ISO 9001 vs ISO 22000: quality vs food safety for mid-market food manufacturers

This page is a buying comparison. It is for operations, quality, and food-safety leads at mid-market food, beverage, ingredient, and food-contact packaging manufacturers who are about to send a registrar request and cannot agree whether ISO 9001 or ISO 22000 belongs on it.

Those standards are not the same product. ISO 9001 is the quality management system (QMS). ISO 22000 is the food safety management system (FSMS). A customer portal, a retailer manual, and a co-packer agreement will use words that sound alike: quality, HACCP, GFSI, food safety, packaging. Sales conversations will offer to "cover food safety inside the quality quote." The useful question is a procurement question: which certificate does this cycle have to produce, and can you show the system behind it.

Quality versus environment, when food safety is not this cycle, is ISO 9001 vs ISO 14001. The plant stack of 9001, 14001, and 45001 is the integrated management systems guide. ISO 22000 is not a fourth logo on that stack. After you pick the certificate, the request still uses one outbound scope pack. You still verify accreditation for the legal entity, the scheme, and the edition. Once the scope is frozen, days, sites, and travel are what drives cost. The calendar is how long certification takes. This page does not invent prices, audit-day counts, transition deadlines, accreditation identifiers, or claims about which firms are accredited.

The decision here is narrower: 9001 only this cycle, 22000 added to a 9001 scope you already hold, both together, 22000 only, or a GFSI-benchmarked scheme such as FSSC 22000 because the customer named that scheme. Then one honest request. When the customer has named FSSC 22000, SQF, or BRCGS, and the argument is which of those schemes this cycle, use FSSC 22000 vs SQF vs BRCGS. This page still does not choose among them.

1. What each standard certifies

Skip the clause lecture. Buyers do not award work because they memorized a table of contents. Read the edition, then read the system you can walk.

ISO 9001 is the QMS. ISO's public page for ISO 9001:2026 describes ISO 9001 as a quality management standard whose requirements define how to establish, implement, maintain, and continually improve a quality management system. The same page says it is for organizations that want to meet customer and applicable statutory and regulatory requirements and enhance customer satisfaction, in any size or sector. It says certification is one way to demonstrate that commitment, and that certification is not mandatory. Within the ISO 9000 family, the page says ISO 9001 is the only standard that can be certified to. ISO's management system standards page says ISO does not perform certification.

The certificate is the management system. It is not a product mark, a recipe approval, or a promise that every unit is perfect. A certification body samples how an order becomes a product, how nonconforming work is caught, and who owns the process.

ISO 9001:2015 is edition 5. ISO's page gives the status as withdrawn, at stage 95.99 on 16 September 2026, and names ISO 9001:2026 as the revision. The 2015 page says that edition is no longer current, and that organizations certified to it should consult their certification body about transition. ISO's 2026 page says certified organizations will have to transition within the timeframe set by their certification cycle, and that they should contact their certification body for further information. Those sentences are ISO's public description. They are not a date on a schedule, and they are not a customer waiver. Put the edition you will claim on the request. A body can certify ISO 9001:2026 only when its accreditation covers that edition. A certificate that still says 2015 did not reprint itself on 16 September 2026.

ISO 22000 is the FSMS. ISO's public page for ISO 22000:2018 describes edition 2, published in June 2018, corrected in November 2018 for the Spanish text only. The page says the edition was last reviewed and confirmed in 2023, so this version remains current. It also says the standard is at stage 90.92 (to be revised) and is expected to be replaced by ISO/DIS 22000. Do not ask a certification body to certify the draft. The certificate you can discuss today is ISO 22000:2018, plus the amendment only if you will claim it.

ISO's page says ISO 22000 specifies requirements for a food safety management system so organizations in the food chain can consistently provide safe products and services. It integrates the principles of the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) system and the application steps developed by the Codex Alimentarius Commission. It combines interactive communication, system management, and prerequisite programmes. ISO's food safety management page says the standard maps what an organization needs to do to demonstrate its ability to control food safety hazards so that food is safe, and that any organization can use it regardless of size or position in the food chain. Certification is one way to demonstrate the system. ISO's 22000 page says certification is not a requirement of the standard, and that ISO does not perform certification.

The same page says the standard applies to organizations of any size involved in the production of food, supplies, and food contact materials, and in retail, catering, and related services. Primary producers, food manufacturers, transport and storage operators, caterers, retailers, and subcontractors are named. A beverage plant, an ingredient plant, and a plant that makes packaging or other food-contact materials can be inside that sentence. The sentence does not choose the certificate. The customer specification still does.

