Japan’s 2011 Earthquake and Tsunami: Food and Agriculture Implications

Congressional research reportMay 18, 2011

Ask Donna

What actually matters in this document.

Text

Japan’s 2011 Earthquake and Tsunami:

Food and Agriculture Implications

name redacted

Specialist in Agricultural Policy

May 18, 2011

Congressional Research Service

7-....

www.crs.gov

R41766

CRS Report for Congress

Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress

Japan’s 2011 Earthquake and Tsunami: Food and Agriculture Implications

Summary

The March 11, 2011, earthquake and tsunami in Japan caused widespread devastation that

affected many of the country’s agricultural and fishery areas. The nuclear crisis that followed at

the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant, and the subsequent detection of radioactive contamination

of food produced near the disabled facility, further raised fears about the safety of Japan’s food

production systems and its future food exports. Most reports acknowledge that Japan’s current

production and supply shortages, along with rising food safety concerns and possible longer-term

radiation threats to its food production, could limit Japan’s food exports while possibly increasing

its need for food imports in the future. It is still not clear what effect, if any, Japan’s current food

supply and demand situation will have on world farm commodity markets and food prices.

Following initial reports about possible radioactive contamination of foods, many countries

increased their surveillance of food imports from Japan. In addition to the United States, others

imposing heightened surveillance measures include the European Union, Canada, Australia, New

Zealand, India, and most Asian nations, such as China and Hong Kong, Indonesia, Malaysia,

Singapore, Korea, and Thailand, among others. Import restrictions vary by country but broadly

cover milk and milk products, vegetables and fruit, and seafood and meat from those prefectures

with a perceived risk of contamination, specifically Fukushima, Ibaraki, Tochigi, and Gunma.

Several international organizations, including the various organizations of the United Nations, are

closely monitoring global concerns about the safety of foods produced in Japan.

The Japanese government has taken steps to monitor and restrict, if necessary, the distribution of

contaminated foods. Testing has been conducted nearly daily to detect possible radioactive

contaminants on a wide range of plant and animal products, including fish, and also tap water in

some of the coastal prefectures as well as in southern prefectures near the disabled Fukushima

facility. In March 2011, Japan’s government made a series of announcements restricting the

distribution and consumption of certain vegetables harvested in Fukushima, Ibaraki, Tochigi, and

Gunma prefectures, and fresh raw milk produced in Fukushima prefecture. In April 2011, there

were additional announcements regarding possible contaminated fish products, and also an

announcement restricting spinach and leafy greens from Chiba prefecture.

In the United States, the two principal agencies that regulate U.S. food imports—the Food and

Drug Administration (FDA) and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)—have taken steps

to address these concerns. Following Japan’s announcement that some foods had been

contaminated by radiation, FDA issued “Import Alert 99-33” for milk, vegetables, and certain fish

species (sand lance) produced or manufactured in selected Japanese prefectures. Both FDA and

USDA have announced that they are taking extra steps to better track U.S. food imports from

Japan, working in conjunction with existing border inspectors at the Department of Homeland

Security’s U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

Other U.S. agencies are also addressing concerns about whether radiation from Japan might affect

food production in the United States or in U.S. territories in the Pacific. The Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) is continuously monitoring the nation’s air and is regularly monitoring

drinking water, milk, and precipitation for environmental radiation. To date, the results of EPA’s

sampling and monitoring have shown detected radiation below levels that are a public-health

concern.

Congressional Research Service

Japan’s 2011 Earthquake and Tsunami: Food and Agriculture Implications

Contents

Introduction ................................................................................................................................1

Japan’s Food Industry .................................................................................................................1

Production ............................................................................................................................1

Trade ....................................................................................................................................1

Policy Priorities ....................................................................................................................2

Estimated Damages.....................................................................................................................3

Potential Production Losses ..................................................................................................3

Potential Radioactive Contamination.....................................................................................6

Possible Global Implications .......................................................................................................8

Effects on U.S. Food Supplies ...............................................................................................8

Trade Considerations .......................................................................................................... 10

International Activities .................................................................................................. 10

U.S. Activities............................................................................................................... 11

Figures

Figure 1. Map of Affected Areas, Japan.......................................................................................4

Tables

Table 1. Japan’s Agricultural Imports, Exports, and Net Trade, 2010............................................2

Table 2. Agricultural and Fisheries Output, and Shares in Selected Prefectures ............................5

Contacts

Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 15

Congressional Research Service

Japan’s 2011 Earthquake and Tsunami: Food and Agriculture Implications

Introduction

The widespread devastation from the March 11, 2011, earthquake and tsunami affected many

agricultural and fishery areas in Japan. In addition, detected radioactive contamination of food

produced near the disabled Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant has raised fears about the safety of

Japan’s food production systems and its future food exports. Many countries have increased their

surveillance of food products from Japan, and the Japanese government has taken steps to

monitor and restrict, if necessary, the distribution of contaminated foods. In the United States, the

two primary agencies that regulate U.S. food imports—the Food and Drug Administration (FDA)

and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA)—have taken steps to address these concerns.

Other U.S. agencies are also working to address this situation, as well as concerns about whether

radiation leaks from Japan might possibly affect food production in the United States or U.S.

territories in the Pacific.1 Various international organizations, including those within the United

Nations, are closely monitoring global concerns about the safety of foods produced in Japan.

Japan’s Food Industry

Production

Japan’s agricultural and fisheries industries account for a small share (less than 2%) of its total

yearly GDP, but are an important part of the country’s overall economy. Agricultural output,

measured at the farm level, totals about $70 billion annually.2 The value of Japan’s fisheries

accounts for another $14 billion. 3 Principal food commodities produced in Japan include fish and

seafood, rice, vegetables, fruits and nuts, and dairy and poultry products.4

Despite its size, Japan has roughly the same number of commercial farms as the United States—

estimated at about 2 million. These farms are spread across an estimated 11.4 million acres of

cultivated farmland (a fraction of that in the United States, estimated at more than 400 million

acres).5 Japan’s marine fisheries industry has about 115,200 business enterprises and another

6,500 “inland water” (aquaculture) operations. 6

Trade

Japan is a net food importer (Table 1). Imports of agricultural and fisheries products totaled $59.3

billion in 2010.7 Nearly half of the value of Japan’s food imports consisted of fish and meat

For more information, see CRS Report R41702, Japan’s 2011 Earthquake and Tsunami: Economic Effects and

Implications for the United States.

Japan’s Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF), 84th Statistical Yearbook (2008-2009),

http://www.maff.go.jp/%20e/tokei/kikaku/nenji_e/index.html; MAFF, “Summary of Agricultural Production,”

http://www.maff.go.jp/e/tokei/kikaku/nenji_e/pdf/n0030e.pdf. Converted from yen to dollars (2007). By comparison,

the farm value of U.S. agricultural products sold is about $300 billion (Source: USDA, Census of Agriculture, 2007).

Ibid. MAFF, “Summary of Fishery Production,” http://www.maff.go.jp/e/tokei/kikaku/nenji_e/pdf/n0031e.pdf.

FAOSTAT Production, http://faostat.fao.org/site/339/default.aspx.

MAFF, “Summary of Agricultural Production,” http://www.maff.go.jp/e/tokei/kikaku/nenji_e/pdf/n0030e.pdf. 2008

data. Converted to acres (1 hectare = 2.47 acres). U.S. cropland is reported at 406.4 million acres (2007).

MAFF, “Summary of Fishery Production,” http://www.maff.go.jp/e/tokei/kikaku/nenji_e/pdf/n0031e.pdf. 2008 data.

Global Trade Atlas, http://www.gtis.com/gta/. Harmonized System (HS) codes in chapters 01-22. Excludes food

(continued...)

Congressional Research Service

Japan’s 2011 Earthquake and Tsunami: Food and Agriculture Implications

products. Other imports include grains and bakery goods (23% of total value), and vegetables and

fruits (8%). The United States was the leading supplier, accounting for about one-fourth of food

imports ($14.1 billion in 2010). About half of the value of U.S. food exports to Japan consisted of

cereal grains, including corn ($3 billion in 2010, accounting for 30% of all U.S. corn exports).8

Other U.S. exports were seafood, meat and dairy products (21%), and fruits and nuts (5%).

Table 1. Japan’s Agricultural Imports, Exports, and Net Trade, 2010

Imports

Exports

($ million)

(%)

($ million)

(%)

($million)

Fish and seafood

11,695

20%

1,292

28%

(10,404)

Animal and meat products

9,403

16%

142

(9,262)

Prepared meat and fish

5,263

655

14%

(4,608)

Fats and oils

1,309

141

(1,1690)

Dairy, eggs, honey

1,334

(1,287)

Fresh fruits, vegetables

4,865

141

(4,724)

Grains, baking products

13,410

23%

711

15%

(12,698)

Sugar and Cocoa

1,826

138

(1,688)

Beverages, water

2,865

368

(2,497)

Prepared foods

3,006

(2,949)

Floriculture, spices, misc.

4,350

1,001

21%

(3,348)

59,326

100%

4,693

100%

(54,633)

HS Category

Total

Net Trade

Source: Compiled by CRS using Global Trade Atlas, http://www.gtis.com/gta/, “Reporting Total Import

Statistics” and “Reporting Countries Export Statistics” (Japan).

Notes: Data are by Harmonized System (HS) code. Imports, actual U.S. dollars. Harmonized System (HS) codes

in chapters 01-22. Excludes other agricultural categories: food waste (HS 23) and tobacco products (HS 24).

Japan’s food exports totaled $4.7 billion in 2010. Leading Japanese food exports included fish

and other animal products (about 40%), processed foods, bakery products, and grains (about

15%), beverages (8%), and other miscellaneous products (Table 1). Food exports to the United

States totaled nearly $700 million in 2010, accounting for about 15% of Japan’s total food

exports. Exports to the United States consisted mostly of fish and animal products, processed

bakery products and grains, and beverages.

Policy Priorities

The agricultural and food sectors are important and strategic aspects of Japan’s government

policies. Japan provides generous support to its agricultural sectors and protects its domestic

producers by imposing high tariffs on most imported foods. The Organisation for Economic

(...continued)

waste (HS 23) and tobacco products (HS 24).

CRS, using USITC data, http://www.dataweb.usitc.gov. By U.S. Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) code, includes

corn (HTS 1005). Other grain exports were: sorghum, HTS 1007 ($127 million, 17% of U.S. exports) and barley, HTS

1003 ($2.8 million,7% of U.S. exports in 2010).

Congressional Research Service

Japan’s 2011 Earthquake and Tsunami: Food and Agriculture Implications

Co-operation and Development (OECD) estimates that Japan provides substantial government

support for its domestic farmers—estimated at more than $46 billion in 2009—ranking Japan

second behind the European Union (EU) in terms of total governmental farm spending among

developed countries.9

Japan’s current agricultural policy plan (Food, Agriculture and Rural Areas Basic Plan)

“addresses wide-ranging policy change by designating food, agriculture and rural areas

governance as a national strategy.”10 One of the plan’s principal goals is to raise Japan’s selfsufficiency in food production from an estimated 40% in recent years to 50% by FY2020.11 Food

self-sufficiency is reported to be greater in some prefectures. The five coastal prefectures that

were most affected by earthquake and tsunami had a reported high food self-sufficiency ratio:

Aomori (119%); Iwate (104%); Miyagi (80%); Fukushima (85%); and Ibaraki (70%). It is unclear

how the recent devastation to these areas will affect the region’s food self-sufficiency.

Estimated Damages

The widespread devastation from the March 2011 earthquake and tsunami affected many

agricultural and fishery areas in Japan. Most reports acknowledge that Japan’s current production

and supply shortages, along with rising food safety concerns and possible longer-term radiation

threats to its food production, could limit Japan’s food exports while possibly increasing its need

for food imports in the future.12 It is still not clear what effect, if any, Japan’s current food supply

and demand situation will have on world farm commodity markets and food prices.

Potential Production Losses

Japan’s assessment of the damages to the fisheries, agriculture, and forestry sectors from the

March 2011 earthquake is currently estimated at $21.5 billion.13 Of this estimated total, $11.0

billion is attributed to losses in Japan’s fisheries sector, along with $9.1 billion in damages to

agricultural lands and crops, and another $1.4 billion in damages to forested lands and facilities.

Damages to agricultural crops, land, and facilities have been reported in several prefectures,

including Aomori, Iwate, Miyagi, Akita, Yamagata, Fukushima, Ibaraki, Tochigi, Gunma,

Saitama, Chiba, Kanagawa, Yamanashi, Nagano, Niigata, and Mie, among others (Figure 1). 14

Damages to the agriculture sector cover nearly 4,700 farmland areas and about 16,400 food

facilities.

OECD, Agricultural Policies in OECD Countries, at a Glance, 2010, Table 1.3. Based on estimated 2009 Producer

Support Estimate (PSE). Other leading countries: EU ($121 billion), U.S. ($31 billion), Korea ($18 billion). Additional

information is provided in CRS Report R41713, U.S. and EU Agricultural Support: Overview and Comparison.

MAFF, FY2009 Annual Report on Food, Agriculture and Rural Areas in Japan, March 2010, http://www.maff.go.jp/

e/%20annual_report/2009/pdf/e_all.pdf.

Ibid., pp. 10-20. This ratio is based on a supplied calorie basis.

See, for example, Rabobank Food & Agribusiness Research and Advisory (FAR) Group, “Japan Earthquake:

Magnitude of Impact on Food and Agriculture,” March 2011, and Kiplinger Agriculture Letter, March 11 and 25, 2011.

MAFF, “The Damages caused by the Great East Japan Earthquake and Actions taken by Ministry of Agriculture,

Forestry and Fisheries,” May 16, 2011, http://www.maff.go.jp/e/quake/press_110511-1.html. Reported at 1,752.2

billion yen.

MAFF, “The Damages caused by the Great East Japan Earthquake and Actions taken by Ministry of Agriculture,

Forestry and Fisheries,” May 16, 2011, http://www.maff.go.jp/e/quake/press_110511-1.html.

Congressional Research Service

Figure 1. Map of Affected Areas, Japan

Source: Prepared by CRS based on data from the U.S. Department of State, National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, and GeoCommons.

CRS-4

Japan’s 2011 Earthquake and Tsunami: Food and Agriculture Implications

Among fisheries, “catastrophic damages” to fish vessels and harbor facilities have been reported

in Iwate, Miyagi, and Fukushima prefectures; other damages to fishing vessels and harbor

facilities were also reported in Hokkaido, Aomori, Ibaraki, Chiba, Kanagawa, Shizuoka, Aichi,

Mie, Wakayama, Tokushima, Kochi, Oita, Miyazaki, Kagoshima, and Okinawa prefectures, and

in Tokyo Metropolitan. 15 Damages to aquaculture facilities were reported in Toyama, Ishikawa,

Shizuoka, and Tottori prefectures. Damages to the fisheries sector cover damage to more than

20,700 fishing vessels and 319 fishery harbor facilities.

A compilation by USDA of cropland production statistics in the five coastal prefectures—

Aomori, Iwate, Miyagi, Fukushima, and Ibaraki—indicates the importance of these prefectures to

Japan’s agricultural sector (Table 2).16 USDA’s summary, using 2007 production data, shows that

these five prefectures account for about one-fifth of Japan’s total marine fisheries and aquaculture

production by volume, and 17% of all agricultural output by volume. These areas also account for

similar shares of the nation’s rice, soybeans, vegetables, and livestock production, and also house

19% of Japan’s hog production, about one-tenth of all cattle and dairy herds, and about one-fifth

of its poultry flocks.

Table 2. Agricultural and Fisheries Output, and Shares in Selected Prefectures

All

Japan

Aomori

Iwate

Miyagi

Fukushima

Ibaraki

Total

Marine fishery catch (1000 mt.)

4,397

19.8%

Marine aquaculture (1000 mt.)

1,242

10%

23.5%

Agricultural output (100 billion yen)

16.6%

Crops output (100 billion yen)

16.4%

Vegetables (100 million yen)

15.9%

8,823

20.9%

Soybeans (1000 mt )

262

15.9%

Livestock (100 billion yen)

17.0%

Dairy cattle (1000 head)

1,533

9.4%

Beef cattle (1000 head)

2,890

14.2%

Pigs (1000 head)

9,745

19.3%

Layers (million chickens)

185

18.5%

Broiler shipments (million chickens)

630

16%

25.5%

Rice (1000 mt.)

Source: USDA, Economic Research Service (ERS), “Japan: Current Issues in Japanese Agriculture,” Table 1,

http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Japan/currentissues.htm. Data vary and are either 2007 or 2008.

Notes: 1 metric ton (mt) = 2,205 pounds. Assumes 1 dollar = 118 yen (2007), 103 yen (2008) (nominal).

Ibid.

USDA, Economic Research Service (ERS), “Japan: Current Issues in Japanese Agriculture,” Table 1.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/Japan/currentissues.htm.

Congressional Research Service

Japan’s 2011 Earthquake and Tsunami: Food and Agriculture Implications

Another report by the Netherlands-based Rabobank estimates the potential impact on some major

food sectors, covering meat, dairy, seafood, fruits and vegetables, and grains and rice.17 The

report states that the earthquake had no immediate effect on rice supply, given high year-end

stocks; however, it noted possible concerns about soil contamination and its effect on future

planting. The report notes that most of Japan’s grain processing mills and soy-crushing plants are

located outside the damage zone; other reports confirm that many of these facilities may remain

operational. 18 However, power shortages may temporarily affect processing operations. About

15% of Japan’s compound feed industry capacity is estimated to have been damaged. The report

notes that a significant portion of Japan’s meat, poultry, and dairy production is located in

northern coastal prefectures, and states that power shortages may have damaged supplies that

were in cold storage. The report also notes widespread damage in the fisheries and aquaculture

sectors, including damage to fishing ports and vessels, and to wild seedbeds for key products such

as scallops and oysters.19 Also, seawater contamination is eroding consumer confidence in the

country’s fresh seafood catch. In addition to damage to vegetable farms and orchards in the

coastal prefectures, the report notes growing concerns about radioactive contamination in locally

produced vegetables and fruits.

Despite the current situation in Japan, food imports for consumption or for further processing

have not stopped and many in-country food facilities continue to operate throughout the

country.20

Potential Radioactive Contamination

The Japanese government has been monitoring possible radioactive contamination of plant and

animal products and tap water in some of the coastal prefectures as well as southern prefectures

near the disabled Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Plant. Testing has been conducted nearly daily since

March 19, 2011, to detect possible radioactive contaminants on a wide range of plant and animal

products, including fish.21 Testing for radioactive contaminants in foods is ongoing and spans

many adjacent prefectures. Among the types of foods tested are spinach, lettuce, leeks, cabbage,

cucumbers, strawberries, tomatoes, chives, broccoli, turnips, asparagus, eggplant, parsley,

zucchini, celery, cabbage, melons, shitake, wasabi, garland chrysanthemum and other locally

grown produce, rapeseed, raw and pasteurized milk, poultry eggs, pork, sea cucumbers, blue

mackerel, squid, flounder, and sardines.

The Japanese government has taken action to restrict the distribution of potentially contaminated

foods. Starting in late March 2011, Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare made a series

of announcements restricting the distribution and consumption of foods produced in certain

Rabobank Food & Agribusiness Research and Advisory (FAR) Group, “Japan Earthquake: Magnitude of Impact on

Food and Agriculture,” http://www.rabobank.com/content/research/FoodAndAgriResearch/, as reported by Farms.com

Ltd. (“Rabobank: Japan to import more ag products,” April 7, 2011).

See, for example, Morton Sosland, “Japan’s flour mills built to resist earthquakes,” Food Business News, March 22,

2011; and the Kiplinger Agriculture Letter, March 25, 2011.

Farms.com Ltd., “Rabobank: Japan to import more ag products,” April 7, 2011.

See, for example, Tom Johnston, “U.S. exports to Japan remain strong,” Meatingplace, March 23, 2011; Brian

Salvage, “Smithfield: No declines in pork exports to Japan,” MeatPoultry, March 28, 2011; and Cheryl Anderson,

“U.S. Grain Experts Expect Quick Recovery to Trade,” The Progressive Farmer, March 28, 2011.

Reports are posted by Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW), “Information about 2011 TohokuPacific Ocean Earthquake,” http://www.mhlw.go.jp/english/topics/2011eq/index.html.

Congressional Research Service

Japan’s 2011 Earthquake and Tsunami: Food and Agriculture Implications

prefectures, including “non-head type leafy vegetables and head type leafy vegetables” (such as

spinach, komatsuna, cabbages) and any “flowerhead brassicas” (broccoli, cauliflower), 22 and

restrictions on spinach and kakina (a leafy vegetable), fresh raw milk,23 certain shitake

mushrooms,24 and bamboo shoots and ostrich fern.25 Many of these restrictions were later lifted.26

Japan’s Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) further reports that radiation

levels in meat and hen eggs (among other livestock products, including raw milk) and also

floriculture products are within established safety levels.27 Some press reports, however, indicate

that livestock have been culled in the immediate area around the Fukushima nuclear plant.28

Initially, the ministry noted that “in Fukushima Prefecture, there is no capability for coastal

fishing in the sea area of the prefecture ... due to damage of the coast by the earthquake.” Japan’s

Fisheries Agency stated that “fishery activities will not be resumed for a while in the sea area of

Fukushima prefecture.”29 In early April, Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare made

additional announcements regarding possible contaminated fish products;30 also, there were news

reports that fisheries in some prefectures had ceased operations after contaminated fish were

detected south of the Fukushima nuclear plant.31 By late April, the ministry had placed

restrictions on the distribution and consumption of juvenile sand lance (a marine fish of the

family Ammodytidae) harvested at Fukushima prefecture.32

The situation is ongoing, and updates on the safety of Japan’s agricultural and fishery products

are posted on a regular basis. For updated information, see the ministry’s website at

http://www.mhlw.go.jp/english/topics/2011eq/index.html. This website also posts ongoing

announcements and updates on radiation concerns regarding Japan’s tap water supplies, primarily

in the Fukushima and Chiba prefectures.

