U.S. Code » Title 21 » Chapter CHAPTER 12— MEAT INSPECTION › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER I— INSPECTION REQUIREMENTS; ADULTERATION AND MISBRANDING

21 U.S.C. § 623

Exemptions from inspection requirements

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 21 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Personal slaughtering and custom slaughtering for personal, household, guest, and employee uses

The provisions of this subchapter requiring inspection of the slaughter of animals and the preparation of the carcasses, parts thereof, meat and meat food products at establishments conducting such operations for commerce shall not apply to the slaughtering by any person of animals of his own raising, and the preparation by him and transportation in commerce of the carcasses, parts thereof, meat and meat food products of such animals exclusively for use by him and members of his household and his nonpaying guests and employees; nor to the custom slaughter by any person, firm, or corporation of cattle, sheep, swine or goats delivered by the owner thereof for such slaughter, and the preparation by such slaughterer and transportation in commerce of the carcasses, parts thereof, meat and meat food products of such animals, exclusively for use, in the household of such owner, by him and members of his household and his nonpaying guests and employees; nor to the custom preparation by any person, firm, or corporation of carcasses, parts thereof, meat or meat food products, derived from the slaughter by any person of cattle, sheep, swine, or goats of his own raising, or from game animals, delivered by the owner thereof for such custom preparation, and transportation in commerce of such custom prepared articles, exclusively for use in the household of such owner, by him and members of his household and his nonpaying guests and employees: Provided, That in cases where such person, firm, or corporation engages in such custom operations at an establishment at which inspection under this subchapter is maintained, the Secretary may exempt from such inspection at such establishment any animals slaughtered or any meat or meat food products otherwise prepared on such custom basis: Provided further, That custom operations at any establishment shall be exempt from inspection requirements as provided by this section only if the establishment complies with regulations which the Secretary is hereby authorized to promulgate to assure that any carcasses, parts thereof, meat or meat food products wherever handled on a custom basis, or any containers or packages containing such articles, are separated at all times from carcasses, parts thereof, meat or meat food products prepared for sale, and that all such articles prepared on a custom basis, or any containers or packages containing such articles, are plainly marked “Not for Sale” immediately after being prepared and kept so identified until delivered to the owner and that the establishment conducting the custom operation is maintained and operated in a sanitary manner.

(b) Territorial exemption; refusal, withdrawal, or modification

The Secretary may, under such sanitary conditions as he may by regulations prescribe, exempt from the inspection requirements of this subchapter the slaughter of animals, and the preparation of carcasses, parts thereof, meat and meat food products, by any person, firm, or corporation in any Territory not organized with a legislative body solely for distribution within such Territory when the Secretary determines that it is impracticable to provide such inspection within the limits of funds appropriated for administration of this chapter and that such exemption will otherwise facilitate enforcement of this chapter. The Secretary may refuse, withdraw, or modify any exemption under this subsection in his discretion whenever he determines such action is necessary to effectuate the purposes of this chapter.

(c) Pizzas containing meat food products(1) Under such terms and conditions as the Secretary shall prescribe through rules and regulations issued under section 624 of this title that may be necessary to ensure food safety and protect public health such as special handling procedures, the Secretary shall exempt pizzas containing a meat food product from the inspection requirements of this chapter if—(A) the meat food product components of the pizzas have been prepared, inspected, and passed in a cured or cooked form as ready-to-eat in compliance with the requirements of this chapter; and(B) the pizzas are to be served in public or private nonprofit institutions.(2) The Secretary may withdraw or modify any exemption under this subsection whenever the Secretary determines such action is necessary to ensure food safety and to protect public health. The Secretary may reinstate or further modify any exemption withdrawn or modified under this subsection.(d) Adulteration and misbranding provisions applicable to inspection-free articles

The adulteration and misbranding provisions of this subchapter, other than the requirement of the inspection legend, shall apply to articles which are exempted from inspection or not required to be inspected under this section.

(Mar. 4, 1907, ch. 2907, title I, § 23, formerly 21st, 22nd pars., 34 Stat. 1265; June 29, 1938, ch. 810, 52 Stat. 1235; renumbered § 23 and amended Pub. L. 90–201, §§ 1, 11, Dec. 15, 1967, 81 Stat. 584, 591; Pub. L. 91–342, July 18, 1970, 84 Stat. 438; Pub. L. 102–237, title X, § 1016(a), Dec. 13, 1991, 105 Stat. 1902.)Editorial NotesCodification

Section was formerly classified to sections 91 and 92 of this title.

Amendments

1991—Subsecs. (c), (d). Pub. L. 102–237 added subsec. (c) and redesignated former subsec. (c) as (d).

1970—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 91–342 changed proviso so as to permit custom slaughterers to conduct a separate inspected meat business, continued the exemption for owners to slaughter and process their own animals for their own use, authorized the Secretary to exempt custom slaughtering and processing performed by an inspected establishment, and required that custom slaughtered articles be clearly marked “not for sale”.

1967—Pub. L. 90–201, § 11, substituted provisions for personal, custom, and territorial slaughtering exemptions and for application of adulteration and misbranding provisions to inspection-free articles for farmer definition and retail butcher and retail dealer exemption provisions.

1938—Act June 29, 1948, amended section generally.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1967 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 90–201 effective upon expiration of sixty days after Dec. 15, 1967, see section 20(c) of Pub. L. 90–201, set out as an Effective Date note under section 601 of this title.

Regulations

Secretary to issue final rules no later than Aug. 1, 1992, to implement exemption authorized by subsec. (c) of this section, see section 1016(c) of Pub. L. 102–237, set out as a note under section 464 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1970–2021 · leading case: George v. Custer, 862 P.2d 176 (Alaska 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
George v. Custer, 862 P.2d 176 (Alaska 1993). “21 U.S.C. § 623 (1988). 2 . The superior court found Custer had proven damages in a total amount of $59,052 (expenditures plus labor), minus $11,500 in back rent owed by Custer to George, for a net recovery by Custer of $47,552 in damages, plus interest and attorney’s fees.”
Melinda Deiter v. Donald Coons, 394 P.3d 87 (Idaho 2017). · cites it 10× “21 U.S.C. § 623 (a)(emphasis added). Based upon the portion of the statute they emphasized, they asserted, “Because the Coons Defendants were not preparing the steer and its meat exclusively for use in the household of Patty Anderson, for use in their own household, or for use…”
Nolt v. Knowles (M.D. Tenn. 2021). “21 U.S.C. § 623 (a). Specifically, Nolt and Lea allege that the Hampton Defendants are liable under the FMIA because they “knew or should have known that” the Knowleses, ZK Ranches, the Yoders, and Riverside Labor Group “were selling meat that was removed from the [Hampton…”
Fargo Packing Corp. v. Hardin, 312 F. Supp. 942 (D.N.D. 1970). “From a careful analysis of the contentions of the parties, and from replies to inquiries from the Court during oral argument, it appears that the one basic contention of the Plaintiffs concerning which the Court has jurisdiction to review, is the matter referred to in numbers 1…”
Agric. & Com., Mississippi Dep't o v. Suni Muhammad (Miss. 1997). “These exceptions are codified at 21 U.S.C.A.§623(a). 2. Both federal and state law provides for a slaughter exception which allows an individual to slaughter an animal he has raised for the consumption of himself, members of his household, employees or non-paying guest(s).”
Spell v. Muhammad, 756 So. 2d 748 (Miss. 2000). “These exceptions are codified at 21 U.S.C.A. § 623 (a). . Both federal and state law provides for a slaughter exception which allows an individual to slaughter an animal he has raised for the consumption of himself, members of his household, employees or non-paying guest(s).”
— 21 U.S.C. § 623(a) — 1 case
Agric. & Com., Mississippi Dep't o v. Suni Muhammad (Miss. 1997). “These exceptions are codified at 21 U.S.C.A.§623(a). 2. Both federal and state law provides for a slaughter exception which allows an individual to slaughter an animal he has raised for the consumption of himself, members of his household, employees or non-paying guest(s).”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.