 13.   As

these two were left behind in the alleyway,

the remaining ambulatory Lot 13

pigs were driven into Pen 31.  The livestock

driver  then closed that pen door and opened

Pen 35.  After a minute or two, I finished

signing pen cards on that side of the barn, and

noticed that without clearing the alleyway of

those non-ambulatory pigs, another load of

approximately 30 pigs emerged from the scale

and  were walking toward Pen 35, over and

around the two downers.   

 was informed of  the

non compliance with 9 CFR 313.2(d)2. 

It states, "Disabled animals and other animals

unable to move shall be separated from

normal ambulatory animals and placed in the

covered pen provided for in 9CFR 313.1(c)."  

Livestock movement was halted, as the two

non ambulatory pigs were picked up by the

placed in the downed animal pen,

and tattooed B213.

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 65

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M1756

4

Indiana

Packers

Corporation

MLO56

080448

08N-1

No 04/08/201

5

04C02 313.2 On 4/8/15, observed the

following humane handling non-compliance

while performing HATS category V (Handling

of Suspect and Disabled livestock) in the short

alley of the West CO2 Stunner.  At

approximately 9:15am, I noticed a down pig in

the short alley.  Lying in the center of the

alley, his rear legs were splayed out and he

had open mouth panting.  He was alone in the

alley.  The rear gate to the alley was open,

awaiting a new arrival of 30 pigs for

movement onto the stunner.  I inquired as to

the condition of this pig, remarking that it

looked like a "downer."  The IPC employee

directly responsible for this area commented

back to me that the pig had just " a minute

ago" been walking around,  and suggesting

that he would indeed get up as soon as the

next group of hogs went moving through the

alley.  He did not, despite being encouraged

gently with the rattle paddle.  As he was

crowded by the others, the downed pig did sit

up but moved only his front feet.  Immediately

after that group of ambulatory hogs moved

on,  further movement of pigs into this alley

was stopped. The down pig was loaded into

the hand cart and removed manually from the

alley.    ,

was informed of the non-compliance with 9

CFR 313.2(d)1.  It states, " Disabled animals

and other animals unable to move shall be

separated from normal ambulatory animals

and placed in the covered pen provided for in 

9 CFR 313.1(c)."

(b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 66

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M1756

4

Indiana

Packers

Corporation

MLO06

060818

03N-1

No 07/31/201

5

04C02 313.2 On 07/31/15, observed

the following humane handling

non-compliance while performing HATS

category VI (alternative object use after

ante-mortem inspection has occurred) in the

long alley of the East CO2 stunner.  At

approximately 2:15 pm, I was standing near

the entrance to pen 31, observing the animal

handler move pigs from a pen to the CO2

stun.  It was a typical summer day, very

warm without air flow in the east end of the

old barn despite there being three operational

 fans.  The IPC animal handler broke protocol,

moving a full pen of pigs rather than the

recommended half pen (approximately 30

pigs) to the CO2 stun  alleyway.  The short

alleyway animal driver approximated the

number of pigs to place in his alley, closed his

alley gate, and started moving pigs toward the

CO2 stun.  I witnessed pigs rising up (as if

crowded for space) in the short alley, but was

not close enough to see the number of pigs in

the short alley.  Shortly thereafter, I observed

the overhead gate in the long alleyway move

east, a pig rose up on his hind feet and

became pinned between the cement wall and

the automatic gate.  By the time I walked from

one end of the barn to the other, the pig had

been freed.   I stopped kill.  The plant's

immediate corrective action was to reduce the

number of pigs entering the long alleyway in

the CO2 room to 10 for the remainder of the

day, thus allowing more space for movement

and decreasing the likelihood of pinning a

hog.  Kill was resumed.  Standing in for 

 in the barn manager's office was

informed of the non-compliance with 9 CFR

313.2(a) , and on Monday, 

, was also informed.

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 67

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M1756

4

Indiana

Packers

Corporation

MLO46

090943

30N-1

No 09/30/201

5

04C02 313.2 At approximately 7:50 am,

 observed the following humane

handling non-compliance while performing

HATS category VI- Electric Prod/Alternative

Object Use at the push gate entrance of the

west CO2 stunner. I observed the stunning

operation stopped, because approximately 5-6

inches of a pig's left rear leg was wedged

between the push gate and the adjacent wall. 

This prevented the CO2 stunner door from

closing.  This pig was lying right side down

(head included) and moaning quietly.  It

appeared very subdued making no attempt to

either right itself, retract its foot, or vocalize

loudly.  After several attempts to manually

pull the push gate back, a metal wedge was

used to release the push gate and free the

pig's leg.  There was no physical reaction from

this pig at its release or anytime thereafter.  It

continued to lay right side down, not even

lifting its head.    The CO2 machine was locked

out. The pig was captive bolt stunned where

he lay, and dragged from the.alleyway.   Kill

was resumed. It was unusual to witness such

unresponsiveness in a pig that minutes earlier

had according to the plant, "walked in the

CO2  drive alleyway."  According to the plant

at the time of the accident, the push gate was

programmed to push 880 pounds without

stopping. 

was informed of the non-compliance with 9

CFR 313.2 (b). Short term corrective actions

included reducing the push gate's resistance

from 880 to 297 pounds, reducing the gap

between the push gate and the wall where the

pig foot was wedged, and conferring with

manufacturing about specifications to

the push gate.

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

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 68

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M17D John

Morrell & Co.

WLJ151

202480

8N-1

No 02/08/201

3

04C02 313.2 At 1047 hours while performing routine HATS

monitoring for HATS Category VII the following

incident occurred. I was on the far, east side of

the room when I heard a hog vocalizing

excessively. As I came around the bottom of

the shackle table was descending

the stairs. He immediately grabbed the captive

bolt gun and proceeded up the stairs. I was

directly behind him. When I reached the top of

the stairs I observed 5 hogs in the outside push

pen. There was a single hog laying in left

lateral recumbency. The inside gate to the

Gondola (west ) was completely down

and clamped across the mid-line of the hog,

directly behind the last rib. The head and

thorax of the hog were lying on the concrete

of the last push pen. The abdomen and hind

end were in the gondola. The floor of the

gondola was 6 to 8 inches below the surface of

the outside pen floor. The hog was vocalizing

continuously and struggling to free itself from

the gate. euthanized the hog

immediately with a single shot of the captive

bolt. I condemned the hog and affixed tag

umber Z6667480 to the left ear. I also rejected

the west with tag B37285481 and the

east with tag B37285484. 

advised me that in his opinion the west 

had malfunctioned. I advised of the

Regulatory Control Action on both . I

advised him that hogs in the system should be

processed and that the barn could continue to

unload hogs.

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (4) (b) (4) (b) (4) (b) (4) (b) (4) (b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 69

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M17D John

Morrell & Co.

WLJ491

505121

0N-1

No 05/10/201

3

04C02 313.2 HATS Category V – Disabled Handling At 1430

hours while performing HATS activity in the

cripple pens, I came upon the following

non-compliance. The establishment

employees were moving a hog from the

holding area/alley exiting the shower pen to

the fatigue pen. Prior to reaching the fatigue

pen, the hog went down. This hog was in

sternal recumbancy and was panting

excessively. The hog was still not yet in the

fatigue pen. I yelled to the establishment

employee two times “Do not push the hog.”

One of the employees proceeded to push the

hog across the cement with the gate while still

in sternal recumbancy. The establishment

employee pushed the hog approximately 6-8

inches and latched the gate. Prior to this as I

approached the slow/fatigue pen with another

establishment employee, I noted that the gate

was open on the north side. The two workers

were attempting to move the fatigued hog. I

could see one worker using a pom-pom to

whip the hog. Although the hog did not object

and the action was entirely from the wrist and

forearm, I felt it was excessive because of the

degree of fatigue exhibited by this hog. I

notified of this non-compliance.

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 70

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M17D John

Morrell & Co.

WLJ561

804200

7N-1

No 04/07/201

4

04C02 313.1, 313.2 At approximately 1705 on 04-07-2014, shortly

after entering the livestock barn at M17 D to

perform ante-mortem inspection on hogs in

the slow pens, I observed the following

non-compliances : Several dozen hogs being

confined/held/penned on the first truck

unloading ramp located at the southeast

corner of the livestock barn. No active truck

unloading was occurring on the ramp and the

gate at the bottom of the truck ramp area.

was closed. 1) Several hogs near the top of the

ramp were observed getting legs caught in an

approximate 5ft x 2 ft x 3 ft portable

aluminum barrier which was also present on

the ramp.The barrier was laying on its side in

the middle of the ramp near the top of the

ramp area. 2) No water access for hogs being

held on the ramp. 

 was notified and promptly removed

the portable aluminum barrier from the top of

the ramp area. Several minutes later Plant

Manager Frank Kern and 

 arrived to the barn. At this time I

informed Plant Manager Frank Kern, 

 and 

 that I would be issuing a written

non-compliance report for the above findings.

All hogs held on the ramp were subsequently

relocated to a holding pen with water a short

time later. The findings listed above represent

non-compliance under CFR 313.1 and 313.2.

(b) (6)(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 71

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M17D John

Morrell & Co.

WLJ500

004072

9N-1

No 04/28/201

5

04C02 313.2 On 04-28-2015 at approximately 2210, the

following HATs Category II- Truck Unloading

non-compliance  was found at

Establishment  # M17D: While leaving the

administration building and proceeding to the

hog barn for ante-mortem checks at  2210 on 

Tuesday 04-28-2015 at Est. M17D,  I heard

repeated and unusual loud vocalizations

coming from hogs being unloaded from one of

several nearby hog trailers. I changed direction

and headed to the location of the

vocalizations . The vocalizations continued

and appeared to be coming from a trailer

being unloaded at the first truck ramp on the

southeast end of the hog barn. As I

approached within 10 ft of the driver's side

(east side) of the trailer, I could see hogs on

the second deck were piled and the

driver repeatedly striking hogs along the back 

and head with a plastic rattle can.  I banged on

the side of the trailer and shouted to the

driver in attempt to get him to stop. The driver

continued to drive and hit hogs with the rattle

can.    quickly appeared,

banged several times on the trailer and

shouted to the driver to stop. The driver then

stopped. I told the driver  I had observed him

hitting hogs on the head and back with the

rattle can and that it was not acceptable. The

driver replied "oh" and then resumed to drive

hogs from the trailer while hitting the side of

the trailer with the rattle can.  Under my

direction,  immediately stopped

further hog unloading and contacted 

 I then walked over to the

cab of the truck and noted the company name

 on the driver door and also on the front

top name plate of the trailer. At approx. 2215

 came over and I

informed him of my observations. 

 immediately contacted Plant

Manager Frank Kern. Mr. Kern then met us at

the southeast end of the barn.. I also informed

Mr. Kern of my observations and asked that

the driver be called over to discuss the matter.

When the driver arrived to where we were

standing, Mr. Kern asked him if he had

unloaded at M17D before. The driver replied

that  he had. The driver acknowledged he had

struck hogs with the rattle can and said he

thought it was permissible  to use the rattle

can to do so if they were balking. I told him it

was not acceptable to strike them on the head

and backs as I had observed. The driver then

stated that he normally aimed for neck,

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 72

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

between the shoulder blades. He further

stated that he was unaware that he had hit

any in the face, and that he would never

intend to do so. Barn Manager stated that it

was only acceptable to tap them on the rear

end with the rattle can.  At approximately

2245 I gave permission for company personnel

to finish unloading the trailer. No further

issues were observed with hogs from the

load (tattoo #4931).  I subsequently requested

to view the plastic rattle can used by the

driver. The rattle can used was a 2.5 gallon

square plastic container measuring approx. 9

inches wide x 9 inches deep and 8 inches high

and contained several BBs. At my further

request, a weight of the rattle can was

obtained and the weight was found to be

approx. .65 lbs. I informed Mr. Kern that I

would be issuing a non-compliance based on

my findings/observations in regards to the

driver's handling of hogs.
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 73

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M3W Swift Pork

Company

GJC212

207370

3N-1

No 07/03/201

3

04C02 313.1, 313.2 HATS Task II On 07-03-13 while observing

truck unloading half way up the walk way

between Unloading ramps 4 and 5, I heard

extreme vocalization and excitement. At 1943,

I observed the driver in the trailer in alley #4

raising the rattle paddle higher than (above)

shoulder height to drive hogs out of the trailer.