MHLW, “Restriction of distribution and/or consumption of foods concerned in Fukushima and Ibaraki Prefectures,”

March 23, 2011, http://www.mhlw.go.jp/stf/houdou/2r98520000015wun-att/2r98520000015xym.pdf.

MHLW, “Handling Monitoring of Radioactive Contaminants for Agricultural and Livestock Products,” March 23,

2011, http://www.mhlw.go.jp/english/topics/2011eq/dl/food-110323.pdf.

MHLW, “Restriction of distribution and/or consumption of log-grown Shiitake (outdoor cultivation) produced in

parts of Fukushima Prefecture,” April 13, 2011, http://www.mhlw.go.jp/english/topics/2011eq/dl/food-110413.pdf.

MHLW, “Restriction of distribution of Bamboo shoot and Ostrich fern produced in parts of Fukushima Prefecture,”

May 9, 2011, http://www.mhlw.go.jp/english/topics/2011eq/dl/food-110509.pdf.

MHLW, “Cancellation of Instruction to restrict distribution and consumption of food concerned produced in parts of

Fukushima Prefecture, in relation to the accident at Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant,” May 18, 2011,

http://www.mhlw.go.jp/english/topics/2011eq/dl/food-110518.pdf.

MAFF, “Results of inspections on radioactivity levels in Livestock products,” April 27, 2011, http://www.maff.go.jp/

e/seisan/index.html; and “Questions and answers on floricultural products,” April 18, 2011, http://www.maff.go.jp/e/

quake/press_1104018-1.html.

Dani Friedland, “Japan culls livestock around nuclear plant,” Meatingplace.com, May 13, 2011.

Japan’s Fisheries Agency, “Questions and answers on fishery products,” http://www.jfa.maff.go.jp/e/q_a/index.html.

Also see http://www.jfa.maff.go.jp/e/inspection/index.html for other testing and inspection reports.

MHLW, “Handling of provisional regulation values for radioactive iodine in fishery products,” April 5, 2011,

http://www.mhlw.go.jp/english/topics/2011eq/dl/food-110405.pdf; also MHLW, “Provisional remarks on radioactive

iodine in fishery products,” April 8, 2011, http://www.mhlw.go.jp/english/topics/2011eq/dl/food-110408_2.pdf.

See, for example, Aya Takada, “Fishing Halted in Japan’s Ibaraki After Radioactive Water Contaminates Sea,”

Bloomberg news online, April 6, 2011.

MHLW, “Restriction of distribution and consumption of Juvenile sand lance landed at Fukushima Prefecture,” April

20, 2011, http://www.mhlw.go.jp/english/topics/2011eq/dl/food-110420.pdf.

Congressional Research Service

Japan’s 2011 Earthquake and Tsunami: Food and Agriculture Implications

Various news reports have noted the potential for radioactive contamination to affect several

Japanese food production markets, including those for its fish and seafood, as well as global sushi

markets; and Japan’s milk and dairy foods; produce; and beer, spirits, and bottled water.

Possible Global Implications

Reports about possible radioactive contamination of food produced near the disabled Fukushima

Daiichi Nuclear Plant have raised fears about the safety of Japan’s food production, as well as

concerns that radiation might reach the United States or U.S. territories in the Pacific. Many

countries, including the United States, have instituted controls or banned Japanese food products

from entering their countries.

As previously noted, Japan has been an important trading partner with the United States,

particularly for U.S. exports. In 2010, the value of U.S. food exports to Japan totaled $14.1

billion, making Japan our fourth-largest agricultural export market.33

However, Japan accounts for a relatively small portion of the total U.S. market. The value of

Japanese food exports to the United States totaled $0.7 billion, less than 1% of the value of U.S.

food imports.34 The majority of imports (75% of the value in 2010) consisted of fish and Japanese

prepared foods. Fresh seafood and also prepared fish and meat products accounted for about onethird of total imports from Japan.35 These imports account for less than 2% of the seafood

consumed in the United States.36 Other leading imported products are prepared grain-based foods,

including baked goods and pastas (12%),37 and beverages, including rice wine and sake (7%). 38

Another leading import category is Japanese food preparations “not elsewhere specified” in the

U.S. import codes, accounting for almost 20% of imports.39

Effects on U.S. Food Supplies

To date, based on current available data, agencies in the United States claim that the situation in

Japan does not pose a risk to U.S. food supplies. Similarly, international health organizations

claim there is no evidence that radiation in Japan has contaminated food produced in any other

country.40

Compiled by CRS, using data from the Global Trade Atlas, http://www.gtis.com/gta/. Harmonized System (HS)

codes in chapters 01-22. Excludes food waste (HS 23) and tobacco products (HS 24).

Compiled by CRS using data from the U.S. International Trade Commission (USITC), http://dataweb.usitc.gov. U.S.

Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) codes in chapters 01-22.

HTS 03 (fish and crustaceans, molluscs and other aquatic invertebrates) and HTS 16 (edible preparations of meat,

fish, crustaceans, molluscs or other aquatic invertebrates).

Joint statement, “FDA, USDA, NOAA Statements on Food Safety,” http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/

PublicHealthFocus/ucm248257.htm.

HTS 19 (preparations of cereals, flour, starch or milk; bakers’ wares).

HTS 22 (beverages, spirits and vinegar).

HTS 21 (miscellaneous edible preparations), mostly HTS 2106909998 (food preparations not elsewhere specified or

included, not canned or frozen).

