The requirement that applies today
The food safety team carries out a hazard analysis using the preparation file to decide which hazards require control and how much control is enough for safety, and where it makes sense, measures are combined.
ISO 22000:2018, 8.5.2.1 Hazard analysis: general; ISO/DIS 22000:2026, 8.5.2.1.
What the draft does
Subclause of 8.5.2; not listed separately in the public contents: The public contents name 8.5.2 at this position but do not list its subclauses. The subclause structure shown here comes from the held current edition; whether the draft keeps it is sold by ISO and not held here.
Source: public contents and foreword at 8.5.2.1, retrieved 2026-10-19.
Why this clause matters
The clause sets the purpose of the whole operation: decide what must be controlled and how much control is enough. It is not a list of every hazard imaginable. A good analysis is specific to the product, the process and the environment, and it can be defended step by step.
Suggested evidence to discuss with your auditor
For 8.5.2.1, these are the artefacts we suggest discussing with your auditor. The standard publishes no evidence list, so this is our reading, not a requirement.
- A hazard analysis with the method described and the reasoning visible
- The link from each significant hazard to a control measure
- Evidence that the team reviewed the analysis after a change
Where systems usually fall short
- A table of hazards with no reasoning about significance
- A hazard analysis that has not changed despite a new line or supplier
How to prepare
Read the analysis as if you were the auditor: for each significant hazard, can you see why it is significant and why that control was chosen. Where the reasoning is missing, add one sentence. That is the most valuable hour you can spend on the clause.
Dates
Cross-references
8.5.1.1, 8.5.2.2, 8.5.2.3, 8.5.2.4
Source
Clause 8.5.2.1. Current edition: ISO 22000:2018. Draft: ISO/DIS 22000:2026. Retrieved 2026-10-19. The full DIS text for 8.5.2.1 is sold by ISO and not held here; the sources page lists what is.
Not legal advice; does not certify; our words, not the standard's, and the planning date is an estimate.