When I arrived at the entrance of the trailer

and ramp, was also observing

the same trailer. I informed that

striking hogs with the paddle swung from

above shoulder height was unacceptable

because it was excessively exciting the hogs.

He did not agree with what I had witnessed.

While continuing to observe this continuous

rattle paddle motion, I saw the paddle was

landing near the hogs’ heads and neck area on

numerous hogs. The hogs were extremely

excited and vocalizing while becoming

confused on which direction they were to go.

There were about 25-30 hogs being unloaded

from this area of the trailer at this point and

the driver was striking the middle and last

hogs, in the group, closest to the front of the

trailer. The front hogs were not moving toward

the ramp for unloading, they were standing

still while the hogs behind them were being

hit with the rattle paddle. The number of

times the cluster of middle and back hogs

were being hit repeatedly was excessive to the

point of backward movement by the hogs

being struck with the rattle paddle. As soon as

the paddle landed on one hog, the driver

would immediately raise it above his shoulder

level and strike down on the hogs in the

middle or back of the group of hogs. I pointed

out that the movement and height of the

rattle paddle was still being used by the driver.

I also observed and stated to 

that the same driver was using the rattle

paddle sideways hitting the hogs’ legs to get

them to move toward the trailer ramp. Again,

the hogs that were being struck in the legs

with the raddle paddle long edge (rather than

the flat side) were vocalizing, backing up and

confused on where to move to in the trailer.

 statement to this action of

driving hogs was: “I think he is doing a good

job”. I explained that the chopping motion of

striking hogs' legs with the edge of the paddle

was excessive. (The force of the paddle is

greater when on edge; the legs are more

susceptible to pain, as there is less fat.) I also

informed him that striking hogs with the edge

of the paddle was not acceptable according to

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 74

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

the company’s humane handling program. 

 disagreed, stating “That is not in our

program”. After further review of JBS Standard

Operating Procedure; Handling Tool Use;

Summary: 

This is taken from the JBS “A

Systematic Approach to Humane Handling and

Slaughter.” While observing alley 4, I heard a

lot of vocalization coming from alley #5. I

walked over to observe the unloading in this

alley. I observed a gap between the trailer and

the ramp. I watched hogs getting their feet

caught up in the U shaped gap because the

ramp was too high against the trailer. One hog

lost its footing and slid down on the front of

its leg because its foot was caught in the gap. I

motioned for to come over to

this alley and I told him about the uneven

ramp next to the trailer and that it was

causing the hogs’ feet to get caught in it and

lose footing. At this time, the driver had

ceased driving hogs while I explained the

Non-Compliance to . 

said that this was no different than

something in a trailer and I responded for him

to fix the U gap. walked through

the gates to lower the ramp 2-4 inches so it

was even with the trailer. The driver

proceeded to drive the hogs out of the trailer

with no incidents of any feet slipping in the

area they had previously been getting caught

up in. Since the ramp was lowered, the hogs

were able to easily walk from the trailer onto

the ramp with no incidents because there was

no U gap. I thanked for lowering

the ramp. (Hogs could have been injured (ex:

hoofs torn, legs broken, etc.) by the gap.) I

notified and of

the pending Non-Compliance report around

2240 hours.

(b) (6)

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

(b) (6)

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

(b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 75

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M3W Swift Pork

Company

GJC260

810242

2N-1

No 10/22/201

3

04C02 313.2 At approximately 08:00 I was observing truck

unloading by unloading ramp #1 half way up

the runway. At the time there were two JBS

employees loading the south scale. I started to

hear hogs vocalize, and turned toward the

noise and proceeded to the south scale. When

I arrive by the entrance to the office door for

the yards. I observed two JBS employees using

their rattle paddles trying to get all the hogs

onto the scale. I observed 10 to 15 hogs piggy

backing on top of one another so they could

close the gate to the scale. The hogs remained

over crowded and in a plie condition over the

limitationsof the scaleuntil after the state

weigher sounded the bell indicating the hogs

were weighed and ready to be moved off the

scale. When the bell was sounded, the hogs

started increasing the piling intensity and

about 30 head were climbing on top of one

another. This resulted in a increasing intensity

of vocalization and and the hogs to become

excited and in a state of discomfort. This state

of discomfort and excitement was diminshed

when the hogs were released from the scale. I

proceeded to talk with the two JBS employees

about limiting the amount of hogs they put

onto the scale. During my discusstion with

them I decided to take my observations to

their management. I then proceed into the

office to get the .

As I walked through the Yard office I asked the

state weigher how many hogs were on that

last draft present to the scale. He indicated 66

head were on that last draft which was

observed. This condition of overcrowding

created an excessive amount of vocalization

and discomfort to these animals. 

corrective action was to hold the south scale

to a limit of 50 hogs per draft.

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 76

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M3W Swift Pork

Company

GJC542

210303

0N-1

No 10/30/201

3

04C02 313.2 On 10-30-2013 around 1824 while observing

driving of hogs and good footing, I observed a

stressed hog sitting on its rear end in the

sitting position in the area directly after the

“old” tattoo station. The hog had

labored/open-mouth breathing and was

grunting loudly. About 30-40 hogs were

scattered around this hog in the same area

waiting to be driven into holding pen 2C and

2B. I observed the South scale to see if there

were any other stressed hogs in this lot. I did

not observe any more stressed hogs on the

scale. While I was observing the scale, the hog

driver was driving the hogs into holding pen

2C (from South to North). When I returned to

holding pen 2C, the hog driver was attempting

to close the South gate with the stressed hog

leaning up against the South gate. The hog

driver used some force, with the gate, to

complete latching the gate. The stressed hog

was then in standing position, with

labored/open-mouth breathing and loud,

grunting vocalization. I continued watching

this particular hog and it proceeded to lie

down sitting on the back legs with the front

legs outstretched. The labored breathing and

grunting continued. I heard more vocalization

further up (North) in the holding pen, so I

walked up to the middle of holding pen 2C.

The hog driver drove the hogs up from the

back of the gate and was 1⁄4 way to the front of

2C, when I observed the last hog, which was

the stressed hog, being tapped with the rattle

paddle a few times to encourage continued

movement. The hog was stopped and looked

as though it wanted to sit down with

labored/open-mouth breathing. I explained to

the hog driver about not forcing stressed hogs

to walk and/or drive them with the rest of the

hogs when they are down (stressed) and have

labored breathing. The NonCompliance was

failure to move animals with minimum

discomfort 9CFR 313.2(a). At this same time,

the rest of the hogs (approx. 60-75), were

walking up to the 2B holding pen and 1⁄2 way

up, I noticed the other vocalizing hog was one

with a broken or injured left front leg. This hog

was trying to keep up with the rest, while

bearing NO weight on the left front leg. This

hog hobbled a short way and then fell down

on its belly with three legs splayed, except the

injured leg/shoulder, lying backwards along

side the abdomen (due to no control). When

this hog was on its belly, other hogs were

stumbling over it trying to move to holding
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 77

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

pen 2B. There were 4-6 hogs that had stepped

on its feet and one stepped on its neck/head

area. This hog continued slight vocalization

while remaining on its belly. The

NonCompliance was failure of 9CFR

313.2(d)(1) to separate a disabled animal. The

animal was vocalizing in discomfort and was

stepped on when it went down by other

animals. I took a regulatory control action, I

applied U.S. Retained tag B30694148, and

stopped any further movement of animals in

this holding pen. I motioned to the yard’s

office window for 

 I explained the entire situation to

 and told him that this would be

documented as Non-Compliance and he would

need to come up with a plan to humanely

move these two slow hogs. 

segregated and moved (by walking with and

alongside) the hog with the injured

leg/shoulder outside the North gate of holding

pen 2B. loaded it in the skid

loader. I saw the hog driver ensure the other

hogs walked around and did not crowd this

one. then ran the rest of the

hogs to holding pen 2B and shut the South

gate. A skid loader came to pick up this

stressed hog and put it in the West slow pen

area. Around 1840 hours, U.S. Retained tag

B30694148 was removed after both hogs were

removed from holding pen 2B and 2C.

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 78

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M3W Swift Pork

Company

GJC272

112401

8N-1

No 12/18/201

3

04C02 313.1, 313.2 HATS Category 8 While performing a HATS

task Category 8 (Stunning),on December 18,

2013 at 1746 hours, I entered the stick area

from the area of the chemical storage area and

noticed that there were numerous empty

shackles on the bleed chain. When I arrived at

the south CO2 area I observed 

using the rattle paddle on an animal

that had its leg/foot stuck in a void, which

appeared to be the south east track for the

upraised basket gate. The animal attempted to

move when prodded with the paddle but

could not free its leg/foot. When the animal

moved, I observed a cut and some blood in the

area of the leg at the joint of the foot, at the

point of entrapment. was about

to prod the animal with the paddle again

when I told him to stop, and explained that

any further attempts would result in a

suspension for egregious humane handling.

 then used the captive bolt gun to

render the animal insensible. After the animal

was knocked, it began to convulse and the

foot/leg freed itself. The animal was then

pushed into the basket and normal function of

the resumed. stated that

this does happen, although infrequently, and

prodding usually will free the animal. He also

stated that he was told there was nothing that

could be done to fix the void. It is unknown at

the writing of this non compliance if there was

any previous documentation by the

Establishment of previous similar occurrences.

When and Plant

Manager Tom Hanson arrived in the area, I

explained what I had observed and that the

incident would be documented as a non

compliance. There were no verbal corrective

actions given by the Establishment. On

December 18, 2012, a noncompliance was

documented for an animal having its toes

caught by a basket of the same south

 (NR GJC5102121818N). This NR was

appealed by the Establishment and was

denied by the USDA Inspector, it is not known

if the Establishment sought additional appeals;

NR remains under appeal in PHIS.

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (4) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (4) (b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 79

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M3W Swift Pork

Company

GJC332

301140

6N-1

No 01/06/201

4

04C02 313.2 HATS Task III: On January 6, 2014, at

2253hours, I was in the area of the Canadian

slow hogs pen and noticed that the water line

with the nipple waters was inaccessible to the

approximately 12 hogs retained in the pen.

The water line to which the nipples are

attached had been moved from its original

position and had swung towards the north and

was approximately 4 1⁄2 feet above the floor. I

observed the tubular metal bumper that

protects the waters and which is normally

bolted to the floor and wall, hanging on the

pen wall panel. I also observed the guard that

holds the nipples and water line in place lying

in the corner of the slow pen. There was no

temporary container or trough in the pen that

could hold water. This is a non compliance of

9 CFR 313.2(e). I informed 

 of the non compliance. 

 immediately went to the area of the

Canadian slows pen and observed the water

line in the inaccessible position. Maintenance

was notified and at 2305 hours, the water line

was moved to its original position and the

nipple guard/retainer was secured to the wall,

allowing the hogs access to the water.

M3W Swift Pork

Company

GJC280

601050

7N-1

No 01/07/201

4

04C02 313.15 At approximately 0525 hours, on January 7,

2014, while performing ante-mortem

inspection in the slow and disabled hog pen, I

observed 38 slow hogs. I condemned one of

the hogs for signs of septicemia upon

ante-mortem inspection. I then observed 

 appropriately

position the captive bolt device on the

condemned animal. At the time of the device

application, I observed, the hog move back

away from the captive bolt as it was being

applied. This resulted in an incomplete stun.

The hog vocalized and remained fully

conscious, with normal eye movements,

normal respiration, and sat in sternal

recumbancy. immediately took

corrective actions, re-loaded the captive bolt

device, and re-applied it to the hog. This

second application of the captive bolt

rendered the animal immediately

unconscious. The inability of the first

application of the captive bolt device to

produce immediate unconsciousness is in

noncompliance with 9CFR 313.15 (a) (1).

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

(b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 80

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M3W Swift Pork

Company

GJC440

005550

8N-1

No 05/07/201

4

04C02 313.2 HATS Task: Electric prodding/Alternative

object use. At approximately 2030 of

05/07/2014, as I was walking in the large

east-west alley, I observed an employee

driving hogs from 7B up toward the old pens

1A and 2A. I observed that the employee was

walking behind a very large group of pigs

(approximately 90 to 100) and as he hit on the

backs of pigs at the back of the group, some

pigs were turning back. Other pigs had no

where to walk ahead after the employee

struck the rear most hogs, hogs jumped on

other hogs ahead of them, with the pigs

vocalizing in the stressful situation. . I tried to

get the employee's attention to stop his

behavior, but he continued hitting on the rear

most hogs, which had no where to move.

