Page 119 - 2023 Taiwan Food and Drug Administration Annual Report

7Appendix

Numbering Project name Results

I. Inspected: 172 companies

(I) GHP: 84 companies were asked to correct by a given deadline and 1 company of

them failed the re-inspections.

(II) Food business registration: 2 companies were not applicable, 34 companies

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

inspections.

(III) Legitimacy of sources of food processing gases: 4 companies used such gases

8 Inspection Project and all met requirements.
for Bakery and (IV) Retention of source documents: 8 companies were asked to correct by a given

Manufacturing Sites deadline and all were qualified through the re-inspections.
(V) Product liability insurance: 2 companies were not applicable and 1 company did

not meet requirements.

(VI) Bakery products labeling: 2 companies did not meet requirements.

(VII)Others:

1.5 companies stored expired foods.

2.The labeling of oil and fat raw material product 1 case did not meet

requirements.

II. Random inspection: 1 case out of 309 cases did not meet requirements.

I. Inspected: 25 companies

(I) GHP: 2 companies were not applicable, 8 companies were asked to correct by a

given deadline, and all of them were qualified through the re-inspections.

(II) Food business registration: 7 companies were asked to correct by a given

deadline and all were qualified through the re-inspections.

(III) Gases to be used in foods: 21 companies were not applicable, 2 companies were

9 Inspection project asked to correct by a given deadline, and all of them were qualified through the
for local grain re-inspections.
(IV) Traceability: 20 companies were not applicable and all the remaining 5
supplements for companies were qualified.
babies and young (V) Electronic declaration: 20 companies were not applicable, 1 company was asked
to correct by a given deadline and was qualified through the re-inspections.
children

(VI) Food safety monitoring plan: 20 companies were not applicable, 1 company was

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

(VII) Product liability insurance: 1 company did not meet requirements.

(VIII) Others: 2 companies stored expired foods.

II. Labeling: 4 cases out of 62 cases did not meet requirements.

III.Random inspection: All 30 cases met requirements.

I. Inspected: 37 companies

(I) GHP: 29 companies were asked to correct by a given deadline and all were

qualified through the re-inspections.

(II) Food business registration: 12 companies were asked to correct by a given

deadline and all were qualified through the re-inspections.

(III) Mandatory inspection: 36 companies were not applicable and 1 company met

requirements.

(IV) Use and management of food additives: 8 companies were not applicable, 19

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

through the re-inspections.

Inspection Project for (V) raceability: 36 companies were not applicable and 1 company met requirements.

10 Beverage Ingredient (VI) Food safety monitoring programs: 36 companies were not applicable and 1

Manufacturers company met requirements.

(VII) Food Traceability Management Information System: 36 companies were not

applicable, 1 company was asked to correct by a given deadline and was

qualified through the re-inspections.

(VIII) Waste management: 13 companies were asked to correct by a given deadline

and all were qualified through the re-inspections.

(IX) Others:

1.1 company stored expired foods.

2.1 company did not hire hygiene inspectors.

II. Labeling: 3 cases out of 43 cases did not meet requirements.

III.Random inspection: All 46 cases met requirements.

117