Food Safety
search
Ask Food Safety AI
cart
facebook twitter linkedin instagram youtube
  • Sign In
  • Create Account
  • Sign Out
  • My Account
Food Safety
  • NEWS
    • Latest News
    • Food Safety Five Newsreel
  • PRODUCTS
  • TOPICS
    • Contamination Control
    • Food Types
    • Management
    • Process Control
    • Regulatory
    • Sanitation
    • Supply Chain
    • Testing and Analysis
  • PODCAST
  • EXCLUSIVES
    • eBooks
    • Sponsored Insights
    • Sponsored White Papers
    • FSM Distinguished Service Award
    • Interactive Product Spotlights
    • Videos
  • MORE
    • BUYER'S GUIDE
    • NEWSLETTERS >
      • Archive Issues
      • Subscribe to eNews
    • Store
    • ASK FSM AI
  • WEBINARS
  • FOOD SAFETY SUMMIT
  • FSM FEATURES
    • FSM Features Collection
    • eMag Archives
    • Editorial Advisory Board
    • Contact
    • Advertise
  • SIGN UP!
NewsFood TypeRegulatoryMeat/PoultryInspectionUSDA

USDA-FSIS Publishes FY 2024 PHRs and Thresholds

USDA FSIS logo

Credit: U.S. Department of Agriculture Food Safety and Inspection Service

August 11, 2023

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (USDA’s FSIS) recently posted its fiscal year (FY) 2024 Public Health Regulations (PHR) report. The report covers how FSIS determines PHRs and their thresholds. The FY 2024 PHRs and their thresholds will go into effect October 2023.

Public Health Regulations (PHRs) are verified regulations with statistically higher individual noncompliance rates in establishments in the three months prior to a microbiological positive or a public health-related enforcement action than in establishments with no positives or enforcement actions. This statistical association does not inherently imply that a particular regulation constitutes a more serious food safety concern, rather, it provides a statistical association to help FSIS better align scheduling criteria and agency resources. PHRs are not the only important food safety and public health related regulations, as noncompliance with other regulations remain critical indicators of public health concern but may not be statistically associated with PHR criteria.

FSIS updates its PHRs annually, and uses decision criteria described in FSIS Directive 5100.4 to prioritize establishments for Public Health Risk Evaluations (PHREs), including PHR noncompliance. FSIS has analyzed the most recent data to develop the FY 2024 PHR list, including the thresholds used to prioritize establishments for PHREs and to alert inspection personnel of elevated PHR noncompliance levels.

The PHR list for FY 2024 is as follows, the complete regulation descriptions for which can be read in the 2021 Code of Federal Regulations:

  • 310.18(a): Carcasses, organs, and other parts handled in a sanitary manner
  • 310.18(c): Written procedures to prevent contamination; all swine slaughter
  • 310.18(c)(2)(iii): Records of test results for sampling program
  • 310.18(d): Daily records sufficient to document the implementation and monitoring of contamination control procedures
  • 310.22(c): Disposal of specified risk material (SRM)
  • 310.22(e)(1): Written procedures for removal, segregation, and disposition of SRMs
  • 310.22(e)(2): Appropriate corrective actions
  • 310.22(e)(3): Evaluate effectiveness of procedures for removal, segregation, and disposition of SRMs
  • 310.22(f)(2): Use of routine operational sanitation procedures on equipment used to cut through SRMs
  • 310.3: Carcasses and parts in certain instances to be retained.
  • 318.2(a): All products subject to reinspection by program employees
  • 318.2(d): Removal of U.S. retained by authorized program employees only
  • 381.65(a): Clean and sanitary practices; products not adulterated
  • 381.65(f): Procedures for controlling visible fecal contamination
  • 381.65(g): Procedures for controlling contamination throughout the slaughter and dressing operation
  • 381.65(h): Recordkeeping requirements
  • 381.71(a): Condemnation on ante mortem inspection
  • 381.76(a): Post-mortem inspection, when required, extent
  • 381.76(b)(6)(ii)(A): New Poultry Inspection System (NPIS) Sorting, Trimming, and Reprocessing
  • 381.76(b)(6)(ii)(B): NPIS reprocessing and salvage
  • 381.76(b)(6)(ii)(D): Ready-to-Cook verification in NPIS
  • 381.91(a): Certain contaminated carcasses to be condemned
  • 381.91(b): Reprocessing of carcasses accidentally contaminated with digestive tract contents.
  • 416.1: Operate in a manner to prevent insanitary conditions
  • 416.12(c): Plan identifies procedures for pre-op
  • 416.13(a): Conduct pre-op procedures
  • 416.13(b): Conduct other procedures listed in the plan
  • 416.13(c): Plant monitors implementation of sanitation standard operating procedures (SSOPs)
  • 416.14: Evaluate effectiveness of SSOPs and maintain plan
  • 416.15(a): Appropriate corrective actions
  • 416.15(b): Procedures for corrective action
  • 416.16(a): Daily records required, responsible individual, initialed and dated
  • 416.2(a): Grounds and Pest Control
  • 416.2(b)(1): Sound construction, good repair and sufficient size
  • 416.2(b)(2): Walls/floors/ceilings durable, impervious, cleaned and sanitized
  • 416.2(b)(4): Inedible from edible separated by time or space
  • 416.3(b): Constructed, located and operated in a manner that does not deter inspection
  • 416.3(c): Receptacles for storing inedible material must identify permitted use
  • 416.4(a): Food contact surface, cleaning and sanitizing as frequency
  • 416.4(d): Product processing, handling, storage, loading, unloading, and during transportation must be protected
  • 416.6: Only FSIS program employee may remove "U.S. Rejected" tag
  • 417.2(a)(1): Hazard analysis
  • 417.2(c): Contents of Hazards Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) Plan
  • 417.2(c)(4): List of procedures and frequency
  • 417.3(a)(1): Identify and eliminate the cause
  • 417.3(a)(2): CCP is under control
  • 417.3(a)(3): Establish measures to prevent recurrence
  • 417.3(a)(4): No adulterated product enters commerce.
  • 417.3(b)(3): No adulterated product enters commerce.
  • 417.3(b)(4): Reassessment
  • 417.3(c): Document corrective actions
  • 417.4(a): Adequacy of HACCP in controlling food safety hazards
  • 417.4(a)(1): Initial validation
  • 417.4(b): Reassessment of hazard analysis
  • 417.5(a)(1): Written hazard analysis
  • 417.5(a)(2): Written HACCP plan
  • 417.5(a)(3): Records documentation and monitoring of CCP's and critical limits
  • 418.2: Notification of adulterated or misbranded product in commerce
  • 430.4(a): Listeria monocytogenes, post-lethality exposed ready-to-eat (RTE)
  • 430.4(b)(3): Alternative 3
  • 430.4(c)(2): Listeria monocytogenes, documentation that supports decision in hazard analysis
  • 430.4(c)(3): Listeria monocytogenes, maintain sanitation in post-lethality processing environment
  • 430.4(c)(5): Listeria monocytogenes, evaluate control measures in SSOP.

Compliance by establishments with these regulations will be evaluated and compared to cut points that have been set for two broad categories of establishment operations: Slaughter, and Combination (Processing plus Slaughter). The cut points are, for processing 2.49–3.76 percent, and for combination, 4.44–7.17 percent. The higher end of the range is the threshold at which FSIS will consider the establishment for a PHRE. The lower end of the range is the threshold at which FSIS inspection personnel will be notified via a PHIS Early Warning Alert that an establishment is at an elevated level.

Looking for quick answers on food safety topics?
Try Ask FSM, our new smart AI search tool.
Ask FSM →

KEYWORDS: Public Health Regulations USDA-FSIS

Share This Story

Recommended Content

JOIN TODAY
to unlock your recommendations.

Already have an account? Sign In

  • people holding baby chicks

    Serovar Differences Matter: Utility of Deep Serotyping in Broiler Production and Processing

    This article discusses the significance of Salmonella in...
    Microbiological Control
    By: Nikki Shariat Ph.D.
  • woman washing hands

    Building a Culture of Hygiene in the Food Processing Plant

    Everyone entering a food processing facility needs to...
    Facilities
    By: Richard F. Stier, M.S.
  • graphical representation of earth over dirt

    Climate Change and Emerging Risks to Food Safety: Building Climate Resilience

    This article examines the multifaceted threats to food...
    Risk Assessment
    By: Maria Cristina Tirado Ph.D., D.V.M. and Shamini Albert Raj M.A.
Manage My Account
  • eMagazine Subscription
  • Subscribe to Newsletters
  • Manage My Preferences
  • Website Registration
  • Subscription Customer Service

More Videos

Sponsored Content

Sponsored Content is a special paid section where industry companies provide high quality, objective, non-commercial content around topics of interest to the Food Safety Magazine audience. All Sponsored Content is supplied by the advertising company and any opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily reflect the views of Food Safety Magazine or its parent company, BNP Media. Interested in participating in our Sponsored Content section? Contact your local rep!

close
  • Top view portrait of two factory workers standing by conveyor belt during quality inspection at food production, copy space
    Sponsored byFlexXray