Again, hogs jumped on the backs of other hogs

in excitment. approached

me, as there were a pens which required

antemortem inspection. I told of

my observation and asked what he was going

to do to correct the situation. He said he

would talk to the employee. When I stopped

antemortem inspection at the north end of 1B,

it appeared there were at least two stressed

pigs in the holding pen 1A, which required

special handling. Regulation 313.2 (b) requires

implements used to drive animals be used as

little as possible in order to minimize

excitement and injury. Use of the rattle paddle

to hit the hogs in the back of a large group, in

an attempt to get the group to move faster,

when the group is so tightly clustered that the

animals can only jump on top of other

animals, is excessive.

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

Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 82

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M3W Swift Pork

Company

GJC300

208320

7N-1

No 08/06/201

4

04C02 313.2, 313.5 On August 6, 2014 around 2150 hours, I was

walking along the bleed chain coming out of

the boiling room entrance.  I walked toward

the CO2 area and right around the shields

from the sticking area, I heard consistent,

extremely loud, constant vocalization from a

hog.  I proceeded to the CO2 machines from

the sticking area, guided by the consistent,

extremely loud, constant vocalization.  I

looked in the first CO2 basket of the shorter

run (#1), following the consistent vocalization I

was hearing.  The sounds were not coming

from the #1 CO2 chamber run, so I proceeded

on the catwalk to observe the long run (CO2

#2).  When I arrived at the end of the catwalk

(overlooking #2 run),I observed that both the

EE’s stopped driving hogs with the automatic

gates and pointed to a hog consistently

vocalizing with open mouth, labored

breathing.  There were about seven to eight

other hogs in the same area of the run, in

between the gate in reference and the next

gate going forward to the CO2 chamber.  The

automatic gate in reference to this observation

is the third gate upon driving the hogs up to

the CO2 chamber. 

arrived and motioned for the employee (gold

helmet) operating the gate to run the gate

forward.  The hog was standing sideways

against the gate, with body shaking and had

previously been on the front knuckles and was

at this time in the standing position.  The

operator turned the gate on and then off (few

seconds), the hog did not take a step and went

down on the front knuckles.  

again motioned for the gate operator to start

the gate, when at this time the hog was on his

front knuckles being pushed by the gate.  The

gold helmet employee started and stopped

the gate quickly.  At this point, the hog was

lying down with all four legs under it.  

 once more, motioned with his hand

for the operator to turn the automatic gate on,

and I informed immediately that

he could not continue pushing this hog with

the gate.  In all of the events described above,

the hog never stopped loudly vocalizing.  The

employee did not start the gate on the third

motion from 

motioned to the other gate operator, closest

to the CO2 chamber, and the employee

retrieved and gave the bullet-proof vest and

captive bolt cylinder to 

 shot the hog, chained the front leg

and pulled the hog over to the chute in the

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

(b) (6)

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

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 83

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

middle of both of the runs to drop it on the

stunned conveyor table. Upon review of JBS

"A Systematic Approach to Humane Handling

and Slaughter" in the SOP, the section explains

the procedure to be followed for "Handling

and Segregation of Non-Ambulatory Hog",

Part D, I determined the incident was not

compliant with the establishment's SOP, as

the stated procedure was not followed.  The

Regulatory Requirements in 9CFR 313.2 and

313.5 have not been met.
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 84

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M3W Swift Pork

Company

GJC110

108360

8N-1

No 08/07/201

4

04C02 313.2 On August 7, 2014 around 2240 hours, I

observed the unloading of a trailer of hogs in

unloading chute #1.  I noticed the 

, was in the trailer

helping unload the hogs.  There was a lot of

vocalization from this trailer and that was why

I chose this trailer to observe unloading. The

driver had proceeded to start unloading the

hogs in the front belly of the trailer and I

stepped outside unloading chute #1 to observe

the front of the trailer (closest to the tractor). 

The driver was using a plastic rattle paddle to

unload the hogs.   While the driver was in the

belly of the trailer, was in the

middle of the trailer, where the hogs below

would have to climb the ramp to proceed to

chute #1 unloading dock.  The hogs in the

belly of the trailer were confused and

continued vocalizing, so I got a better view

from the holes in the side of the trailer by

getting closer in addition to the trailer being

lighted.  I observed the driver hit a hog in the

head and face area while the hog was trying to

go up the ramp to the middle of the trailer.  I

stepped closer to be sure of my observations

and the driver moved to the very front of the

trailer.  As six to eight hogs were in progress of

moving up the ramp to the middle of the

trailer, I observed the driver hit one hog twice

in the head and face area and then another

five or six times in the head and face area of

the hog beside the first one.  All of the hogs in

the front of the trailer were excited and

confused on which way to proceed.  This

treatment was excessive use of the rattle

paddle and excessive excitement of the hogs. 

 I said in a loud voice, to the driver, to stop

hitting the hogs in the face and head area. 

The driver put up his arms and the rattle

paddle and said “OK”.  For the remainder of

the unloading, the driver did not hit any hogs

in the head or face area.  Around 2345

hours, I went down to the yard to speak with

 and 

 I explained the excessive

use of the rattle paddle in the head and face

area and the confusion of the hogs.  During

this conversation I was informed the trailer

company was and the hogs

were from .  

explained that the appropriate paperwork for

this driver and hogs could be obtained from

Form #002.  Later, I explained to 

this would be documented on a

Noncompliance report.  The

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

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

(b) (6)(b) (6) (b) (4) (b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 85

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

Regulatory requirements of 9CFR 313.2 have

not been met.

M3W Swift Pork

Company

GJC182

203092

5N-1

No 03/25/201

5

04C02 313.2 HATS Category Vl – Electric Prod/Alternative

Object Use      9CFR313.2. At 18:16 hours on

March 25, 2015, while performing HATS

activities in the hog barn, I observed the

following non-compliance; A yard employee

wearing a gold hat (which identifies the

employee as being a new hire) was driving

hogs from pen 11A to the CO2 holding area.

This pen is the largest in the barn and the

employee was trying to drive the last 20 – 30

hogs out of the pen. Two hogs were moving

south in the pen and suddenly reversed their

travel to the north, the employee attempted

to change the hogs’ direction of travel with his

rattle paddle. The employee used the paddle

in an excessive manner on the running hogs,

striking both hogs in the forehead and nose

with the flat side of the paddle. The hogs then

continued to move to the north. The hogs did

not vocalize when struck nor was any blood

observed from the nose or head of either

animal. I immediately instructed the employee

that he was not to use the paddle to strike the

face and head. 

was notified and informed of my observations.

He stated that he would inform

  I notified

 of the impending NR.

 stated that there had been a

discussion with the employee but did not state

what further actions would be taken.

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 86

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M3W Swift Pork

Company

GJC402

104591

1N-1

No 04/11/201

5

04C02 313.2 HATS Category Il – Truck Unloading      9 CFR

313.2 At 18:07 hours on April 11, 2015,

while monitoring truck unloading in the

livestock barns, I observed the following

non-compliance;  While standing on the

south side of a trailer, with an unobstructed

view of the lower deck of the trailer, I

observed a truck driver unloading hogs at

chute one. The truck driver was driving a

group of hogs from the middle lower deck of

the trailer, in an easterly direction, up the

ramp of the trailer into the barns. The majority

of the group was either off the truck or going

up the ramp when a hog turned and headed

westerly in the trailer. The truck driver struck

the hog aggressively on the nose and

forehead. The hog let out a squeal and turned

slightly to the south. The driver again struck

the hog on the nose and forehead; the hog

turned towards the ramp and exited the

trailer. No visible injuries or blood were

observed on the hog. I immediately

summoned to the

area. Before arrived, the

Establishment employee that was tattooing

hogs, stopped the driver from unloading any

more hogs. I informed of my

observations. After spoke to the

driver, the driver exited the trailer. 

then entered the trailer and finished

the unloading of the hogs. Information on the

truck stated: 

 

Plant Manager Tom Hanson was notified of

the impending NR.

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

(b) (6) (b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 87

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M3W Swift Pork

Company

GJC072

304021

5N-1

No 04/15/201

5

04C02 313.1 Category V - Suspect and Disabled (9 CFR

313.1) At 1040 hours, on April 15, 2015, I

was observing the stunning of hogs in the

slow/non-ambulatory pen. I observed the

green cattle gating, (that is used to separate

the slow area from the dead pen) had damage

to one end. It appeared that the gate had been

hit numerous times from both sides with a

skid steer.   As I continued to investigate the

damage of the gate, I observed three of the

cross bars had broken, leaving jagged, razor

sharp edges. This gate runs west to east. It is

positioned to the east of the swinging panel

that the skid steers use when entering and

exiting the slow/ non-ambulatory pen area.

The gate frame and cross pieces are made of

round hollow steel tubing, approximately two

inches in diameter. The lowest cross bar that

was broken is approximately six inches off the

floor, the second is approximately sixteen

inches from the floor and the third,

approximately twenty eight inches from the

floor. There were four ambulatory hogs in the

area of the gate. Several other hogs were in

the open slow pens, where hogs are not

confined but able to move about the area at

will. These jagged, razor sharp edges of the

gates were at a height that could injure, or

cause pain to a hog, which is a

non-compliance of 9 CFR 313.1(a). No hogs

were observed to have injuries that resulted

from the non-compliance.   I informed

 of my

observations. observed the

damaged gate and notified maintenance of

the need for repair. Maintenance workers

removed the gate for repair. Until repairs were

completed and the gate was replaced, 

stated that an employee would

monitor the area to ensure that no slow hogs

left the area. Plant Manager Tom Hanson was

notified the non-compliance for the gate in

disrepair with sharp edges would be

documented on an NR.

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

(b) (6)

Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 89

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

discomfort. Establishment management was

notified of the impending NR.
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 90

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M3W Swift Pork

Company

GJC532

105072

8N-1

No 05/28/201

5

04C02 313.2 HATS CATEGORY II- Truck unloading  At 1811

hours on May 28, 2015 while verifying truck

unloading in the livestock barns, I observed

the following non-compliance: While

standing on the south side of a trailer, I

observed a truck driver unloading hogs at

chute one. The driver was unloading the rear

upper deck of the trailer, I heard the sound of

hogs’ feet scrambling on the trailer floor and

heard unusually loud vocalization. I observed

the driver in the middle of the trailer with a

rattle paddle moving the hogs towards the

east towards the back of the trailer and the

trailer ramp. Hogs began to pile on top of one

another. Suddenly there was loud commotion

on the ramp and hogs started to go down the

ramp and exited the trailer. The majority of

the hogs from this section of the trailer had

already exited, when one hog turned west and

headed towards the front of the trailer. The

driver immediately moved quickly towards

this hog and was using the rattle paddle to

turn the hog. The hog turned, was facing

south, and in my line of vision. The driver

forcefully struck the hog on the side of the

head and snout, with the flat side of the

paddle, to force the animal to move. The hog

then turned west, towards the front of the

trailer, was parallel to the south side of the

trailer, and still in my line of vision when I

observed the truck driver strike the animal

again, with the flat side of the paddle in the

snout area. The hog turned and moved out of

my sight.  I then observed the driver use the

paddle in a jabbing or spearing motion and

began to aggressively poke, with the tip of the

paddle, towards the area of the remaining

hogs. I was not able to see if the paddle came

into contact with any of the remaining hogs

on the trailer. While the driver was using the

paddle in a jabbing/spearing motion, there

was loud vocalization and sounds of

scrambling feet.I observed no injuries or blood

in the head area of any of the remaining hogs. 

 I got the driver’s attention and told him to

stop unloading hogs. I went into the barn and

informed the individual tattooing hogs to stop.

 was two alleys

over; I got his attention and he came to the

area of the first alley. I informed 

of my observations. He immediately told the

truck driver to go to the yards office. 

 stated that he would discuss what

had happened with the driver and that the

Establishment would finish unloading the

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

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 91

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

trailer. I accepted this immediate corrective

action and allowed the remaining hogs to be

unloaded. was notified that the

non-compliance would be documented. This

non-compliance will be linked to previous NR’s

Improper tool use has previously been

discussed with the Establishment at the

weekly meeting. Prior NR’s, dated 3-25-15,

4-11-15 and 4-17-15 were written for

improper tool use. Written response from

Establishment on the prior NR’s state:  all

yards employees have been retrained in

proper tool use. Discussion and retraining of

an individual truck driver. A copy of handling

tool use reminder sheet was handed out to all

truckers as they entered the plant.

Establishment’s corrective actions have not

been effective in preventing the recurrence of

non-compliance of 9 CFR 313.2  Continued

failure to meet regulatory requirements can

lead to enforcement actions as described in 9

CFR 500.

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 92

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M3W Swift Pork

Company

GJC210

307260

7N-1

No 07/06/201

5

04C02 313.2 HATS Task II: Truck unloading. In the hog

truck unloading area, approximately 0130, I

heard excessive, loud vocalization of  hogs, the

noise of rattle paddle hitting, and a trucker

yelling.  I went to find the truck being

unloaded at ramp number 1.  The trucker was

with hogs in the belly of the truck, repeatedly

hitting randomly at the hogs, with hogs

vocalizing after being struck, and running

about in confusion. The trucker continued

hitting unnecessarily on hogs, as hogs moved

around two dead hogs lying toward the south

wall of the trailer in close proximity to the

bottom of the upward ramp.   As some hogs

were trying to move up the ramp and the

trucker hit hogs at the back of the group,

which had nowhere to go as other hogs were

ahead of them, trying climb up the ramp.

 Hogs being struck in the back of the group

jumped placing their front feet on the hogs in

front.  I told the trucker as loudly as I could

shout, to stop hitting the hogs, but he did not

seem to hear me.  I went inside the barn and

motioned for a supervisor to come over.  I

showed the supervisor the trucker had deads

in the trailer which hogs needed to move

around.  After the deads were removed, I saw

a second individual in the belly of the trailer

with hogs.  Both individuals

began repeatedly hitting (with rattle paddle) 

hogs at random, again with hogs vocalizing

excessively and running about in confusion. 

Hogs continued to vocalize loudly as they

were struck even as they were moving toward

and onto the ramp.  (The ramp appeared only

wide enough to accommodate a single file of

hogs.)  I told the supervisor the individuals

needed to quit hitting the hogs and give them

a chance to move up the ramp.   After the

supervisor told the truckers to give the hogs a

chance to move, the hogs calmed, stopped the

provoked vocalizing, and  were allowed to

quietly move up the ramp and off the truck. I

notified the supervisor that the

noncompliance of excess excitement and

trying to force animals to move at faster than

normal pace would be documented.

Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 94

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M1620 Quality Pork

Processors

QMO26

090932

09N-1

Yes 09/09/201

3

04C02 313.1, 313.2 HATS Category II and VII At 0800 hours while

performing humane handling activities of

antemortem inspection at the stunning and

restraining area I observed a hog that had

become stuck in the east side restrainer. The

employees working in this area had shut down

the restrainer and were no longer driving hogs

into the area. They had also retrieved the

captive bolt gun to stun this animal, as they

were unable to free it. The animal was stunned

with this device successfully. As there were no

supervisors in this area at the time the

employees asked me if once they had the hog

removed could they get started again? I

replied " have the dead animal removed, but

hold off using this side until I contact

management and return". I rejected the

restrainer using USDA retain tag B39388145,

and went in search of a supervisor. I notified

VP Mel Gilbertson of this occurence and then

returned to the area. At this time the hog had

been removed from the restrainer and I

observed slight trauma to the front leg that

had been caught. The restrainer remained

under USDA rejection while a solution to this

problem was discussed. The temporary

solution was to remove the pinch points of the

flooring at the entrance to the restrainer, with

a more permanent fix to happen this weekend

Sept. 14, 2013. Approx. one half hour of down

time was incurred to this side while this was

alleviated.

was informed of the release of this

area.

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 95

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M1620 Quality Pork

Processors

QMO25

111111

26N-1

Yes 11/26/201

3

04C02 313.1 HATS Category VII (slips and falls) At 1015

hours while conducting antemortem

inspection I observed that a hog being driven

from livestock pen #102 to pen #202 was

slipping and falling. Both hind feet were going

out from under it in tandem with the hog

ending up on its hams. There were approx. 30

animals left in the pen that continued to

meander on their own to pen 202 and of these

three others slipped when they reached the

same section of flooring. The animals gave no

outward sign of injury. I allowed employees

driving the hogs from this pen to carefully

drive the remainder, and then rejected the

loading gate entrance of the pen with USDA

retain tag B39387703. I notified both QPP and

Hormel production employees of my

regulatory control action, and then notified

, and

 of

what had occured. After the pen had been

hosed out with a high pressure water hose I

released it for use.

M1620 Quality Pork

Processors

QMO36

220140

30N-1

Yes 01/30/201

4

04C02 313.1 HATS category IV ( 9 CFR 313.1 ) Thursday

January 30, 2014. At approximately 9:50 pm

while verifying humane handling of hogs on

the east side of the magazine area in the

livestock barn, I, , observed

a sharp, protruding piece of metal on the

framework of the lift-gate to the east circle

pen. The hogs were being moved from the

shower pen, through the small alley way and

through the lift- gate which leads into the

circle pen. This piece of metal protruded

outward approximately 1/2”, was

approximately 1/2” wide and was at a height

of approximately 2 1⁄2 feet from the floor. I

immediately told 

of the noncompliance. Production

was stopped on the east side until frame was

repaired.

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

(b) (6)

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 96

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M1620 Quality Pork

Processors

QMO19

140443

01N-1

Yes 04/01/201

4

04C02 313.1 HATS Category IV Ante-Mortem Inspection: At

1245 hours while examining hogs in pen #312

I (  noticed that two steel

dividers had been added to the pen.  These

dividers were approx. 2.5" to 3" above the

surface of the floor and were approx 3/8"

thick.  The bottom edge was squared off, and

had burrs that could be felt by touch.  There

were hogs in the pen at the time of my

observation, although none had been injured

that I could see.  In my opinion a hog would be

able to get it's snout or leg under the divider,

and depending on circumstance become

injured. 9 CFR 313.1(a) reads in part

that "livestock pens, driveways and ramps

shall be maintained in good repair.  They shall 

be free from sharp or protruding objects which

may, in the opinion of the inspector, cause

injury or pain to the animals."  I spoke with

the ) about

my concerns and he agreed to empty the pen. 

I then rejected this pen utilizing USDA retain

tag #B40515173 to prevent refilling until this

matter was resolved. Approx. 1.5 hours later 

rounded bar stock was welded to the bottom

of these dividers and I released the pen for

use.

(b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 97

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244 Tyson Fresh

Meats, inc.

HKG29

231134

18N-1

No 11/18/201

3

04C02 313.2 In the hog barn at the bottom of the drive

ramp, (at approximately 2237 hours

11-18-2013) I observed a Tyson Fresh Meats

(establishment #244 in Storm Lake, Iowa)

employee kicking a nonabulatory/slow

hog to get it to go into pen#2. Pen#2 is the

pen where nonabulatory and or slow hogs are

often segregated before being represented for

veterinary inspection. I immediately took

regulatory control action by flagging the

employees down , and ) and

rejecting the use of drive alley at pen#2 USDA

FSIS reject tag#B27 064241. 

 and were

also immediately informed of the inhumane

treatment to the slow nonambulatory market

weight hog. At 2337 after the company

presented a written corrective actions the

reject tag was removed and the kill allowed to

resume. 

presented written

corrective actions, and the B-shift yard

employees were given a retraining on proper

animal handling procedures by Tyson

management. 

 admitted to kicking the hog out of

frustration. Tyson Fresh Meats has committed

to increased audits and monitoring of the

handling of the live animals to prevent

improper treatment of the live animals.

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

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 98

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244 Tyson Fresh

Meats, inc.

HKG14

200107

23N-1

No 01/23/201

4

04C02 313.2 While conducting handling during ante

mortem inspection task and the electric

prodding/alternative object use task at

approximately 1820 to 1830 on 01/23/2014

at Tyson Fresh Meats Inc. in Storm Lake, Iowa I

observed a Tyson Fresh Meats employee

chasing live hogs utilizing excessive techniques

during her process and forcing the hogs to

move with discomfort and faster than normal

walking speed down the center drive alley

ramp into the east/west alley that leads up to

the doors know as the hole. At one point I

observed approximately three to four hogs pile

up on top of other hogs in the crowded

east/west drive alley because there was no

place else for the hogs to go but to climb up

on top of other hogs as they were still being

vigorously force driven with the employees

excessive techniques of moving the hogs. The

techniques utilized by the Tyson employee

was as such; very loud continuous yelling,

continuous hitting of the hogs closest to her

with a large plastic baseball bat containing an

unspecified number of ammunition grade

copper coated steel ball bearings (BB’s) the

total weight of the baseball bat with the BB’s

is unknown as the total weight varies because

some employees add more BB’s than other

employees. I notified 

 who lines up the hogs for the kill and

was located up on top by pen #13 by signaling

to him and pointing to the employee moving

the hogs excessively in the previously

described manner and at times raising her

hand holding the driving device above head

level. At approximately 1840 I notified

 of

my observations and concerns for the well

being of the animals and asked him to verify

video footage of the method being used by the

employee identified. Regulatory control action

taken: I used direct regulatory control action

by signaling 

 to make an attempt at backing

off the employee aggressively driving the hogs

and he was unsuccessful in doing so. From my

physical location in the same east west drive

alley I was blocked by hogs and I was unable

to get to the location of the noncompliance or

signal to the employee to back off as well; the

hogs that had piled up on top of the other

hogs eventually un-pilled as they were being

forced into the hole. There was no USDA reject

tag used with the noncompliance and the

employee aggressively driving the hogs was

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 99

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

directly removed and replaced. There was no

down time associated with the

noncompliance. The following are the

corrective actions taken by the establishment:

The verbal report I received from 

 is that the employee

that was aggressively driving the hogs was

directly replaced by another plant employee.

All employees were instructed on proper and

acceptable humane handling techniques and

the employee that was aggressively driving the

hogs was retrained and counseled. The

following are the preventative measures taken

by the establishment: Animal Well Being

(AWB) audits have been increased from

category A which is to category

B which is or .

(b) (6)

(b) (4) (b) (4) (b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 100

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244 Tyson Fresh

Meats, inc.

HKG50

180101

28N-1

No 01/28/201

4

04C02 313.2 At approximately 1823 hours on 1-28-2014

after checking the non-ambulatory/slow pigs

near the scale and round tub, I observed a live

non-ambulatory hog in the round tub right

before the double irons. The round tub

operator yelled to another employee to open

the gate to the round tub to remove the down

non-ambulatory hog, and then the Tyson

Fresh Meats employee (est#244 Storm Lake,

Iowa) used the hydraulic control to operate

the hydraulic gate and push the downer hog

across the cement floor approximately 5-6 feet

to where the opening in the round tub is

located. After removal from the round tub, the

nonambulatory down hog was observed to be

limping afterwards in its hind leg and

immediately laid down outside the round tub.

At this point I immediately went to the end of

the double irons where the stunners are

located and signaled them to stop any further

stunning and notified 

 who was shackling the stunned

hogs to contact .

I then informed 

and of the

improper handling of the down

non-ambulatory hog. I requested immediate

preventative and corrective actions for the

animal handling non-compliance in writing

before releasing the stunning chute area for

continued production. Tyson plant

management ensured all yards employees

were retrained on humane handling and the

plant management submitted written

corrective and preventative measures before

releasing the round tub stunning area. At

approximately 1918 production was allowed

to resume. 

acknowledged all yards employees were

re-trained on animal handling procedures.

9CFR 313.2(d)(2) The dragging of disabled

animals and other animals unable to move,

while conscious, is prohibited. Stunned

animals may, however, be dragged.

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

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 101

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244 Tyson Fresh

Meats, inc.