The 2018 edition has one published amendment. ISO 22000:2018/Amd 1:2024 is titled climate action changes, published in February 2024, and ISO's page says it applies to ISO 22000:2018. This guide does not paraphrase the amendment. Name it on the request if you will claim it, and ask whether the live schedule includes it.

You can hold both a quality certificate and a food safety certificate on one legal entity. This page is about which one this request is for, and which edition or scheme.

2. The shared structure, and what ISO 22000 adds

ISO's management system standards page says management system standards can work together because of the Harmonized Structure. The idea is that the standards are laid out the same way, whatever the subject. Annex SL, on the same page, is the shared text and the shared terms. ISO says that is particularly useful when one management system has to meet two or more standards at once. The same page says certification is not required, and that ISO does not perform certification.

ISO's ISO 22000:2018 page still uses the earlier name for that layout. It says ISO 22000 follows the same High-Level Structure (HLS) as other ISO management system standards, such as ISO 9001, so it can be integrated into an existing management system or used alone. ISO/TC 34/SC 17's January 2019 FAQ says the same thing in buying language: ISO 22000 was written to be integrated with ISO 9001, the management-system elements are largely those of ISO 9001 with food-safety amendments, and the operations requirements are where the standard uses the Codex HACCP principles in a form that fits the rest of the food safety system. Quality asks whether the product meets the specification. Food safety asks whether hazards are controlled so the product is safe. Shared headings do not make those the same audit.

Shared structure is why a plant that already runs document control, internal audit, management review, and corrective action can put food safety on the same calendar as quality. It is not a finding that the technical work is the same, and it is not a discount. This page does not publish a day reduction. If a body offers one, the method has to be written on the quote. How to read that reply is what a quote includes.

What ISO 22000 adds, on ISO's own pages and in that committee FAQ, is the food safety system a quality audit does not sample:

HACCP principles. ISO's 22000 page says the standard integrates the HACCP principles and application steps developed by Codex. The committee FAQ says this is a management system around those principles, not a photocopy of a HACCP chart with no policy, no leadership, no internal audit, and no management review. A wall chart of critical control points is not the system.

Prerequisite programmes (PRPs). These are the basic conditions and activities that keep a hygienic environment: the committee FAQ's examples are the programmes that are not selected to control one identified hazard, such as good hygienic practice. ISO's 22000 page names prerequisite programmes as one of the key elements. The same FAQ says the ISO/TS 22002 series is guidance for building those programmes to support ISO 22000, and that those technical specifications are not intended to be certified as documents on their own. ISO's 22000 page still describes the family as including the ISO/TS 22002 series. Foundation FSSC's current pages say FSSC 22000 uses the ISO 22002 series as sector-specific PRPs inside that scheme. Ask which documents the body will audit. Do not ask to be certified to a PRP specification by itself.

The hazard control plan. The committee FAQ says ISO 22000 links three groups through the hazard analysis. Prerequisite programmes maintain the hygienic environment. Operational prerequisite programmes (OPRPs) are control measures, identified by the hazard analysis, that prevent or reduce a significant food safety hazard and are not managed as critical control points. Critical control points (CCPs) are the steps where control measures prevent or reduce a significant food safety hazard to an acceptable level. The FAQ calls the combination of OPRPs and CCPs the hazard control plan, and says the standard combines that plan with the prerequisite programmes into one hazard control system. Someone on the plant has to be able to walk that plan. A quality control plan for colour, fill weight, or label copy is a different document.

Interactive communication along the food chain. ISO's 22000 page names interactive communication as a key element, together with system management, prerequisite programmes, and HACCP principles. The committee FAQ says the standard takes a food-chain approach: the organization has to consider the food chain before and after its own operations when it builds the system. For a mid-market plant that is suppliers, co-packers, transport, and the customers who set specifications. It is not a newsletter.

