RESTRICTED  
  
G/SPS/R/110/Corr.1  
 
29 September 2023  
(23-6558) Page: 1/2 
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures    
 
SUMMARY OF THE MEETING OF 12 -14 JULY 2023  
NOTE BY THE SECRETARIAT1 
Corrigendum2 
Please note that paragraph  3.1 on page 6 , and paragraph 3.4 on page 7 , should read as follows:  
3  INFORMATION SHARING  
3.1  Information from Members on relevant activities  
3.1.1   Japan - Update on the import measures on Japanese food regarding radionuclides 
(G/SPS/GEN/1233/Rev.6 ) 
3.1  Japan  drew Members' attention to document G/SPS/GEN/1233/Rev.6 . Japan emphasized that 
the health risk of food produced in Japan was negligible and that no reports of non -compliance in 
food imported from Japan had been received for around a decade. In its view, the assessment by 
the FAO/IAEA Centre of Japan's status r egarding radionuclides acknowledged the effective control 
of the food supply chain and the safety of public food supply. As such, noting that the majority of 
Members had lifted measures imposed following the Fukushima nuclear accident, Japan called on 
those Members that continued to maintain measures to immediately review them. Japan considered 
such measures to be maintained without scientific evidence and to be inconsistent with the 
SPS Agreement . Japan noted that the comprehensive report, which was the ou tcome of a series of 
IAEA review , had been  published on 4 July. Japan also noted that i n the report, the IAEA had 
concluded that the approach to the discharge of the ALPS treated water (water treated by the 
Advanced Liquid Processing System)  into the sea a nd associated activities were consistent with 
relevant international safety standards, and the discharge would  have a negligible radiological impact 
on people and the environment. In addition, Japan noted that the report state d that IAEA additional 
review and monitoring activities were envisaged , which  would  continue during and after the treated 
water  discharge occur red. Japan  indicated that it  would  continue to provide necessary information 
to the international community in a transparent manner based on scientific evidence  and would  
continue efforts to gain further understanding from the international community regarding the 
discharge  of ALPS treated water. Therefore, the discharge of water could not justify imposing import 
measures on Japanese food. Japan further noted that it had provided relevant scientific updates to 
the IAEA, and reminded Members of its updates to the Committee, annual reports, one -stop website 
for information sharing, and bilateral consultations. Japan asked relevant Members to conduct  risk 
assessments, and risk communication efforts with their citizens.  
3.4  Japan  thanked Members for their comments and reminded Members that Japan had measures 
in place to detect and monitor non -compliance cases, and that its framework prevented food 
exceeding Japanese maximum levels from entering the food chain or being exported. As for the food 
product mentioned by Korea, which was black rock fish, Japan noted that the sampling point was no 
fishing area . Therefore, this finding was never related to food safety in Japan.  Japan also reiterated 
that its water discharge plans were compliant with international safety standards, the water that did 
not comply with these standards would never be discharged,  and that the IAEA conducted a 
comprehensive report  that concluded that Japan's approach to the  discharge of the treated water 
 
1 This document has been prepared under the Secretariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice 
to the positions of Members or to their rights and obligations under the WTO.  
2 In English only.  G/SPS/R/110/Corr.1  
 
- 2 - 
 
  into the sea , and associated activities , were consistent with relevant international safety standards.  
Japan also noted the IAEA had concluded the discharge would have a negligible radiological impact 
on people and the environment. As for the statements mentioned by China, Japan noted that the 
amount of tritium to be discharged was equivalent to about 1/5 to 1/7 of the amount of tritium 
discharged into the sea from each of the nuclea r power plants in China, and that ALPS treated water, 
which would  be discharged in compliance with international standards , should not be a problem in 
light of China's standards . 
Paragraph 4.60 on page 17 should read as follows:  
4.2  Issues previously raised  
4.2.9   EU review of legislation on veterinary medicinal products (ID  446) – Concerns of 
the United  States  
4.60  Japan  regretted that the European  Union had not provided the necessary information, 
including sufficient transition periods, f or the third countries  to comply with the new regulations. 
Japan  asked the European  Union to provide details on the requirements to be included in the list of 
approved third countries, provide at least a three -year transition period before the implementati on 
of the delegated act to third countries, clarify timelines for implementation, exempt the use of 
Fosfomycin in fisheries products, and avoid discrimination in the implementation of the delegated 
act. 
Paragraph 4.85 on page 21 should read as follows:  
4.2.13  China's administrative measures for registration of overseas manufacturers of 
imported food (26 November 2019) (ID  485) – Concerns of Australia, Japan, the 
United  States and the European  Union  
4.85  Japan  thanked China for its bilateral engagement and  information on documents submitted by 
30 June, but remained concerned that regulations lacked transparency and imposed a significant 
burden on foreign authorities and manufacturers . Japan requested China to establish a standard 
processing period for appli cations made through the CIFER system and clarify the processing period  
to the Members , notify changes in the operation of its regulations or the CIFER system with a 
reasonable transition period if changes were introduced, correct defects in the CIFER syst em as soon 
as possible, respond to unanswered questions within a reasonable time, provide explanations when 
an application was rejected through the CIFER system, and ensure consistency.  
__________