 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Script: Humane Handling Series - Part 7, Enforcement Actions |
|
 |
Intro:
Welcome to USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service podcast. Each episode
will bring you cutting edge news and information about how FSIS is working to ensure public
health protection through food safety. While we're on the job, you can rest assured that
your meat, poultry, and processed egg products are safe, wholesome, properly labeled,
and packaged correctly. So turn up your volume and listen in.
Host:
Hello and welcome to the final episode of our series on Humane Handling.
I'm Paul Koscak from FSIS and with me again is Joan Collins from the Office of Field Operations.
Joan has been with FSIS for more than 20 years and has a great deal of experience training front
line supervisors on the statutes, Rules of Practice and the administrative enforcement process.
Today, we're going to focus on the enforcement actions that FSIS might take with regard to the
Humane Methods of Slaughter Act.
Joan, in an effort to provide some background on enforcement actions for plant operators,
please describe to us the steps taken by FSIS inspectors when they observe humane handling
noncompliance in a slaughtering facility.
Guest:
It's important to understand first and foremost that FSIS inspectors are required by law to
take immediate action if they observe humane handling noncompliance.
The specific actions that they take depend on the nature of the noncompliance and the
response of establishment managers.
The first thing inspectors consider when a humane handling violation is observed is whether the
animal is being immediately harmed. If so, their first duty is to ensure that the animal doesn't
continue to be harmed.
For example, if inspection personnel observe a plant employee driving livestock with a moving aid
that can cause injury, inspectors must stop that activity from continuing.
The inspectors' action or inaction should not result in further or continued inhumane treatment to
the animal.
Host:
Then what should they do?
Guest:
The inspectors' next step is to decide if the noncompliance is
egregious or non-egregious, because that determines the actions they will need to take.
According to 9 CFR 500.3(b), an egregious humane handling violation is so serious that it warrants
an immediate suspension of the assignment of inspectors at that particular plant under the authority
of the Rules of Practice.
9 CFR 313.50 and FSIS Directive 6200.2, Revision 1, give specific directions to FSIS inspectors
on how to address humane handling noncompliance. Once they have addressed the needs of the animal,
they must then notify plant management of the inhumane handling noncompliance.
Host:
So, what makes a violation egregious?
Guest:
FSIS considers any act that is cruel to an animal — or a condition
that is ignored and leads to animal harm — as egregious.
Host:
Could you give us some examples?
Guest:
Examples of egregious violations include:
- Making cuts on or skinning conscious animals,
- Excessive beating or prodding of ambulatory or non-ambulatory disabled animals,
- Dragging conscious animals,
- Driving animals off semi-trailers over a drop-off without providing adequate unloading facilities, or
- Running equipment over animals.
Other egregious violations are:
- Stunning animals and then allowing them to regain consciousness, or
- Making multiple attempts, especially in the absence of immediate corrective measures, to stun an animal versus a single blow or shot.
Host:
What other actions could be considered egregious?
Guest:
Dismembering live animals — such as removing feet from livestock,
leaving disabled livestock exposed to adverse climatic conditions while awaiting disposition,
and causing unnecessary pain and suffering to animals, including situations on trucks.
And remember, these are just some examples of actions that could be considered egregious. Each
inhumane activity needs to be assessed individually by an FSIS inspector.
Host:
What actions can FSIS inspectors take if they observe a violation that they believe to be egregious?
Guest:
If FSIS inspectors observe a violation that they believe to be egregious,
they'll place a U.S. Retain or Reject tag at that appropriate place.
Then they'll inform plant managers that they are suspending slaughter activities without prior
notification in accordance with 9 CFR 500.3(b) or through a regulatory control action.
Whichever route is taken, all livestock slaughtered before the action may be dressed, processed and
prepared under inspection.
The facility Inspector in Charge — or IIC — will immediately notify the FSIS
District Office of the suspension action. In addition, the IIC will document the facts that serve
as the basis of the suspension action on a Memorandum of Interview and forward that information
electronically to the District Office.
Finally, the Memorandum of Interview will form the basis of the Notice of Suspension and
Administrative Enforcement Report.
Host:
What if the noncompliance is caused by other means such as facility
deficiencies, disrepair or equipment breakdown and it's not causing immediate injury or
inhumane treatment of animals?
Guest:
These are considered non-egregious violations, and they must be
corrected. The FSIS inspectors must request that the plant immediately correct the situation
and take the necessary steps to prevent recurrence.
If plant managers fail to take such action - or fail to promptly provide FSIS inspectors with
satisfactory assurances that such action will be taken — the inspectors are to attach a
U.S. Retain or Reject tag to the non-compliant equipment or pen.
Host:
So, that means no tagged equipment, alleyway, pen or compartment can
be used until it's brought back into regulatory compliance?
Guest:
That's right! Furthermore, FSIS inspectors are required to attach
the tag to the alleyways leading to the stunning area, if the noncompliance is the result of
plant employee actions in the handling or moving of livestock, and animals are being injured
or treated inhumanely.
After tagging the alleyway, no more livestock shall be moved to the stunning area.
The tag will remain in place until the plant operator implements appropriate immediate
actions and measures to prevent recurrence. And only an FSIS inspector can remove this tag.
All livestock slaughtered prior to the tagging can be dressed, processed and prepared under inspection.
Host:
In the third episode, we talked about stunning.
What happens if an FSIS inspector cites noncompliance as the result of improper stunning?
Guest:
The inspector will attach the tag to the stunning area, so stunning
procedures will not be resumed until the plant implements appropriate immediate actions and
measures to prevent recurrence.
This tag, too, can only be removed by an FSIS inspector. Again, all livestock slaughtered prior
to the tagging can be dressed, processed and prepared under inspection.
Host:
Well, Joan, thank you for this informative session. I believe this is
quite useful for plant officials to understand what enforcement actions FSIS is required to take.
And thanks to all of our listeners for joining us for this podcast series. Visit the FSIS Web site at
www.fsis.usda.gov for more information on humane handling.
Outro:
Well, that's all for this episode. We'd like your feedback on our podcast. Or if you
have ideas for future podcasts, send us an e-mail at
podcast@fsis.usda.gov. To learn more about food safety, try our web site at
www.fsis.usda.gov. Thanks for tuning
in.
|
Last Modified: May 13, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