Question	ISO 9001	ISO 22000
System	Quality management system	Food safety management system
Current edition on iso.org	ISO 9001:2026, published 16 September 2026. ISO 9001:2015 was withdrawn the same day	ISO 22000:2018, confirmed in 2023, plus amendment 1:2024 (climate action changes). A draft revision is under development. Do not certify the draft
What the audit samples	Processes that deliver conforming product or service, customer requirements, and correction when work fails	Control of food safety hazards: prerequisite programmes, hazard analysis, and the hazard control plan, plus communication along the food chain
HACCP, on the public pages	Not the subject of the standard	Integrated from Codex, inside a management system
Who often asks	Customers, tenders, and supplier approvals that name a quality certificate	A named party that wants an accredited FSMS certificate. A party that names FSSC 22000 or another GFSI-recognized programme is asking for a different document. Read section 4
Shared design	Harmonized Structure and Annex SL with other ISO management system standards. ISO's 22000 page still calls the shared layout the High-Level Structure	The same shared layout, which ISO says makes integration with 9001 practical
What does not transfer	An FSMS certificate, a HACCP wall chart, or an FSSC 22000 certificate	A quality certificate, a product approval, or a retailer listing

A quality system can sit beside a food safety system. Treating a metal-detector check as a quality inspection does not establish the hazard analysis, and it does not produce an ISO 22000 certificate. The reverse is also true. An FSMS that controls hazards does not, by itself, show that you meet customer quality requirements that are not food safety hazards.

3. How FSSC 22000 relates to ISO 22000 and to GFSI

Say this only in the words those organizations publish. This page does not rank schemes, and it does not invent a retailer mandate.

FSSC 22000 is a certification scheme that uses ISO 22000. It is not a reprint of ISO 22000. Foundation FSSC's scheme page describes FSSC 22000 as a complete certification scheme for food safety management systems, aligned with the ISO management system approach and the ISO Harmonized Structure. The same page says the scheme uses international standards such as ISO 22000 and the ISO 22002 series for sector-specific prerequisite programmes. FSSC's steps toward certification say an organization has to meet three elements: ISO 22000, the ISO 22002 series for prerequisite programmes, and the FSSC 22000 scheme requirements. Meeting ISO 22000 alone is the first element, not the certificate.

The FSSC 22000 Scheme, Version 7 (May 2026) states the normative documents as ISO 22000:2018, the relevant sector prerequisite programmes based on the ISO 22002-x series, and FSSC 22000 additional requirements. It says the food-chain categories follow ISO 22003-1:2022. It says the scheme allows integration with other ISO management system standards, including quality, environment, and occupational health and safety. It also says that, as of February 2010, the scheme has been benchmarked and recognized by the Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI). That is Foundation FSSC's statement about the scheme. It is not a statement that every published version is on GFSI's current recognized list. Version 7's own introduction says one reason for the update was aligning the scheme with the GFSI benchmarking requirements of 2024. Alignment language is not a recognition announcement.

GFSI recognizes certification programmes. It does not certify plants, and the benchmarking requirements are not a standard you implement. GFSI's page of recognized certification programme owners says the benchmarking requirements were first created in 2001 by a group of retailers in order to harmonise food safety standards across the supply chain. The same page says those requirements are not a food safety standard, and that food businesses are not audited or certified against them. Recognized programme owners do that work. GFSI recognition, in GFSI's words, is something a programme owner earns by meeting the benchmarking requirements.

On that recognized-programme page, FSSC 22000 version 6 is listed against Version 2020 of the benchmarking requirements. The scopes named there include pre-process handling of plant products, animal primary conversion, processing of perishable animal products, perishable plant products, mixed products, and ambient stable products, production of feed, storage and distribution, production of food packaging, and production of (bio)chemicals and bio-cultures used as food ingredients or processing aids. Read the page for the scope letters. Do not guess which letter your plant is. Production of food packaging is a published scope on that FSSC version 6 entry, which is why a food-contact packaging plant reads it. An ingredient plant should not assume it is the (bio)chemical scope. Name the products, and let the customer specification and the certification body map the category.

ISO 22000 is not a certification programme on that list. The programmes named there are scheme owners, and the FSSC entry on the Version 2020 list is FSSC 22000 version 6, not the ISO standard by itself. An ISO 22000 certificate and a GFSI-recognized certificate are different artifacts until the customer says otherwise in writing.

FSSC 22000 version 7 is a different line on GFSI's site. GFSI's page of programmes undergoing benchmarking against Version 2024 lists FSSC 22000 version 7 among the programmes in that process. GFSI's consultation notice for that version says the public consultation step closed, and it describes FSSC 22000 as a scheme based on ISO 22000 and the ISO 22002-x series, with certification accredited to ISO/IEC 17021-1 and ISO 22003-1. A closed consultation is not the final recognition vote. Until version 7 appears on the recognized-programme page, do not tell a customer that a version 7 certificate is the GFSI-recognized version. Open both GFSI pages in the week you send the request. This guide does not freeze a later decision.