HKG09

180543

19N-1

No 05/19/201

5

04C02 313.2 At approximately 1605 May19th 2015 at

Tyson Fresh Meats, Inc. the following

inhumane handling of a non-ambulatory live

hog was observed: a newer Tyson employee

(est#244 Storm Lake, Iowa) was

observed closing the grapple fork of the skid

loader onto the snout and mouth of a live

non-ambulatory hog (weighing approximately

300 pounds). The live hog squealed with pain

and discomfort due to having its head

hydraulically squeezed between the skid

loader bucket and the grapple fork. Another

Tyson employee signaled the

Tyson's skid-loader operator of the problem. I

immediately applied regulatory control to the

skid-loader and informed the

 that the skid-loader with grapple fork

was rejected for use with the live animals. I

placed U.S.D.A. reject tag B41148573 on the

skid-loader with grapple fork. A U.S.D.A. reject

tag B41148574 on the stunning chute as the

cause of the inhumane handling was caused

by a Tyson employee improperly operating

equipment causing pain and discomfort to the

non-ambulatory market hog by squeezing its

head between the grapple fork and skid-loader

bucket.  After a verbal and written response

from Tyson was

received; the stunning chute was released for

use with operations allowed to resume. The

skid loader with hydraulic grapple fork was

released for handling dead hogs.

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

(b) (6)

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 102

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244L Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc.

TWH26

170316

25N-1

No 03/25/201

3

04C02 313.30 While performing HAT category VIII, stunning

effectiveness, on 3/25/13 at approximately

1641, I observed the following non

compliance. I observed a hog exit the

restrainer on its side onto the shackle table. I

did not see the hog stunned. The hog was

vocalizing loudly and conscious. The hog slid

off the table using the slide at the end of the

shackle table. I did not see any injury to the

hog. The company employee immediately

restunned the hog using a different set of

prods inducing a state of surgical anesthesia. I

immediately halted production. I talked with

 about what I had

observed. I applied US Reject tag B26373641

to the circle pit until corrective actions could

be implemented. The hogs that had been

stuck were allowed to continue the slaughter

process into the kill floor. Plant Manager Mike

Grothe gave the following corrective actions.

, went through the

stunning system and found no problems. 

would monitor the system until the end of

production. Stunning resumed at

approximately 1700. I monitored the stunning

process for additional 15 minutes with no

problems observed. The company maintains a

robust humane handling system with

adequate records to document activities. Mike

Grothe was notified a non compliance would

be issued.

M244P Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

FJJ5213

033906

N-1

No 03/06/201

3

04C02 313.15 On March 6, 2013 at Tyson Fresh Meats in

Perry, Iowa while performing humane

handling at 1315 I observed a company

employee attempt to knock a hog in the

subject pen. I observed the employee using

the captive bolt on a hog. I heard the captive

bolt go off as he was trying to hold it against

the hogs head. The hog went down and then

got back up and started walk away. 

 stepped in the pen and was able to

get the hog knocked and rendered

unconscious. I then informed 

 that he would be receiving an NR.

Regulation 313.15(a)3 states that 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.

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

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

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 103

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244P Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

FJJ1406

093827

N-1

No 09/27/201

3

04C02 313.2 On 09/27/13 at approximately 0530 at Tyson

Fresh Meats in Perry, IA while performing my

odd hour inspection I observed a pen of hogs

awaiting slaughter that did not have access to

water. Pen 19A is a small pen that has two

nipple valves to supply water to the hogs in

that pen. There were 14 hogs present in the

pen at he time the noncompliance was

observed. Neither nipple valve was working in

the pen so the hogs were unable to drink. I

notified the company of the situation and they

took care of the problem by getting the valves

working again. I notified 

that the company would be receiving

an NR for the violation.

M244P Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

FJJ0214

072711

N-1

No 07/11/201

4

04C02 313.15 At 1:15 pm on 11th July, 2014, while

conducting antemortem inspection and

humane handling verification at Est. 244P,

Tyson Fresh Meats, Perry, I observed the

following noncompliance: A yard employee

attempted to stun a down hog in the pen via

penetrating captive bolt.  The stun initially

appeared correct, and he began to walk away. 

However, the hog then showed signs of

continued consciousness (focused eyes, blink,

righting reflex).  

noticed the signs, and yelled for the employee

to return with the stunner.  He then supervised

the correct re-stunning of the hog.  

 informed me of his intention to

immediately retrain the employee on correct

placement of the stunning blow.  I informed

him that an NR would be written.

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 104

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244P Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

FJJ4914

085915

N-1

No 08/15/201

4

04C02 313.1, 313.2 At 1340 on 15 August, 2014, while conducting

antemortem inspection and verifying humane

handling (HAT category 4) at Est. 244P, Tyson

Fresh Meats, Perry, IA, I observed the

following noncompliance: In the drive alley on

the north side of the yards, leading to the

staging alleys,I noted three dead (captive-bolt

stunned) hogs laying in the alley.  One had

been marked as "dead" using a paint stick.  All

were in rigor, indicating that some time had

passed since being shot.  

was accompanying me on the

antemortem round; he also noted the dead

hogs.  A pen puller was attempting to bring up

a small group of hogs into the staging area;

several of these hogs tripped over the dead

hogs.  None of that group fell or were

injured.   signaled a yard

employee to bring the and, on arrival,

instructed the employee to transport the

stunned hogs to the collection point for "yard

dead" hogs.  I proceeded into the staging area,

and discovered additional dead, captive-bolt

stunned hogs in both sides of the staging

alley.  In total, over one dozen stunned, dead

hogs were present in the drive and staging

alleys.  All were in rigor; some had turned

purple in the nose, ears, and face.  I spoke to

, running the

stunning area, and informed him that the

situation was unacceptable.  Dead hogs lying

in the alley present a risk of injury (tripping

hazard) to live hogs being moved through the

area; this tripping hazard also threatens the

safety of establishment personnel working in

the area.  was informed that an

NR would be written.  I remained in the area

to ensure all stunned, dead hogs were

removed to the dead collection point before

releasing the alleys for resumption of normal

operations.

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 105

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244P Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

FJJ5314

083718

N-1

No 08/18/201

4

04C02 313.2 At 1330 hours on 18th August, 2014, while

verifying humane handling of disabled animals

(HAT Category 5) at Est. 244P, Tyson Fresh

Meats, Perry, IA, I observed the following

noncompliance: Three yard employees (two

on foot, one driving the vehicle) were

attempting to remove a disabled hog from the

loading dock.  The hog was resisting the

employees attempts to load it into the bucket

of the , struggling against them and

vocalizing.  The driver of the advanced

the bucket slightly forward, with a small gap

between the edge of the bucket and the floor. 

The toe of the hog's left hind leg slipped into

this gap and, unnoticed by the employees,

became trapped.  As the employees pushed

the hog into the bucket, the horny hoof of the

outer left hind toe was pulled loose and

detached from the underlying bone and tissue

of the toe.  The hog was taken to the

disabled/suspect pen.  I entered the loading

dock and verified what had occurred by

finding the detached hoof.  I showed the hoof

to and

described what I had witnessed.  Shortly

thereafter, I examined the hog in the suspect

pen, confirmed the injury, and, as the hog

appeared otherwise normal, passed it to be

captive-bolt stunned and transported to

slaughter.  I remained in the area to verify

correct stunning of the hog (performed by 

).  I informed him that an NR would be

written.  At approximately 1450 hours, plant

management verbally informed myself and 

that as an immediate

measure they had initiated retraining of all

relevant personnel on proper technique for

loading disabled animals.

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (4) (b) (4) (b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 106

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244P Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

FJJ4407

081414

N-1

No 08/14/201

5

04C02 313.1 At 7:03 am while doing antemortem

inspection at Establishment M244P, Tyson

Fresh Meats Perry, I witnessed a hog’s head

stuck in a rectangular shaped gap between

pen 29N and the adjacent empty pen. The hog

was vocalizing while trying to escape.  

 first attempted to

free the hog with his hands but was

unsuccessful.  He then immediately retrieved a

captive bolt gun and euthanized the hog.  The

stun was performed correctly.  He offered as

an immediate solution to find material to

block the gap and then yard personnel would

keep the pen empty until a permanent fixture

could be applied by maintenance. According

to regulation 313.1, pens must not have

unnecessary openings where the head, feet or

legs may be injured.  was

informed that an NR would be issued. At 8:10

am I returned to the pen in question, saw that

a temporary secured barricade was put in

place.  Hogs remained in the pen.

M244P Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

FJJ0211

091225

N-1

No 09/25/201

5

04C02 313.15(a)(1) At 1006 on 25 September, 2015, at Est. 244P,

Tyson Fresh Meats, Perry, IA, while conducting

antemortem inspection and humane handling

verification, I observed the following

noncompliance under the category of stunning

effectiveness: A yard employee was

attempting to captive-bolt stun a "slow" hog in

Pen 33.  A second employee was standing by

with the vehicle to remove the hog

after stunning; he maneuvered the bucket of

the vehicle to confine the hog to a smaller

area.  The hog was sitting up and moving its

head frequently.  The first employee

attempted to stun the hog; the hog moved its

head during the attempt and the stun was

unsuccessful, with the hog vocalizing but

remaining fully conscious.  

 was accompanying me on the

antemortem round; he also observed the

missed stun.  promptly removed

the backup captive bolt stunner from its

carrying case (placed close by near the

entrance to the pen), and performed a second,

successful stun on the hog.  I informed 

 that a NR would be written.

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 107

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244m Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

PGC531

507070

9N-1

No 07/09/201

3

04C02 313.2 I, , was performing ante

mortem duties and HATS activities in the barn

at approximately 1320 on 07/09/2013. I

noted that the employee counting and moving

hogs off the scale was walking toward the

animals and using his flag to encourage the

animals off the South end of the scale and

count them as they left. The group of hogs on

the scale consisted of approximately 20

animals and included one non-ambulatory

animal that was laterally recumbent and

visibly hyperventilating. The employee moving

the hogs started walking toward the group

while continuing to use his flag and count the

animals. As a result of the confined area, the

remaining 20 animals were excited and in

their attempt to avoid the employee and leave

the scale at least 3 animals were observed

stepping on and running over the recumbent

animal. Once the ambulatory animals were off

the scale the employee tried to encourage the

recumbent animal to stand but the hog was

unable to do so. The employee was then able

to move the non-ambulatory hog in a plastic

boat, with the help of a second employee, to

the disabled pen. I informed 

 of the situation and that a

noncompliance record would be forth coming

as the establishment failed to meet the

regulatory requirements of 9 CFR 313.2 as well

as the requirements under category IV and V

of the HATS activities, Handling During Ante

Mortem Inspection and Handling of Suspect

and Disabled. The Establishment failed to

follow their Animal Well-Being Program that

covers potential issues including animal

injuries, balking and downers. Animal Welfare

Procedure/SOP 5.6 states

 7.4.1 of the program states,

 Corrective measures include,

Immediate corrective actions at this time

include discussing animal handling procedures

with the employee involved as well as 100%

monitoring of the scale activities by barn

Supervisors.

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (4)

(b) (4)

(b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 108

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244m Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

PGC261

210480

3N-1

No 10/03/201

3

04C02 313.15,

313.2

At 1106 on 10/3/02013, I, ,

was watching human handling activities in the

barn near the south end at the house hog pen.

While verifying HAT activities Category V

Handling of Suspect and Disabled, and

Category VIII Stunning Effectiveness, a humane

handling noncompliance occurred. There were

five animals in the house hog pen. There was

one employee using the captive bolt stun gun

and four others observing the situation,

including , as

well as myself. The animal was in a sitting

position and calm. The captive bolt gun was

placed on or near the forehead of the animal

in the appropriate location between the eyes.

The gun fired with a high-pitched pop and the

employee’s arm was propelled far up and

away from the animal. The hog immediately

began vocalizing, was unable to stand but

continued sitting, and was clearly distressed

and conscious. The animal turned its head in

all directions and I noted a depression in the

skull of approximately 1 cm that was starting

to ooze blood. The animal was blinking,

vocalizing and breathing rhythmically. The

employee immediately reloaded the captive

bolt gun and fired it, this time resulting in the

normal sound and minimal recoil, to render

the animal unconscious. spoke

to the employee to remind him that, should

this happen again, he does have a loaded

spare captive bolt gun within reach instead of

taking time to reload. was made

aware that this situation is noncompliant with

the regulations and that an NR would be forth

coming as the establishment failed to meet

regulatory requirements of 9 CFR 313.15 and

313.2. This situation is also in violation of the

establishment’s own program, “Electrical and

Captive Bolt Stunning Procedures” 4.2.1 

Immediate corrective actions include

reminding the employees to use the second

captive bolt gun, rechecking all the guns for

mechanical issues, and the establishment will

move to category B of their RACE program

which requires monitoring of humane

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

(b) (4)

(b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 109

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

handling activities until

M244m Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc

PGC190

906040

4N-1

No 06/04/201

4

04C02 313.1, 313.2 On 06/04/2014, at approximately 0815, 

was signing for pens and verifying HATS

activities category II Truck Unloading and

category IV Humane Handling activities during

Ante Mortem inspection, when a noticeable

increase in vocalization was noted near the

unloading area. An employee was moving

hogs from the unloading ramp toward the

ramp that angles down into the North and

South sides of pen 18. This is a known

bottleneck area and the hogs were refusing to

descend down the ramp, the flooring surface is

different from the alley and depending on

state of cleanliness is see through. The gate

behind the group had been closed to prevent

movement back onto the truck. The employee

was attempting to move the group forward

and as a result of his flag waving back and

forth the back half of the group moved

backwards over the top of one another and

had no avenue of escape, resulting in

increased and unnecessary excitement and

discomfort. There were four Tyson employees

in the immediate area, including the Humane

Handling Monitor, and no assistance was given

to the employee involved until the truck driver

of that load exited the truck and attempted to

help move the group forward. 

 witnessed the situation and 

 was made aware of

what had occurred. This is in violation of the

Establishment's own Pork Animal Welfare

program under Receiving where Balking,

Vocalization, and Unacceptable Ramps are

considered, "Not Reasonably Likely to Occur"

because of, 

" This

situation is noncompliant with 9 CFR 313.1

and 313.2. Immediate corrective actions

include retraining of barn employees that are

involved in animal handling.

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

(b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 110

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244

W

Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc.

BTD430

902122

7N-1

No 02/27/201

3

04C02 313.30 At approximately 8:10 a.m. while performing

the Stunning Effectiveness Humane Handling

Task, I observed an egregious humane

handling noncompliance. A Stunned pig woke

up and walked away before it could be

rendered unconscious with a captive bolt gun.

At about 8:10 a.m. there was a stunned and

knocked (by captive bolt gun) pig laying next

to the shackling table. A second pig was

missed on the shackling table and it slid down

the chute at the end of the table and landed

upside-down (feet in the air) and was leaning

against the first pig. The Tyson team member

tried to figure out how to knock the second

pig and decided to use the electric chain hoist

to pull the first (already knocked) pig out of

the way. While the first pig was being dragged

out of the way the second pig resumed

rhythmic breathing. The team member

grabbed a captive bolt gun and attempted to

knock the hog and the gun misfired. It was

later determined the the cartridge rim was

struck but it did not fire. The team member

grabbed a second captive bolt gun and made

another attempt at knocking the pig.

Unfortunately, this gun did not work either

(the company said it had just been used and

had not been reloaded and contained a spent

cartridge). The team member reloaded the

second gun and made a third attempt at

knocking the pig. When the pig was touched it

rolled upright on its sternum and walked

away. The pig was not vocalizing and was

apparently uninjured. The pig was successfully

knocked immediately after it walked away

from where it was laying. I informed

 and 

 of what had

happened. At approximately 8:15 a.m. I hung

U.S. Rejected Tags B28883985 and B5974826

on the two restrainers after halting stunning.

The plant gave us a written response with

proposed corrective actions and preventive

measures. At about 10:57 a.m. I removed the

U.S. Rejected Tags and allowed production to

resume.

(b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 111

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244

W

Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc.

BTD470

710570

9N-1

No 10/09/201

4

04C02 313.30 (a)(2) On Thursday October 9, 2014, at

approximately 6:43 to 6:56 a.m., I 

) was performing HATS task

Category VI "Electric Prod/Alternative Object

Use" at the East Restrainer position.  I

observed the team member use their electric

prod on 32 of the 100 pigs of the selected

sample.  A number of the pigs had the electric

prod used on them without trying to use the

Alternative Object (the rattle paddle).  This

constitutes excessive electric prod usage under

Regulation 313.30(a)(2).  Tyson Fresh Meats

 was notified that an

NR would be written.

M244

W

Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc.

BTD171

510322

7N-1

No 10/27/201

4

04C02 313.2 At approximately 11:50 a.m. on Monday

October 27, 2014, I 

 was performing ante-mortem inspection

with the assistance of the Procurement Barn

Supervisor.  I observed a procurement

employee operating a skid-steer loader as the

"subject" and "house" hogs were being

prepared to be moved.  These hogs are moved

while conscious.  The skid-steer loader

operator and another employee loaded a hog

into the bucket and he then proceeded

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 112

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244

W

Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc.

BTD321

807312

3N-1

No 07/22/201

5

04C02 313.15(a)(1),

313.15(a)(3)

At Est. 244W, on July 22, 2015, at

approximately 1400, 

and I 

 finished verifying Category V, Handling of

Disabled Animals, while performing ante

mortem disposition in the subject pen next to

pen 3 in the stockyards.  While conducting

Category VIII, Stunning Effectiveness, we

verified captive bolt stunning of three

nonambulatory market swine.  The operator,

, brought two captive bolt

guns out from the stick pen.  When he

knocked the first hog, gun #9 made a soft,

popping noise and the hog did not assume the

usual eyes bulging, fixed stare of a successfully

knocked hog.  However, no signs of sensibility

were observed and, within seconds, the hog

stiffened, began reflex kicking and died.  

set gun #9 aside and stated he was going

to get a different captive bolt gun.  He

returned from the stick pen with captive bolt

#7 and, at 1403, knocked subject #69.  Gun #7

also made a soft, popping noise and subject

hog #69 immediately began vocalizing.  The

hog rose on its forequarters and was struggling

to stand with its hindquarters, obviously in

pain, as it vocalized several times.  

had another captive bolt gun ready as a

back-up and promptly knocked the hog a

second time.  It immediately stiffened, eyes

bulging in a wide open stare, then collapsed

and began reflex kicking as it died. Est. 244W

has failed to meet the requirements of 9 CFR

313.15(a)(1) (through failure to produce

immediate unconsciousness & failure to stun

in a manner rendering the animal unconscious

with a minimum of excitement and

discomfort) and 313.15(a)(3) ("Immediately

after the stunning blow is delivered the

animals shall be in a state of complete

unconsciousness...").  and

 were notified

by me a noncompliance record would be

issued documenting the establishment's

failure to meet regulatory requirements.

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

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

(b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 113

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244

W

Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc.

BTD541

108520

6N-1

No 08/06/201

5

04C02 313.5 On August 6, 2015 at 1105 while performing

Humane Activity Tracking at the entrance to

the south carbon dioxide chamber, I (

 observed a hog standing with

front limbs on the back of another hog as the

last push gate to move the hogs into the

was activated.  The hog’s head was still

outside of the as the inner door

began to close, and its neck became wedged

between the gate and door; the hog was

unable to free itself and was vocalizing.  No

employees were watching this portion of the

drive, so I immediately alerted 

 who was standing on

the walkway between the two   He ran

over and summoned the team member in

charge of the final end of the drive alley. This

team member released the immobilized hog

by pushing the emergency stop button on the

control panel.  Approximately 8 seconds had

passed before the door was opened, after

which the hog was ambulatory and did not

appear injured or distressed. I told 

 to halt operation of the south

 while I contacted 

.  It was determined an NR

would be issued in response to the incident

which represents noncompliance with

9CFR313.5(b)(2).  I informed 

and that an NR

would be issued and that could resume

full operation.

M244

W

Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc.

BTD421

708351

2N-1

No 08/12/201

5

04C02 313.2 At approximately 10:15 a.m., I 

) was performing ante-mortem

inspection and observed a humane handling

non-compliance.  A team member had pushed

most of the hogs in pen 15 to the West half of

the pen and closed the center gate of the pen. 

Approximately 150 hogs were West of the

center gate and 45 to 50 hogs to the East of

it.  When he tried to move the pigs out to the

West drive alley, several dozen of the hogs

tried to move toward the East and ended up

piling against the center gate with

considerable squealing and struggling on the

part of the affected hogs. This represents a

non-compliance with Regulation 313.2(a)

which mandates driving of animals with a

"minimum of excitement and discomfort". I

informed and 

 that I would be issuing an NR.

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

(b) (6)

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

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

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 114

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M244

W

Tyson Fresh

Meats, Inc.

BTD572

309522

4N-1

No 09/24/201

5

04C02 313.2 At approximately 2005, on 9-24-15, I, 

, while monitoring HATS

category II activities in the hog yard truck

unloading area,  noticed a loud commotion in

the rear of a truck being unloaded at Est.

244W, Tyson Fresh Meats, Inc. located in

Waterloo IA.  At the bottom of the ramp (in

the truck) a large hog had gone down (virtually

blocking the narrow passageway) and the hogs

being driven from behind were trampling over

the down hog, which was squealing.  From the

time I first noticed the commotion until I was

able to get from beside the truck up around to

the back unloading door, approximately 7 or 8

hogs from behind had managed to trample

over the down hog to exit the truck.  With my

presence I blocked the passageway to stop the

continued trampling of the downed hog

and notified the truck unloader of the down

animal. He descended from the truck, and the

hogs left on the vehicle backed off from the

downed hog, leaving it lying on the floor in a

sternal position.  It's eyes were open and alert,

and it did not struggle to arise or move.  With

the down hog appearing relatively safe from

further trampling and accessible for removal

from the truck, I left the area to speak with

.  I explained to him what

had transpired, and also notified him that a

Non-Compliance Record would be

forthcoming. Driving animals over disabled

animals is inhumane treatment, and is

non-compliant with CFR 313.2 (a), and 313.2

(d) 1.

(b) (6)

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 115

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M717 Smithfield

Farmland

Corp.

TAE470

908041

8N-1

No 08/18/201

5

04C02 313.2 At approximately 9:10 AM, on 8/18/2015.

While performing Humane Handling tasks, I

) was observing Humane

Handling at the area (CO2 Chambers),

when I observed a Plant employee trying to

move hogs through the chute of the south

. The hogs were bunched up at one end

and the employee was using a whip with

several lengths on “canvas” attached to a 2

foot handle to get them to move. When the

hogs didn’t move, the employee grabbed the

whip end of the implement and started using

the handle portion of the device on the hogs.

The employee was leaning over the wall and

striking the hogs with the handle portion of

the device raised above his shoulder in an

aggressive downward motion, striking the

hogs several times in the hind quarters and

back. The hogs squealed and were jumping

onto each other, while the employee

continued to strike the hogs. At this time, I

immediately went to stop the employee from

striking any other hog with the handle portion

of the device and proceeded to tag up the area

for Inhumane Handling. I applied US Rejected

Tag #B39297898 and notified 

 that I was taking a

Regulatory Control Action for Inhumane

Handling and would be contacting the District

Office. Corrective actions taken by the

Company is to retrain all employees in this

area on Humane Handling. At 9:45AM, after

speaking with the District Office and Plant

Management, I removed U.S. Rejected tag#

B39297898 and proceeded to allow the

company to slaughter hogs. I notified 

and 

 that I would be issuing a

Noncompliance Report for Inhumane

handling, using a device to move hogs

improperly, causing the hogs to vocalize and

unnecessary excitement resulting in hogs

jumping over other hogs in the chute.

Regulation 313.2 Humane Handling states: (a)

Driving of livestock from the unloading ramps

to the holding pens and from the holding pens

to the stunning area shall be done with

minimum of excitement and discomfort to the

animals. Livestock shall not be forced to move

faster than a normal walking speed. (b) Electric

prods, canvas slappers, or other implements

shall be used as little as possible in order to

minimize excitement and injury. Any use of

(b) (6)

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

(b) (4) (b) (6) (b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 116

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

such implements which, in the opinion of the

inspector, is excessive, is prohibited.

M717C

R

Smithfield

Farmland

Corp.

RZG281

108260

5N-1

No 08/05/201

4

04C02 313.1 Around 10:45 am while I was performing ante

modem disposition in the slows holding pen, I

observed a hog laying down in right

recumbency with it's right hind leg stuck in a

drain.  The leg had superficial abrasions on the

medial side below the hock.  I notified 

 about the

hog.  He removed the hog's leg out of the

drain, slid the drain cover over the drain where

the hog was laying and repositioned the hog

away from the drain.  I informed 

about

the noncompliance.  He informed me that he

will have the barn employees no longer place

hogs by the drain and that the drain cover will

be replaced with one that will cover the whole

drain.

M717C

R

Smithfield

Farmland

Corp.