    Foreign Material By the Numbers: What the 2026 Benchmark Report Reveals

  • a conveyorized industrial metal detector system that appears to resemble a Loma Systems IQ4 Metal Detector setup with an integrated conveyor belt and control panel for food or package inspection.
    Sponsored byMettler Toledo

    Beyond Detection: How to Avoid Physical Contamination in Food Through a Smarter Inspection Strategy

  • The image displays a bottling plant production line, commonly used in the beverage industry for filling and packaging soft drinks.
    Sponsored byBIOIONIX

    Sustainability with ROI: A Beverage Producer Case Study in Water Savings

Popular Stories

farmer walking through field of lettuce

With Cyclospora Lettuce Outbreak Over, Taylor Farms Speaks Up as FDA is Questioned

warehouse manager

FDA Announces Food Traceability Rule Exemption for Certain Small Businesses, Considers Additional Flexibilities

Managers discuss operations in canned fish production facility

Building Leadership Buy-In for Food Safety

allergens ebook

Events

October 15, 2026

How to Prevent Physical Contamination in Food Production and Strengthen Compliance

Live: October 15, 2026 at 2:00 pm EDT: Attend this webinar to gain insight into how product inspection helps protect your brand, reduce recall risk, and support compliance.

October 29, 2026

FDA Proposes Major GRAS Reform: What It Could Mean for Your Business

Live: October 29, 2026 at 2:00 pm EDT: Attend this webinar to examine potential implications for self-GRAS, Flavor and Extract Manufacturers Association (FEMA) GRAS, and food-contact substances.

November 5, 2026

How Middle Managers Shape Food Safety Culture and Risk Performance

Live: November 5, 2026 at 11:00 am EST: From this webinar, attendees will learn how investing in middle managers improves both FSQ strategy implementation and accountability across all levels of the company.

View All

Products

Global Food Safety Microbial Interventions and Molecular Advancements

Global Food Safety Microbial Interventions and Molecular Advancements

See More Products

Related Articles

  • FDA overlay dollar bills

    FDA Publishes FY 2024 User Fees for VQIP and TPP

    See More
  • scientist testing samples

    USDA-FSIS Publishes Sampling Plan for FY 2025

    See More
  • USDA FSIS logo

    USDA FSIS Publishes FY2023 Public Health Regulations

    See More

Related Products

See More Products
  • 9781032369990 (1).webp

    Food Safety Quality Control and Management

  • food safety.jpg

    Food Safety Contaminants and Risk Assessment

See More Products

Related Directories

  • Schneider Food Safety Services

    We are a boutique regulatory (FDA/USDA) consulting firm, and we support companies with FSMA 204 traceability compliance and other regulated processes.
  • StateFoodSafety

    StateFoodSafety develops and publishes technology-enhanced food safety training and certification programs that provide superior value to regulatory, restaurant, and hospitality communities. We invite you to measure our effectiveness and enjoy A Better Learning Experience®.
  • Vega Analytical Labs

    Vega Analytical Labs is an ISO 17025:2017 accredited growing analytical laboratory headquartered in Farmers Branch, TX, at the heart of the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex. We provide comprehensive microbiological testing, environmental monitoring, shelf-life studies, water quality analysis, and rapid detection services to food manufacturers, ingredient suppliers, importers, and foodservice operators throughout Texas and across the United States. Our team brings 25+ years of combined expertise and the capacity to process 10,000+ tests annually. All testing is conducted exclusively under AOAC Official Methods, FDA Bacteriological Analytical Manual (BAM), and USDA FSIS Microbiology Laboratory Guidebook (MLG) validated methods. We are committed to delivering scientifically rigorous results and building lasting partnerships with every client we serve.
×

Never miss the latest news and trends driving the food safety industry

Newsletters | Website | FSM Features Collection

JOIN TODAY!
  • RESOURCES
    • Advertise
    • Contact Us
    • Directories
    • Store
    • Want More
  • SIGN UP TODAY
    • Create Account
    • eMagazine
    • Newsletters
    • Customer Service
    • Manage Preferences
  • SERVICES
    • Marketing Services
    • Reprints
    • Market Research
    • List Rental
    • Survey/Respondent Access
  • STAY CONNECTED
    • LinkedIn
    • Facebook
    • Instagram
    • X (Twitter)
  • PRIVACY
    • PRIVACY POLICY
    • TERMS & CONDITIONS
    • DO NOT SELL MY PERSONAL INFORMATION
    • PRIVACY REQUEST
    • ACCESSIBILITY

Copyright ©2026. All Rights Reserved BNP Media, Inc. and BNP Media II, LLC.

Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing