NCQM — National Committee for Quality Management

Search NCQM

Federal regulation

Meat and Poultry: FSIS HACCP Systems

FSIS HACCP requirements connect a process-specific hazard analysis with critical controls, validation, verification and records. Official establishments assess the hazards associated with their products and operations rather than adopting a model unchanged. The system relies on both scientific support and evidence that the controls work in the establishment. Sanitation and other prerequisite programs support, but do not replace, the hazard-analysis decision.

Reference
9 CFR Part 417
Source authority
USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service
Legal character
Official establishments covered by Part 417 must meet its HACCP requirements; FSIS models and guidelines do not prescribe the only permissible implementation.

Start with product and process

Part 417 requires a hazard analysis to determine food-safety hazards reasonably likely to occur and the preventive measures the establishment can apply. Product descriptions, intended use and process flow establish the context. Grouping products together requires a reasoned relationship between their processes and hazards, not merely a shared commercial category or packaging format. HACCP regulation.

From hazard analysis to critical controls

A HACCP plan addresses identified hazards through critical control points and critical limits, with monitoring, corrective actions, verification and records. The plan should describe the actual operation and its controls. FSIS’s preparation guidebook illustrates methods and forms but expressly does not create new requirements or mandate those particular forms. FSIS plan guidebook.

Validation has two connected elements

FSIS’s validation guidance explains the relationship between scientific or technical support and in-plant evidence demonstrating implementation. A published study must be relevant to the product and operating conditions. Establishment observations show whether the supported parameters can actually be achieved. Possessing a research paper without matching the process does not validate a materially different production operation. Validation guideline.

Monitoring, verification and reassessment

Monitoring observes the critical controls in operation; verification assesses whether the system is being implemented as intended. Reassessment evaluates continuing adequacy, including when changes affect the hazard analysis or plan. These activities have distinct purposes and record implications. A final product result alone does not demonstrate that each critical limit was met during production. Part 417.

Records support the establishment’s decisions

The system retains the hazard analysis, supporting documentation, plan and implementation records required by the regulation. Evidence supporting a prerequisite program may also be important to a decision that a hazard is not reasonably likely to occur. Records should make the establishment’s reasoning and actual control visible, rather than simply reproduce a generic model. FSIS preparation guidebook.

Keep the system specific to the operation

Describe the product and flow, identify hazards, select controls and verify that supporting studies match the operating parameters. Assemble implementation evidence and review deviations for their effect on system adequacy. Use the validation guideline alongside the regulation; FSIS guidance provides interpretive assistance and is not an approval of a particular commercial HACCP plan. FSIS validation resource.

Official sources

Sources checked 2026-10-19. This is the review date for this profile, separate from any legal effective or compliance date.

  1. codified regulation

    9 CFR Part 417

    www.ecfr.gov

  2. nonbinding guidebook

    Guidebook for the Preparation of HACCP Plans

    www.fsis.usda.gov

  3. nonbinding validation guidance

    HACCP Systems Validation Guideline

    www.fsis.usda.gov

How these profiles are prepared · Request a correction

Practice guidance