RZG111

409511

9N-1

No 09/19/201

4

04C02 313.15(a)(1) At 1:20 pm on 9/19/2014, I was performing

disposition of fatigue hogs in the fatigued

pen.  I observed use a

captive bolt gun on one of the fatigue hogs

that I passed for slaughter.  The hog was

setting upright along the North wall facing

East.  He properly placed the captive bolt gun

on the hog's forehead and pulled the trigger. 

The rod did not fully deploy into the hogs

head.  The hog squealed and remained

setting realized it was a

miss stun and started implementing the

establishment's corrective action.  I went over

to the hog and saw a hole through the skull

and the hog was still conscious.     

took the gun apart, repositioned the rod in the

captive bolt gun and reload it.  Before putting

the gun back together, he tried to explain to

me what happened.  I told him that he needed

to knock the hog again.       The hog was

successfully knock unconscious the second

time.  I told him that he could not knock

anymore hogs. I placed a retained tag No.

B28324476 on the hog and No. B27703984 on

the captive bolt gun.  I contacted 

and 

 and notified them what I observed.

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

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 117

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M717C

R

Smithfield

Farmland

Corp.

RZG250

710550

2N-1

No 10/02/201

4

04C02 313.2 At around 6:58am, on Oct 2, 2014, I, 

, was performing HATS

Stunning Effectiveness of the North and South

CO2 Stunners when I observed a hog standing

upright on it's hind leg by the North CO2 alley

gate.  The push gate was moving towards the

hog.  The hog tried to move away from the

push gate by jumping over the alley gate.  The

hog was unable to clear the alley gate before

the push gate started to come down.  The hog

was hanging half way on the alley gate while

the push gate came down on top of it.  The

hog was vocalizing and flailing it's legs while

the push gate continued to push down on it. 

The North CO2 operator ran to the main

control panel, about 8 feet away, stopped the

push gate and moved it to free the hog.  The

hog did not appear to be injured.  I placed a

U.S. Retained tag # B27703985 on the North

CO2 control panel.  

 witnessed the event.  He informed

me that it happens all the time and the

operator was not watching the hogs by the

alley gate.  He was watching the hogs going

into the holding area in front of the CO2.  I

informed   that I will need a

corrective action before removing the U.S.

Retained tag.  He went to get the supervisor.  

, and

,

was notified about the NR.  They informed me

that they will place a second person at the

North CO2 stun alley to help watch the hogs

at the gate until a more permit solution

can be put in place.  I agreed with their

corrective action and removed the U.S.

Retained tag.

(b) (6)

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

(b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 118

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M717C

R

Smithfield

Farmland

Corp.

RZG071

301512

2N-1

No 01/22/201

5

04C02 313.15(a)(1) On 01-22-2015 at 12:36 pm, I was performing

HATS stunning effectiveness by watching a

fatigue hog being stunned with a captive bolt

gun.  A fatigue hog was standing inside a

restraint when 

 establishment employee, used a

captive bolt gun to stun it.  As soon as the

captive bolt gun was fired, the hog started

vocalizing, moving back and forth in the

restraint and remained standing

and conscious.  quickly

loaded the second captive bolt gun and was

able to stun the hog with the second knock

within 10 seconds after the first failed

stunning.  When I inspected the hogs head,

the first knock hole was high on the forehead,

almost between the hogs ears, and the second

knock was positioned about 5mm below the

first one. I placed a U.S. Rejected

tag # B34132671 on the captive bolt gun case

with the guns inside and notified 

, of the noncompliance

and that I will be issuing a NR.

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

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 119

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M717C

R

Smithfield

Farmland

Corp.

RZG581

306573

0N-1

No 06/30/201

5

04C02 313.5 HATS IV: Ante-mortem Inspection; Handling,

Noncompliance regulations: 9 CFR 313.5(a)(2),

9 CFR 313.5(b)(2) At 1330 hours on 6-30-15, I,

, walked into the stunning

area and saw establishment employee

 at the South CO2 control panel trying to

get the basket gate to lift up off a hog that got

trapped under it. The gate came down on the

hog between its head and shoulders, causing

suffocation. The hog was lying sternal, not

vocalizing or moving.  A minute after my

arrival, maintenance personnel arrived and

showed how to get the gate to lift to

free the hog. Once the gate was removed from

the hog, the establishment performed a

security knock with a captive bolt gun on it. I

tagged the South CO2 with U.S. rejected

tag # B34133862 and notified

of the NR.  

,

informed me that the basket failed to rotate

when it was filled with hogs. The push gate

activated and started to push another group of

hogs into the basket. The push gate was

stopped and moved back. The basket gate

came down on the hog from the second

group.  Corrective Action: The establishment

will place a person at the control panel to

monitor the South CO2. If the basket fails to

rotate again, that person will be able to stop

the machine right away. They are also going to

contact the manufacture to find out how this

happened and get it repaired.

M1359

7

Seaboard

Foods

VMK47

190123

29N-1

No 01/29/201

3

04C02 313.2 At Approximately 19:25 on 01/29/13 I was at

the south stunner and observed a gate coming

down and hitting a hog on the ham knocking

the hog to the ground, pinning it to the

ground and at this point the hog vocalized.

The hog freed itself and stood up. I told 

 that "we can't do that". 

 showed up, I told her

what I had observed and she said that she

would notify . I notified

 of this

noncompliance. 9 CFR 313.2(a) states "Driving

of livestock from the unloading ramps to the

holding pens and from the holding pens to the

stunning area shall be done with a minimum

of excitement and discomfort to the animals.

Livestock shall not be forced to move faster

than a normal walking speed." Continued

failure to comply with the Federal Regulations

could result in further regulatory and/or

administrative actions.

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

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

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

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 120

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M1359

7

Seaboard

Foods

VMK33

200505

16N-1

No 05/16/201

3

04C02 313.2 HATS Category II Truck Unloading; Regulation

9 CFR 313.2(a) At approximately 1911 hours

on production day 05/16/2013, while

monitoring Truck Unloading (HATS Category II)

at Seaboard Foods; establishment number

13597M, I, observed

the following noncompliance. I was standing

between alleys two and three observing the

trailer in alley two being unloaded. At the

same time a truck backed into alley one and

began unloading. A few minutes later, the

truck in alley one was being driven away from

the unloading dock. Noticing that there were

still hogs on the trailer, I looked at the back of

it to verify that the trailer gate had been

closed. As I returned my attention to the truck

in alley two, I saw a hog land on the ground in

front of alley one and begin running around. I

then went around the front of the truck in

alley two to assess the status of the hog since

it did not vocalize. The hog was in an excited

state and moving quickly with no apparent

injury. It ran from the dead carcass unloading

area to the west under one trailer to the area

between unloading alleys two and three to the

east. At that time the hog stopped and two

stockyards personnel and one supervisor were

able to confine it to the area next to a pair of

locked doors using sorting panels. The hog was

then safely loaded into a skid loader and taken

to the Suspect pen where it was euthanized by

. 

and were informed of

the noncompliance. Before any further

unloading took place, the two stockyards

personnel from alley one were replaced by

two different stockyards personnel. The

establishment failed to comply with 9 CFR

313.2(a) “Driving of livestock from the

unloading ramps to the holding pens and from

the holding pens to the stunning area shall be

done with a minimum of excitement and

discomfort to the animals. Livestock shall not

be forced to move faster than a normal

walking speed.” This document serves as

written notice that your failure to comply with

regulatory requirements could result in

additional regulatory or administrative action.

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

(b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 121

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M1359

7

Seaboard

Foods

VMK46

211043

04N-1

No 10/04/201

3

04C02 313.15 Hats Category V: Handling of Suspect and

Disabled; Regulation 313.15(a)(1). At

approximately 1745 on production day

10/04/2013 I was observing the captive bolt

stunning of suspect or "stressor" hogs.

 was stunning the

hogs in the trailer used to bring the hogs from

their designated pen to the stunning area.

Supervisor started to stun a hog and it moved

its head as he fired the bolt gun. This led to

the bolt striking the hog on the lower right

side of the forehead. The hog remained

conscious, stood up and started pacing. It was

vocalizing the entire time. 

then began reloading the stunner. Within

approximately thirty seconds, 

 came from outside of the

stressor trailer with a second captive bolt

stunner. He was able to successfully restrain

and stun the hog. The hog was then removed

from the trailer and pithed according to

company procedures. The hog was determined

to be unconscious at that time. I immediately

went to the USDA office and asked 

to come to the stressor area. Following

 observation of the stunned

carcass, a meeting was held between

 and 

 to discuss the

event. This document serves as written

notification that your failure to comply with

Federal Regulations. Continued failure could

result in further Regulatory and/or

Administrative action.

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

(b) (6)

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

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 122

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M1359

7

Seaboard

Foods

VMK49

120347

06N-1

No 03/06/201

4

04C02 313.2 HATS Category III: Water and Feed Availability

On March 06th, 2014 at approximately 1039

hours, while performing the PHIS Humane

Handling task ‘Water and Feed Availability’ at

the barn (Establishment 13597M), I, 

,observed the following

noncompliance. I observed the water supplies

(nipples) did not dispense any water for the

hogs held in alley #3. There were at least 40

hogs resting in alley #3 and the establishment

was not unloading hogs at the time of

observation. These hogs did not have access to

water as required by the regulatory

requirements of 9 CFR 313.2(e) which state

that animals shall have access to water in all

holding pens. I initiated a regulatory control

action by rejecting alley #3 with US Rejected

tag # B38924519 and showed the

noncompliance to plant’s 

 and 

checked the water supplies in alley # 3 but no

water was dispensed. The supervisors then

turn on an overhead plumbing valve which

immediately provided a continuous stream of

water to the hogs. The corrective actions

initiated by the establishment were

acceptable; as a result, regulatory control

action was relinquished at 1044 hours.

 was

notified of the forthcoming of a

noncompliance record (NR). No similar NR was

issued within the past 90 days.

(b) (6)

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

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 123

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M1359

7

Seaboard

Foods

VMK47

140530

01N-1

No 05/01/201

4

04C02 313.15,

313.2

At approximately 13:10 hours on May 1,

2014, I, , was monitoring 9

CFR 313.2 Handling of Livestock, Hats category

IV at the CO2 stunners at establishment 13597

M. I observed 

operating the south stunner.

He was using the push gate at the entrance of

the stunner to physically push the hogs into

the stunner. I observed the hogs’ feet slide

several inches before he stopped the push

gate. I notified and

she took over operations of the stunner. I then

went to the north stunner to continue the

task. The stunner operator was also using the

push gate to push hogs. I saw two hogs hind

feet slide approximately 8 inches when one

hog sat down. The operator used more force

with the push gate and the down hog would

not get up. The company employees hit the

down hog numerous times on an attempt to

get the hog up. came over and I

informed her about the pushing hogs with the

push gate and the down hog. backed

the gate off and they again tried to get the hog

to get up then backed the gate off and

told the employees to knock the hog with the

captive bolt stunner. When the employee was

going to stun the hog he did not get the

captive bolt in position correctly and fired it

into the right eye of the hog. I then initiated

regulatory control action and applied tag

B38924363 to the alley to the stunners and let

them empty the stunners. This was a

noncompliance of 9 CFR 313.15, Hats category

VIII. I also notified the 

 of the deficiency. The injured hog

was contained and properly stunned. I

released regulatory control action at

approximately 13:49 hours. This document

serves as written notification that your failure

to comply with regulatory requirements could

result in additional regulatory or

administrative action. The company has a

Robust Systematic Approach humane handling

system and has had very limited failures in the

recent history.

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

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

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 124

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M1359

7

Seaboard

Foods

VMK50

101045

21N-1

No 10/21/201

4

04C02 313.15(a)(1) HATS Category IV: Handling during

antemortem inspection; Regulation 313.15(a). 