FDA, “Radiation Safety,” http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/ucm247403.htm#food; and

FAO/WHO consolidated statement, “Nuclear Emergency in Japan and Food Safety Concerns,” http://www.fao.org/

crisis/japan/69718/en/.

Congressional Research Service

Japan’s 2011 Earthquake and Tsunami: Food and Agriculture Implications

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) further states that, based on current testing

information, it does “not expect harmful levels of radiation to reach the West Coast, Hawaii,

Alaska, or U.S. territories in the Pacific.” Also, the NRC “does not expect that residents of the

United States or its territories are at any risk of exposure to harmful levels of radiation resulting

from the events in Japan.”41 In addition to the NRC, other U.S. agencies are monitoring and

assessing radiation released from the Japanese plants, including the Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA) and the Department of Energy (DOE).

EPA is continuously monitoring the nation’s air in all states and most territories, and is also

regularly monitoring drinking water, milk, and precipitation at these sites for environmental

radiation using its nationwide radiation monitoring system, RadNet.42 EPA’s daily sampling data

are posted at its website: http://www.epa.gov/japan2011/data-updates.html. To date, EPA’s

sampling of drinking water, precipitation, and milk, and its air monitoring, have consistently

detected only “low levels of radioactive material below levels of public-health concern.”43 On

March 30, 2011, EPA and FDA issued a joint statement:

Results from a screening sample taken March 25 from Spokane, WA detected 0.8 pCi/L of

iodine-131, which is more than 5,000 times lower than the Derived Intervention Level set by

FDA. These types of findings are to be expected in the coming days and are far below levels of

public health concern, including for infants and children. Iodine-131 has a very short half-life of

approximately eight days, and the level detected in milk and milk products is therefore expected

to drop relatively quickly. 44

Again, on May 3, EPA stated: “all of the radiation levels detected by RadNet monitors and

sampling have been very low, are well below any level of public health concern, and continue to

decrease over time.”45

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have posted information to address

consumer concerns about iodine-131 detected in milk and in surface water supplies.46

NRC, “Frequently Asked Questions About the Japan Nuclear Crisis,” http://www.nrc.gov/japan/faq-need-toknow.pdf.

EPA, “Japanese Nuclear Emergency: Radiation Monitoring,” http://www.epa.gov/japan2011/. See map on national

monitoring sites. Also see EPA’s “Frequently Asked Questions,” http://www.epa.gov/radiation/.

Results for April 7, 2011. EPA, “Daily Data Summary,” http://www.epa.gov/japan2011/data-updates.html. Also see

EPA, “EPA Monitoring Continues to Confirm That No Radiation Levels of Concern Have Reached the United States,”

March 28, 2011; and Joint EPA/DOE statement, “Radiation Monitors Confirm That No Radiation Levels of Concern

Have Reached the United States,” March 18, 2011. Also see CRS Report R41728, The Japanese Nuclear Incident:

Technical Aspects (specifically, section titled “Could Harmful Levels of Fallout Reach the United States?”).

Joint FDA/EPA statement, “Update on Ongoing Monitoring,” March 30, 2011, http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/

Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm249146.htm.

EPA, “Japanese Nuclear Emergency: Radiation Monitoring,” http://www.epa.gov/japan2011/. Also see EPA

Administrator Lisa Jackson’s testimony before the Senate Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Clean Air

and Nuclear Safety, April 12, 2011, http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View&FileStore_

id=016b87a4-114b-4588-b2fc-99dc6569edff.

CDC, “Frequently Asked Questions About Iodine-131 Found in Milk,” http://emergency.cdc.gov/radiation/isotopes/

iodine131andmilk_faq.asp; and “Frequently Asked Questions About Iodine-131 Found in Surface Water,”

http://emergency.cdc.gov/radiation/isotopes/iodine131surfacewater.asp. For additional health-related information,

contact (name redacted), CRS Specialist in Health Policy (7-....).

Congressional Research Service

Japan’s 2011 Earthquake and Tsunami: Food and Agriculture Implications

Reports by some West Coast states, including California and Washington, also downplay potential

risks based on ongoing radiologic monitoring in these states. The California Department of Public

Health reports that “all data from state and federal sources show that harmful radiation won’t

reach California.”47 These findings underlie claims by industry representatives of the Western

Growers and Produce Marketing Association that there is no threat to California’s produce

industry.48 Washington State Department of Health officials also claim they “aren’t seeing

significant levels of radioactivity in our state, and there’s no health risk.”49

Regarding fish and seafood, FDA, EPA, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration (NOAA) issued a joint statement claiming these three agencies “have high

confidence in the safety of seafood products in the U.S. marketplace or exported U.S. seafood

products … The only Japanese fish with levels of radiation exceeding standards is the Japanese

sand lance, which does not migrate away from the Japanese coast.”50

The joint statement further highlighted that, “[t]o date, no significantly elevated radiation levels

have been detected in migratory species,” such as the juvenile North Pacific albacore tuna and the

North American Pacific salmon. These agencies also reported “only one seafood species, the

Japanese sand lance, with levels of radiation exceeding standards.”51 Although FDA has not

detected any longer-lived radionuclides in any fish imported from Japan, it is continuing to

monitor fish caught in Japan’s prefectures surrounding the damaged nuclear power plant. About

2% of the seafood consumed in the United States is imported from Japan.52

Trade Considerations

International Activities

Following the initial reports about possible radioactive contamination of foods, many countries

increased their surveillance of food imports from Japan. In addition to the United States, others

with heightened import surveillance measures include the European Union, Canada, Australia,

New Zealand, and India, as well as most Asian nations, such as China and Hong Kong, Indonesia,

Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, among others. Import

restrictions vary by country but broadly cover milk and milk products, vegetables and fruit, and

seafood and meat from those prefectures with a perceived risk of contamination, specifically

Fukushima, Ibaraki, Tochigi, and Gunma.

