Page 117 - 2023 Taiwan Food and Drug Administration Annual Report

7Appendix

Numbering Project name Results

(V) Traceability: 19 companies were not applicable, 3 companies were asked to

correct by a given deadline, and all of them were qualified through the re-

inspections.

(VI) Electronic declaration: 19 companies were not applicable, 11 companies were

asked to correct by a given deadline and 1 company failed the re-inspections.

3 HACCP Inspection (VII) Food safety monitoring plan: 37 companies were not applicable, 1 company
Project for Canned was asked to correct by a given deadline and was qualified through the re-
inspections.
Food Factories
(VIII) Product liability insurance: All 69 companies met requirements.

(IX) Others:

1.1 company did not hire hygiene inspectors.

2.1 company did not hire specialized professionals or licensed technicians.

II. Labeling: 2 cases out of 165 cases did not meet requirements.

III. Random inspection: All 115 cases met requirements.

I. Inspected: 31 companies

(I) GHP: 12 companies were asked to correct by a given deadline and all were

qualified through the re-inspections.

(II) Food business registration: 6 companies were asked to correct by a given

deadline and all were qualified through the re-inspections.

(III) Mandatory inspection: 3 companies were not applicable, 4 companies were

asked to correct by a given deadline and all were qualified through the re-

inspections.

Inspection Project (IV) Traceability: 2 companies were not applicable, 3 companies were asked to

4 for Food Additive correct by a given deadline, and all of them were qualified through the re-

Manufacturing inspections.

(V) Electronic declaration: 3 companies were not applicable, 4 companies were

asked to correct by a given deadline and all were qualified through the re-

inspections.

(VI) Food safety monitoring plan: 16 companies were not applicable, 3 companies

were asked to correct by a given deadline and all were qualified through the re-

inspections.

II. Labeling: All 42 cases met requirements.

III. Random inspection: All 13 cases met requirements.

I. Inspected: 40 companies

(I) GHP/Good operation practice for health food factories: 9 companies were not

applicable, 4 companies were asked to correct by a given deadline and all

qualified through the re-inspections.

(II) Food business registration: All 40 companies were qualified.

(III) Mandatory inspection: 16 companies were not applicable, 1 company was asked

to correct by a given deadline and was qualified through the re-inspections.

(IV) Use and management of food additives: 12 companies were not applicable, 3

companies were asked to correct by a given deadline, and all were qualified

5 Inspection project through the re-inspections.
for domestic source (V) Traceability: 17 companies were not applicable and all the remaining 23
providers of health
foods, vitamin tables companies were qualified.
and capsules and (VI) Food safety monitoring plan: 16 companies were not applicable and the
specialized nutritious
remaining 24 companies were all qualified.
foods (VII) Food Traceability Management Information System: 17 companies were not

applicable, 2 companies were asked to correct by a given deadline and all were
qualified through the re-inspections.

(VIII) Retention of source documents: 4 companies were not applicable and the

remaining 36 companies were all qualified.

(IX) Waste management: 9 companies were not applicable, 1 company was asked to

correct by a given deadline and was qualified through the re-inspections.

(X) Registration: 1 case out of 82 cases did not meet requirements.

II. Labeling: 3 cases out of 80 cases did not meet requirements.

III.Random inspection:

(I) Infant or follow-up formula food: All 10 cases met requirements.

(II) Empty capsule shells: 1 case out of 12 cases did not meet requirements.

115