FSSC's certification steps page also describes annual surveillance audits and a recertification audit once every three years, after an FSSC-licensed certification body conducts the initial audit. That is FSSC's public description of maintaining an FSSC certificate. It is not a fee, and it is not a day count. Plain ISO 22000 follows the certification body's ISO management-system programme. Ask the body to restate the cycle for the scheme you named. The general chapter, once you know which rules apply, is surveillance and recertification.

4. When a buyer or retailer may ask for a GFSI-benchmarked scheme

Start from the sentence in the supplier manual, the portal, or the specification. GFSI's recognized-programme page says the benchmarking requirements were first created in 2001 by a group of retailers, to harmonize food safety standards across the supply chain. That history does not tell you what this customer accepts. This page does not publish a list of retailers, brands, or grocers, and it does not claim that any of them require a GFSI-recognized certificate. Check your customer requirements.

Read the noun.

The field says ISO 9001, or "a quality certificate," and nobody has named food safety. The product this cycle is ISO 9001, in the edition you will claim and the body is accredited to issue. Leave ISO 22000 off the request.

The field says ISO 22000, an accredited food safety management system, or a certified FSMS, and it does not name a GFSI-recognized programme. The product to discuss is ISO 22000:2018, with amendment 1:2024 only if you will claim it and the schedule lists it. Do not upgrade the request to FSSC 22000 because a homepage said GFSI is better. Do not downgrade a named FSSC request to plain ISO 22000 because the plant already wrote a HACCP plan.

The field says FSSC 22000, or it names FSSC and a version. The product is that scheme: ISO 22000, plus the sector PRPs the scheme requires, plus the FSSC additional requirements, audited by an FSSC-licensed certification body. Ask which version they accept if the portal is silent, and get the answer in writing before you book. A version that is still on GFSI's "undergoing benchmarking" page is not the same sentence as a version on the recognized list.

The field says GFSI, "GFSI benchmarked," or "a GFSI-recognized scheme," without a programme name. GFSI does not certify your plant. Ask which recognized programme they accept, and which scope. FSSC 22000 version 6 is one programme on the current recognized list. It is not the only one. When the customer names FSSC 22000, SQF, or BRCGS, the comparison of those three schemes is FSSC 22000 vs SQF vs BRCGS. If the customer names IFS or another programme on that list, that scheme is still a different buy, with its own owner and its own rules. Do not ask a body to "cover GFSI" as if it were an ISO standard.

The field says HACCP and nothing else. Ask what document they will accept. ISO 22000 integrates HACCP principles inside an FSMS. A standalone HACCP study, a customer audit, or a regulatory plan can be a different artifact. Quoting ISO 22000 does not finish a plan they did not ask for, and a HACCP binder does not finish ISO 22000.

Put 9001 on this cycle when most of these are true:

• A named customer, portal, tender, or supplier approval requires 9001, or an accredited quality certificate, on a date you can point at.
• You can describe the products and processes in the quality scope, and which legal entity operates that work.
• Someone owns the quality system and can be interviewed.
• Food-safety pressure is a forecast: a conversation you expect, a slide that says "GFSI later," a customer who has not written the scheme down. A forecast is not a date that kills a contract this cycle.
• You are not offering a quality certificate as a stand-in for a food safety certificate, or for an FSSC 22000 certificate, already named in the exhibit.

Put 22000 on this cycle when most of these are true:

• A named customer requires an accredited ISO 22000 certificate, on a date you can point at, and has not named FSSC 22000 or another GFSI-recognized programme instead.
• You can describe the products, the sites that make or handle them, and the food-chain position: manufacturer, ingredient supplier, food-contact packaging, storage, or something else you can defend.
• Someone owns prerequisite programmes, the hazard analysis, the hazard control plan, and communication with suppliers and customers, and can show those records.
• Quality pressure is a forecast, or you already hold a quality certificate the customer still accepts.
• You are not offering an ISO 22000 certificate as a stand-in for a GFSI-recognized programme the customer already named.

Put FSSC 22000 (or the other named programme) on this cycle when the customer wrote that name, and the system you can show includes the extra requirements that scheme adds on top of ISO 22000. If those extra requirements do not exist, do not send. Build them, or hire an implementer who will not also certify you, then send the request. Who writes the system versus who certifies it is consultant vs certification body.

If neither system exists, do not send. Readiness still has the first-certificate shape. The content is the QMS, the FSMS, or both. What the first visits are for sits in Stage 1 versus Stage 2.