CDPH, “FAQs About Radiation,” http://www.cdph.ca.gov/pages/radiationfaqs2011.aspx.

Dan Flynn, “CA says no threat of radiation in leafy greens,” Food Safety News, March 25, 2011.

Washington State Department of Health, “Frequently Asked Questions: How the nuclear reactor event affects

Washington, http://www.doh.wa.gov/topics/japan-faq.htm. Also see press release by Governor Gregoire, “Gov.

Gregoire’s statement on ongoing radiological monitoring,” March 30, 2011, http://www.governor.wa.gov/news/newsview.asp?pressRelease=1682&newsType=1.

Joint statement by FDA/EPA/NOAA, “U.S. Seafood Safe and Unaffected by Radiation Contamination from

Japanese Nuclear Power Plant Incident; U.S. Monitoring Control Strategy Explained,” May 3, 2011,

http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/mediacenter/docs/2011/may/seafoodsafetyfactsheet_03may2011.pdf.

Ibid.

Joint statement by FDA/USDA/NOAA, “FDA, USDA, NOAA Statements on Food Safety,” March 23, 2011,

http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/ucm248257.htm.

Congressional Research Service

Japan’s 2011 Earthquake and Tsunami: Food and Agriculture Implications

Several international organizations are monitoring concerns about the safety of food produced in

Japan. These include the various organizations of the United Nations, including the World Health

Organization (WHO), the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the Joint FAO/WHO Codex

Alimentarius Commission, the International Food Safety Authorities Network (INFOSAN), and

also the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).53 These organizations help oversee the

rules for radioactivity in foods for international trade, as agreed to within the Codex “Guideline

Levels” (GLs) for radionuclide levels in internationally traded food following a nuclear or

radiological emergency.54 Other joint U.N. activities include “international guidance related to

nuclear preparedness and response to nuclear or radiological events, including application of

appropriate agricultural countermeasures.”55

These international organizations acknowledge that recent reports of radioactivity in food in

Japan suggest that “some foods produced in Japan are likely to be contaminated by radioactive

material at levels unsuitable for human consumption.”56 The primary contaminant detected in

some food samples include radioactive iodine; however, radioactive cesium has also been

detected in some foods. 57 Radioactive iodine is relatively short-lived with a half-life of about one

week and decays naturally within a few weeks. However, if ingested and accumulated in the

body, radioactive iodine has been associated with certain types of cancers.58 Radioactive cesium

is longer-lived and can remain in the environment for a long time; also, because radioactive

cesium can be relatively quickly transferred from feed to milk, its uptake into food production can

pose longer-terms risks and public health effects.59

U.S. Activities

In the United States, food imports are regulated by FDA, which monitors the safety of most types

of food imports, and USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), which regulates the

safety of meat and poultry imports.60 In addition, USDA’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection

Service (APHIS) is responsible for protecting plant and animal resources from domestic and

foreign pests and diseases, and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is responsible for

See, for example: WHO, “FAQs: Japan nuclear concerns,” http://www.who.int/hac/crises/jpn/faqs/en/index7.html;

FAO, “United Nations system response,” http://www.fao.org/crisis/japan/en/; FAO/WHO statement, “Nuclear

Emergency in Japan and Food Safety Concerns,” http://www.fao.org/crisis/japan/69718/en/;” and IAEA, “Fukushima

Nuclear Accident Update Log,” http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/news/tsunamiupdate01.html.

GLs are published by Codex. See “Codex General Standard For Contaminants And Toxins In Food And Feed,”

Codex Stan. 193-1995, 1995, http://www.codexalimentarius.net/download/standards/17/CXS_193e.pdf.

FAO, “United Nations system response,” http://www.fao.org/crisis/japan/en/; and Joint FAO/IAEA statement,

“Emergency Preparedness & Response,” http://www-naweb.iaea.org/nafa/emergency/index.html.

Joint WHO/FAO/IAEA statement, “Questions & Answers on the Nuclear Emergency in Japan and Food Safety

Concerns,” http://www-naweb.iaea.org/nafa/faqs-food-safety.html.

Joint FAO/WHO statement, “Nuclear Emergency in Japan and Food Safety Concerns,” http://www.fao.org/crisis/

japan/69718/en/.

INFOSAN, “Information on Nuclear accidents and radioactive contamination of foods,” March 2001,

http://www.who.int/foodsafety/fs_management/INFOSAN_note_Radionuclides_and_food_300311.pdf. Also see NRC,

“Fact Sheet on Biological Effects of Radiation,” http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/fact-sheets/bio-effectsradiation.html; and CRS Report R41728, The Japanese Nuclear Incident: Technical Aspects (specifically, section titled

“Health Effects of Ionizing Radiation”).

Ibid. For additional health-related information, contact (name redacted), CRS Specialist in Health Policy (7-....).

CRS Report CRS Report RL34198, U.S. Food and Agricultural Imports: Safeguards and Selected Issues; and CRS

Report RS22600, The Federal Food Safety System: A Primer.

Congressional Research Service

Japan’s 2011 Earthquake and Tsunami: Food and Agriculture Implications

coordinating agencies’ food security activities, including border inspections by the U.S. Customs

and Border Protection (CBP).