On October 21, 2014 at approximately 09:15

hours, while performing Antemortem

Inspection (HATS Category IV) at

Establishment 13597  M, Seaboard Foods, I

was walking south in the main drive alley,

when I came upon a hog laying on the east

side of the alley in front of pen 25.  The hog

was slow to move and the company opted to

knock the hog to expedite the clearing of the

alley, so that pens north of the hog could be

run. Two hourly employees’ approached the

hog with a sorting board, two captive bolt

guns and a sled.   At 09:15 one of the

employees’ proceeded to lean over the sorting

board to knock the hog.  Immediately after the

discharge of the captive bolt into the hogs

head, the hog proceeded to hurriedly back up

and turn around running north down the alley;

in the opposite direction.  The hog did not

vocalize.  From all appearances the hourly

employees’ appropriately followed corrective

actions in company policies and procedures

for an occurrence of ineffective stunning and

handling in pens in accordance with their

Robust Systematic Approach to Humane

Handling.  At 09:18 

was finally able to get

the hog restrained and re-knocked.  

 was standing next

to me observing the non-compliance.  I

immediately notified 

of the issuance of the

non-compliance report.  The plant has a robust

systematic approach humane handling system

in place.

(b) (6) (b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 125

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M360 Clougherty

Packing LLC

DAM19

130145

19N-1

Yes 01/19/201

5

04C02 313.15(a)(1) On 1/19/15 at about 0715 while performing a

Humane handling task, HATs category

Stunning Effectiveness, the following

non-compliance was noted.  A market hog was

in the “sorted” pen for the slower hogs that

were having difficulty moving and 

 was attempting to stun the

pig. This market hog was ambulatory and was

restrained to help get an accurate placement

of the stun gun. He had the help of 

 and had the pig restrained within a

three sided containment unit. The pig was

calm while used a .25

caliber unit to stun the pig. The first shot failed

to produce insensibility (gun worked as

expected) and immediately grabbed the

backup .25 gun and

successfully stunned the pig on the second try.

 The pig was removed from the pen via a skid

steer loader and taken to be bled in a separate

area.  The plant has an effective systematic

approach to humane handling and all

necessary protocols were followed. All  of the

other 60 pigs in the “sorted” pen were

rendered unconscious with one knock. This

is a violation of 9 CFR 313.15(a)(1).

M791 Clemens Food

Group, LLC

MXL18

100105

25N-1

Yes 01/25/201

4

04C02 313.2 HAT Category III – Water and Feed Availability

Today, 01/25/2014 at approximately 07:55

While perfoming HAT category 3 (water/feed

availability) in the Barn/Serpintine area I

observed the following noncompliance: while

finishing the harvesting lot 13 I noticed 2

downer hogs on the floor next to the

serpintine. One was from lot 8 and the other

was from lot 11. The hog from lot 8 was there

approximately one hour, the second one for

approximately 30 minutes with no water

available to them. I immediately notified 

 about the

noncompliance. He took immediate corrective

action and provided water in pans. This is a

Humane Handling noncompliance and the

establishments failure to meet the regulatory

requirements 9 CFR 313.2(e) as well as

establishment 791’s Animal Welfare Policy

Manual on page number 6, item number 7

which states “

, and Appendix C

Process step-Pens states

(b) (6)

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

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

(b) (4)

(b) (4) (b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 126

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M791 Clemens Food

Group, LLC

MXL14

110523

08N-1

Yes 05/08/201

4

04C02 313.2 HAT Category VII - Slips and Falls(313.1 and

313.2) Today, 05/08/2014 while performing

Ante-mortem and humane handling stunning

effectiveness, I observed one hog walking on

the bleed table. The plant personnel took

immediate action by stopping the production

line and stunned the hog with a captive bolt.

The plant personnel then re-started the

production line and I observed another live

hog exiting the stunner. The hog appeared

alive, fully alert and un-stunned. The hog

immediately stood up traveled approximately

4 feet and fell off the bleed table

(approximately 3 feet high) to the floor before

the plant employees could stun the pig with

the captive bolt or direct the hog to the slide

on the other side of the table. The hog that fell

on the floor appeared uninjured and walked

away and was immediately stunned by a plant

employee with the captive bolt. I immediately

a took Regulatory control action and rejected

the bleed table using US Retain/Reject tag # B

24762758 and immediately notified plant

management. I informed The Inspector in

Charge of the incident. The Inspector in charge

contacted the front line supervisor. A meeting

was held with Plant Management 

 and At

the meeting, the establishment explained

there had been a malfunction in stunning

equipment. The fuses that operate the electric

currant paddles were not set. The live hogs

exiting the stunner did not receive any electric

current. Immediate and long term corrective

actions were proposed by the plant

management.The plant will place sorting

boards at the bleed table to help guide live

hogs to the appropriate exit ramp and an

electrician will be on standby in the stunning

area. The long term action proposed by the

establishment is to install a link between the

stunning electrodes and the restrainer belts.

After the meeting the regulatory control

action was lifted and production

continued

notified of the failure to comply with

Regulatory requirements of 9 CFR 313.2(a).

(b) (6)

(b) (6) (b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 127

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M3196

5

Triumph Foods NMO31

150244

26N-1

No 02/26/201

3

04C02 313.1, 313.2 At approximately 1355 hours as I 

 was verifying the humane

handling of market hogs in the stockyards

area, I observed the following noncompliance:

As the establishment employees were driving

market hogs into the chutes leading to the

electric stunning area, excessive excitement

and discomfort was being caused to the

animals. The animals were balking once they

entered the chutes and the employees were

using excessive prodding, screaming and

poking with rattle paddles in an attempt to get

the animals to enter the chutes to the electric

stunner. Numerous times, the animals

proceeded up the chutes only to reverse their

direction and back down the chutes. The

chutes were not equipped or set up to keep

the animals from backing down the chutes

once they arrived at the upper end of the

chutes. The establishment employees were

having to prod the animals and scream

excessively to get them moving forward and

on numerous occasions had to use the electric

prod. On two occasions, animals entered the

chute side by side and became wedged into

the entrance causing them to vocalize loudly.

The emergency "dump" gate had to be used to

extract the animals from their stuck positions

in the chute. On the second occasion, three

animals became wedged into the chute

causing the "dump" gate to violently swing

open. At that time, I took regulatory control

action and applied U.S. Reject

Tag # B39296973 on the chutes leading to the

electric stunner. I immediately notified 

 that the establishment could no

longer use the chutes to the electric stunner

until corrective measures could be taken to

regain regulatory compliance. 

 and came to the

area and I explained what I had observed and

informed them that the equipment and area

would remain under regulatory control until

corrective actions and preventive measures

could be established to ensure humane

handling of the animals. 

then came to the area and I explained to him

the issues observed. We examined the chutes

and discovered that there was a sharp piece of

angle iron which was in a position that it could

cause significant injury to the animals entering

the chute. The angle at the entrance of the

chutes appeared to make the entrance look

very small which was causing the animals to

balk. There was also a walkway which had

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

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

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 128

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

been installed over the entrance to the chutes

which was making the area very dark and was

casting a shadow over the entrance. This may

have caused some of the balking issues as

well. The conditions of the equipment and

area were such that made it very difficult for

establishment employees to accomplish their

goal of delivering animals to the electric

stunner. The chutes and electric stunner are

used at this establishment only when there are

issues with the normal CO2 stunning method.

This does not occur with regularity. When

there are issues with one or both of the CO2

 systems, the establishment has used

the electric stunner and chute equipment to

improve production numbers until the issues

are rectified. The above described

noncompliant conditions are in violation of 9

CFR 313.1(a); 313.1(d);313.2(a);313.2(b) and

313.2(c). The establishment is responsible to

ensure that animals on the premises are

handled humanely at all times and the

observed regulatory noncompliance must be

prevented in the future.

(b) (4)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 129

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

M3196

5

Triumph Foods NMO54

130212

07N-1

No 02/07/201

5

04C02 313.1, 313.2 HATs Categories: IV-Handling During Ante

Mortem Inspection VI-Electric

Prodding/Alternative Object Use

VII-Observation for Slips and Falls Relevant

Regulations: 9 CFR 313.1(a); 313.2(a);

313.30(a)(2) At approximately 1025 hours, as I

) was observing the

electrical stunning operations, I observed the

following noncompliance: There were two

market hogs stuck in the north side of the

electrical stunner equipment entrance

chutes. The animals were vocalizing loudly and

appeared to be in distress. The animals were

squeezed together so tightly that they could

not move. 

 came to the area and opened one of

the escape doors to allow the animals to get

out of the chute. This was not the first

occurrence of this type of incident on this

day and I had suggested that the entrance to

the chute was too wide allowing animals in

side by side. As the animals progressed up the

chute, the narrowing of the chute caused the

animals to become stuck. After being released

from the chute, neither animal showed signs

of injury. I took regulatory control by placing

U.S. Reject Tag # B39296132 on the restrainer

and notified and 

 that further use

of the electrical stunning equipment was to be

discontinued until repairs could be made to

the chute entrance. I also notified 

that I would issue a noncompliance

record (NR) for the incident

proffered that the establishment would block

the north chute and only use the south chute

until repairs could be made. I removed the

Reject Tag and allowed the operation to

resume at approximately 1030 hours. I

continued to observe operations and became

concerned that employees driving the animals

into the alley were causing the animals to

become overly excited by shouting, using

rattle paddles excessively to hit the animals on

their backs and waving their arms. At

approximately 1039 hours, I then took

regulatory control again by re-affixing the U.S.

Reject Tag and stopped the electrical stunning

operations. I informed that

corrective measures would need to be put in

place for the operation to resume. 

 then stated that the establishment

would take lunch break and make the

necessary repairs to the alley entrance and

would also ensure that their employees were

(b) (6)

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

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

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

(b) (6)
Table: Noncompliance Reports in Response to FP_2312_Humane_Handling_NRs

12:23 Friday, August 12, 2016 130

EstNbr EstName NR# HIMP Date Task Regs Description

made aware of the need to remain calm and

move the animals with the least amount of

stress and excitement possible. At

approximately 1125 hours, I observed that the

repairs had been completed and 

met with the employees to ensure that proper

driving of animals would occur. I released the

electrical stunning operations at that time

after the establishment demonstrated that the

process was under control. The above noted

occurrences were in violation of 9 CFR 313.1

(a), 313.2 (a) and 313.30 (a)(2). The electrical

stunning operation is only used when

problems develop with the CO2 

stunners which is the usual equipment used at

this establishment.

(b) (6) (b) (4)
FOIA Request – Canadian HIP inspection System

02/28/2018 

FOIA requested all records detailing the deficiencies found by FSIS audit staff of the HIP inspection system during the 

agency's September 12-30, 2016, of Canadian inspection system. 

FSIS Note: FSIS audited two swine slaughter establishments under HIP inspection system in 2016. 

1) Est # 10 - Agromex Inc. Ange-Gardien, Quebec, Canada

Date of Audit: 09/22/2016

Finding: Post-mortem Inspection

The government inspectors were not conducting carcass-by-carcass post-mortem inspection to ensure freedom from 

contamination with feces, milk, or ingesta for reconditioned carcasses prior to applying mark of inspection. 

The auditor also noted that Carcass Presentation Station was positioned after post mortem inspection station. Section

6.2 annex C of Manual of Procedure which requires “operator to ensure that carcasses and their parts are presented 

for post-mortem inspection in such a way as to permit proper examination by CFIA inspectors.” This requirement 

implies the positioning of carcass presentation needs to be prior to post mortem inspection. 

2) Est # 270A - Olymel S.E.C. Red Deer, Alberta, Canada

Date of Audit: 09/19/2016

Finding: HACCP – Ongoing Requirements

The establishment’s HACCP verification records for record review component did not document the results of the 

verification activities conducted by the establishment’s personnel. The establishment’s HACCP plan did document 

the results of the verification for its direct observation component. 

Finding: Other Requirements – Establishment Construction/Maintenance

The FSIS auditor observed several small holes on the ceiling and on the overhead structures in the production areas 

and over exposed products. No direct product contamination observed by the FSIS auditor at this time. However, 

this condition may create an insanitary condition. 

Finding: Other Requirements – Light 

There was insufficient illumination (720 LUX) at the CFIA inspection station for verification of establishment 

procedures for controlling fecal material, ingesta, and milk. CFIA requires a minimum of 1000 Lux illumination for 

inspection stations. 

Finding: Other Requirements – Sanitary Operation 

Swine carcasses that were identified for dressing defects (including fecal or ingesta contamination) or pathological 

defects were in direct contact with each other on the trim line creating an opportunity for cross contamination. 

Finding: Post-mortem Inspection

The government inspectors were not conducting carcass-by-carcass post-mortem inspection to ensure freedom from 

contamination with feces, milk, or ingesta for reconditioned carcasses prior to applying mark of inspection. 

Attachments: Two (2) establishment checklists