5. Integrated 9001 and 22000 audits

An integrated audit is honest when both systems already run, shared processes are real, and one certification-body legal entity is accredited for every standard and edition on the page. You may still receive two certificates. Say which processes are shared and which work is standard-specific.

Shared, when they are actually shared: document control, internal audit, management review, corrective action, competence, and the calendar that reaches both systems. The committee FAQ and ISO's 22000 page are the reason a combined programme is possible. They are not a reason to hide a missing hazard analysis.

Standard-specific: customer quality requirements, process control, and nonconforming product that is a quality failure rather than a food safety hazard. On the food safety side: prerequisite programmes, the hazard analysis, OPRPs, CCPs, and the communication with the rest of the food chain. They are not one manual with two covers.

Foundation FSSC's scheme document says the scheme allows integration with ISO management system standards such as quality, environment, and occupational health and safety. That permission is about audit design. It does not put 14001 or 45001 on this request. Keep those on the plant stack unless a customer has named them this cycle. Food safety is not a fourth mark you add so the quote looks complete.

If the body that holds your ISO 9001 accreditation is not accredited for ISO 22000, it is not your food safety certification body until the schedule changes. Use a second body and say so. Each still receives the same facts. If the scheme is FSSC 22000, licensing is a second door: FSSC's pages say the audit is done by an FSSC-licensed certification body. Accreditation for ISO 22000 is not that licence. Ask for both, in writing.

More than one plant, warehouse, or packaging line still follows multi-site certification scope. A sales office that never handles the product is a weak candidate for the food safety scope. A warehouse that stores the certified product is not invisible because quality lives at headquarters. The committee FAQ, discussing an earlier certification document, says a line or process that bears on the food safety of the product belongs in the certified scope. Write the boundary on purpose. Do not hope the body draws it the way you would.

You hold 9001, and someone has now said food safety. Name the 9001 certificate on the pack: legal entity, issuer, edition, scope, expiry. If that certificate says ISO 9001:2015, say so. Whether this cycle also moves quality to ISO 9001:2026 is a separate line: only when you will claim 2026, the customer will accept it, and the schedule lists it. Do not let a food safety add silently become a 9001 transition. ISO's transition sentence tells you to talk to the certification body. It does not put 2026 on a schedule that still names only 2015.

You hold neither. Buy both this cycle only when each certificate is a dated requirement and both systems exist on one legal entity, with accreditation for every edition and, if FSSC is named, licensing for that scheme. Do not stack 22000 onto a first 9001 quote because a brochure said food is included.

6. How to scope the RFQ

One narrative, so the facts do not drift. The request uses the scope pack. Food safety changes specific rows. It does not replace the pack with a letter that says "please include 22000."

Fact	If ISO 9001 is this cycle	If food safety is this cycle
What you are buying	An accredited QMS certificate for the edition you will claim	An accredited ISO 22000:2018 certificate, amendment 1:2024 only if you will claim it, or an FSSC 22000 certificate for the version the customer named
Edition or version	9001:2026, or 9001:2015 only when a customer or a live schedule still uses that withdrawn edition	22000:2018, confirmed in 2023. For FSSC, the version on the portal. Ask whether that version is the one the body is accredited and, for FSSC, licensed to issue
How it relates to the other standard	Say whether 22000 or FSSC is a later add, already held, or out of scope	Add to an existing 9001 scope, buy 9001 and the food-safety scheme together, or the food-safety scheme only
Sites	Where the certified work happens, with headcount bands and shifts	Producing sites, packaging lines, and warehouses that handle the product. Name what is outside, including a sales office that does not handle product
Product categories	Products and services in the quality scope, and exclusions you will defend	The products in the customer's words: beverage, ingredient, food-contact packaging, or whatever you actually make. Ask the body which food-chain category it will print. Do not invent the category code
Document the owner can show	Processes that match the work, plus internal audit and management review of this system	Prerequisite programmes, hazard analysis, hazard control plan (OPRPs and CCPs), and the records of communication up and down the food chain
Scheme	ISO 9001. Not a food safety scheme	Write "ISO 22000 only" or "FSSC 22000" or the other programme the customer named. "GFSI" is not a scheme
Accreditation body	The mark the customer accepts, on the legal entity that will sign, for that 9001 edition	The same test, read for ISO 22000 or for FSSC 22000, not only for 9001. For FSSC, ask for the FSSC licence as well
Out of scope on purpose	Name it	Products, sites, and schemes you will not claim. A PRP specification is not a certificate you hold

Headcount is a band per location. A night shift still counts when the line runs at night. Ask the questions in what a quote includes. This page does not publish a fee or a day count.

