FSIS Notice 01-26 Small Business Rights

FSIS Notice 01-26 Small Business Rights in FSIS Enforcement Letters

Is Not New Law. It Is a Reminder.

USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service FSIS Notice 01-26 does not introduce new regulations. It does not change HACCP requirements. It does not add new paperwork.

The full notice can be read here: https://www.fsis.usda.gov/policy/fsis-notice/01-26

What it does is restate, very clearly, what inspectors are being asked to look for when they walk into an establishment.

And that matters.

This notice reinforces a quiet shift that many producers are already experiencing on the floor. Inspection is moving away from whether a document exists and toward whether a system can explain itself.

We see this most clearly when establishments that have passed inspection for years are suddenly asked to walk through their reasoning out loud.

What FSIS Is Emphasizing

At its core, Notice 01-26 redirects attention to the fundamentals of hazard analysis and decision making.

Not whether hazards are listed.

Not whether forms are present.

But whether the logic connecting hazards, controls, monitoring, and records actually holds.

Inspectors are being reminded to evaluate:

• Whether identified hazards make sense for the specific process being conducted

• Whether controls are appropriate and supported

• Whether documentation aligns with real time operations

• Whether decisions can be explained clearly and consistently

This is not about catching establishments off guard.

It is about whether a food safety system is coherent.

Where Plans Quietly Break Down

In our work, the most common issues are not dramatic failures. They are subtle fractures.

Examples we see regularly:

• Hazards listed because they are standard, not because they are relevant

• Controls carried over from another facility without reevaluation

• CCPs that exist on paper but are not truly critical in practice

• Preventive measures that are assumed rather than supported

• Records completed correctly but not demonstrating control

Many of these systems pass inspection for years.

Until they are asked to explain themselves.

Notice 01-26 is a reminder that explanation matters.

This Is Not About More Documentation

FSIS is not asking establishments to produce thicker binders.

They are asking for:

• Clear reasoning

• Traceable decisions

• Alignment between written programs and daily operations

A strong HACCP plan is not defined by how much it says.

It is defined by whether it can withstand a calm, informed question.

Why is this hazard significant here?

Why is this control sufficient?

How do you know it is working?

What This Looks Like During Inspection

In practice, this emphasis often shows up as simple questions asked calmly.

Questions such as:

• Walk me through why this hazard is significant for this process.

• Tell me how this control was selected.

• What tells you this step is working.

• What would you look for if it were not.

These are not trick questions.

They are clarity questions.

Strong systems can answer them without reaching for the binder.

What Producers Can Do Now

You do not need to rewrite everything.

Instead, pressure test what you already have.

Ask:

• Can I explain each hazard in plain language without reading from the plan?

• Can I explain why a control exists and what would happen if it failed?

• Do my records demonstrate control or just completion?

• Does this plan reflect how we actually operate today?

• 
  

If the answer is no, the issue is not compliance.

It is clarity.

The Bigger Signal

This expectation applies equally to small, traditional, and highly specialized operations. In many cases, simpler processes with clearly articulated reasoning hold up better under scrutiny than complex systems built without intention.

Notice 01-26 reinforces a truth experienced operators already know.

Food safety systems are not built to satisfy inspection alone.

They are built to hold under scrutiny.

Good systems are disciplined.

They are thoughtful.

They are explainable.

That is not a regulatory burden.

That is what protects producers, inspectors, and the public alike.