Accreditation is a separate line from a quality schedule. The method is how to verify accreditation. ISO 22000 accreditation is not included in an ISO 9001 line. FSSC 22000 is not included in an ISO 22000 line unless the schedule says so. Narrower means a separate scope, not a ranking of firms.

ISO's 22000 page says the family includes the ISO 22003 series, the requirements for bodies that provide food safety conformity assessment. GFSI's description of FSSC 22000 says that certification is accredited to ISO/IEC 17021-1 and ISO 22003-1. Those are requirements on the body. They are not certificates your plant implements. The 2019 committee FAQ discusses an earlier document, ISO/TS 22003:2013. Do not cite 2013 as the current rule. Ask the body which edition of the conformity-assessment document sits behind the schedule it is offering.

IAF CertSearch is where you trace accredited certificates and certification-body identities. The accreditation-body directory is where that body's own scope lives. For the marks buyers most often see on a proposal here, start with ANAB or UKAS. Other accreditation bodies can be legitimate. The test is the mark your customer accepts and the legal entity on that body's current schedule.

This site's directory tags ISO 9001. It does not tag ISO 22000 or FSSC 22000. A 9001 tag is not accreditation for either a quality edition you have not checked or a food safety scheme.

Two profiles already in the directory publish a food-safety note you can read before you shortlist. Neither note is a new accreditation claim, and neither replaces the live schedule.

Eagle Certification Group records two legal entities at the same Dayton address. The profile says EAGLE Food Registrations Inc. has an ANAB scope, issue date 24 April 2026, that lists ISO 22000:2018 and FSSC 22000 (version 6 as of 31 March 2024), plus ISO 9001:2015 only for food products, paper, pulp and paper, chemicals, rubber and plastic products, and transport, storage and communication. The management-system scope on that issue lists only Dayton. EAGLE Registrations Inc. is a different issuer. A quality line on the management-system company is not the food company's scope. If your customer named FSSC 22000 version 7, this published issue does not show version 7. Ask, and read the live schedule.

NQA's profile says its UKAS summary names food safety, and that this directory does not tag that scheme. The profile does not name ISO 22000 or FSSC 22000. Ask for the line. Do not read "food safety" as a scheme the file did not print.

No other profile in this directory's registrar files publishes an ISO 22000 or FSSC 22000 scope. Absence from a profile is not a finding that the firm is unaccredited. It is a finding that this site has not verified the line. How to choose a registrar still applies after the schedule matches: sector experience, the mark the customer will accept, and independence from anyone who wrote the system.

7. Send one request

Make the call in one sitting. Put one sentence at the top of the request.

1. Write the requirement in their words. If one field says ISO 9001 and another says ISO 22000 or FSSC 22000, note which deal is blocked this cycle. If a field says GFSI, HACCP, or a programme this page did not compare, mark it as a document you still have to identify. Do not translate it into ISO 22000 on a guess.
2. Match it to a system you can show. A 9001 request needs processes you can walk. An ISO 22000 request needs prerequisite programmes, a hazard analysis, and a hazard control plan you can walk, plus the food-chain communication. An FSSC 22000 request needs those, plus the scheme requirements the version adds. If that system does not exist, do not send.
3. Name the edition or the version. 9001:2026, or 9001:2015 only with a reason you can defend. 22000:2018, and amendment 1:2024 only if you will claim it. FSSC 22000 with the version the customer accepts, checked against the GFSI page if they also said "GFSI-recognized."
4. Pick one design. 9001 only, food safety added to the 9001 certificate you hold, both together, or the food-safety scheme only. Combined designs need both the evidence and a live accreditation line for every edition. FSSC also needs a licensed certification body.
5. Check the signer before you invite them. Use how to verify accreditation for the legal entity, the mark, the scheme, and the edition. ISO 22000 is its own line. FSSC 22000 is its own line.

If the room is still split after step 4, do the work that unblocks the deal and park the other certificate until its evidence and its accreditation line exist.

When a certificate is the artifact, send one registrar RFQ / scope pack. The Get quotes form does not list ISO 22000 or FSSC 22000. In Scope notes, name the scheme, the edition or version, the sites, the product categories, and whether this cycle adds food safety to an existing 9001 scope, buys both, or seeks the food-safety scheme only. Tick ISO 9001 only when that certificate is part of the request. Do not let a ticked 9001 box stand in for a food-safety-only request. Put any certificate you already hold in Existing certificates. Submit once.