Following reports about radioactive contamination of milk and leafy greens, FDA issued “Import

Alert 99-33” for milk, vegetables, and certain fish species (sand lance) produced or manufactured

in selected Japanese prefectures.61 This import alert has been modified several times; for the most

recent version see FDA’s website: http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cms_ia/importalert_621.html.62

FDA’s Import Alert 99-33 establishes an order for “detention without physical examination”

(DWPE) for specified products from specified prefectures. Accordingly, FDA’s import alert

detains all shipments of items subject to the alert, and places the burden upon the importer to

demonstrate, through testing, that a given shipment is “not violative” and may be imported. For

additional information about DWPE and FDA’s authority, see the text box below.

As of May 17, 2011, FDA’s Import Alert 99-33 has reduced the area of concern to three

prefectures: Fukushima, Ibaraki, and Tochigi. It applies to food products from Japan in four

categories:63

•

Category 1. Products that the government of Japan has restricted for sale or

export will be prevented from entering the United States. These products cannot

gain entry by providing sample results. As of May 17, 2011, these include (1)

spinach, lettuce, celery, cress, endive, escarole, chard, collards, and other headtype leafy vegetables from the Fukushima prefecture; (2) turnips and other nonhead type leafy vegetables, as well as broccoli, cauliflower, flower head brassicas

(i.e., broccoli and cauliflower), mushrooms, bamboo shoots, and Ostrich fern

from the Fukushima prefecture; (3) sand lance from the Fukushima prefecture;

(4) milk from the Fukushima and Ibaraki prefectures; (5) spinach and kakina

from the Fukushima and Ibaraki prefectures.

•

Category 2. Products from the Fukushima, Ibaraki, and Tochigi prefectures that

the government of Japan has not currently banned for sale or export. These

include dairy products and fresh produce. Under Import Alert 99-33, authorities

may detain these products when they arrive in the United States. Authorities will

release these products from detention if the importer can show the products are

compliant.

•

Category 3. Food and feed products not covered by FDA’s Import Alert 99-33

that come from these three Japanese prefectures: Fukushima, Ibaraki, and

Tochigi. FDA will examine these products, and conduct sampling and testing as

needed, to determine if they are safe to enter the United States.

FDA, “Detention Without Physical Examination of Products from Japan Due to Radionuclide Contamination,”

Import Alert 99-33, http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cms_ia/importalert_621.html. All U.S. alerts for Japan are at

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cms_ia/country_JP.html.

This import alert was first issued on March 22, and was subsequently revised on March 25, April 12, April 15, and

April 20, April 21, and May 17.

FDA, “Radiation Safety,” http://www.fda.gov/newsevents/publichealthfocus/ucm247403.htm#importjapan.

Congressional Research Service

Japan’s 2011 Earthquake and Tsunami: Food and Agriculture Implications

•

Category 4. All other FDA-regulated food products from Japan that are not listed

in Import Alert 99-33 and do not belong to one of the other categories.

Authorities will review these products using standard procedures, and as part of

this may monitor and sample products as resources permit.

It is unclear how the recent series of cancellations of “instruction to restrict distribution” and/or

“consumption”64 by the government of Japan influences the import alert, particularly for Category

1 products.

Detention Without Physical Examination (DWPE)65

FDA has primary responsibility for the safety of most domestic and imported foods (with the exception of meat and

poultry products) under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FFDCA), as amended (21 U.S.C. §§ 301 et seq.).

The FFDCA requires that all such foods be safe, wholesome, and accurately labeled.

Importers of foreign food are responsible for verifying that the products obtained from foreign processors are in

compliance with U.S. laws. FDA’s surveillance of imported foods consists of reviews of prior notice data, reviews of

customs entry forms, physical or sensory analysis, sample collections for laboratory analysis, and detention without

physical examination (DWPE).

Prior to importation, FDA must have received a notice for articles of food being imported or offered for import into

the United States. Prior notice is required to enable the food to be inspected at U.S. ports of entry, and FDA must

refuse admission to food imported or offered for import if the notice was not submitted or if the notice was deficient.

Additionally, FDA may hold food at the port of entry if it is imported or offered for import by a person who was

debarred under the FFDCA or if it was imported or offered for import from a foreign facility that has not registered

with the FDA. FDA screens the electronic shipping records of all imported food products before they enter the

United States. From these records, the agency selects products for physical examination and/or testing to determine

whether they contain adulterants.

Under the FFDCA, FDA has the authority to refuse entry of any food import if it appears to be adulterated,

misbranded, or in violation of U.S. law. Generally, the FFDCA provides that a food article must be refused admission

into the United States, with some exceptions, “if it appears from the examination of such samples or otherwise” that

it has been “manufactured, processed, or packed under insanitary conditions,” or it is “forbidden or restricted in sale

in the country in which it was produced or from which it was exported,” or it is “prohibited from introduction or

delivery for introduction into interstate commerce under section 301(ll)” (FFDCA § 801(a)).

FDA actions on imported products are implemented through FDA “Import Alerts,” which may require DWPE.

DWPE, formerly known as “automatic detention,” was developed to address recurrent violations. DWPE is based on

FDA’s statutory authority to refuse admission of any product that “appears” from examination “or otherwise” to be

violative. DWPE means that a product is refused entry on the basis of certain information regarding either past

history of violations from a particular producer or country or other information indicating that the product may be

violative, such as certain known contamination. FDA detains all shipments of items subject to the import alert and

places the burden upon the importer to demonstrate, through testing, that a given shipment is not violative and may

be imported. If the importer cannot demonstrate that the product is not violative, the importer may be able to

recondition the product, or the product t may otherwise be re-exported or destroyed.

See, for example, MHLW, “Cancellation of Instruction to restrict distribution and consumption of food concerned

produced in parts of Fukushima Prefecture, in relation to the accident at Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant,” May 18,

2011, http://www.mhlw.go.jp/english/topics/2011eq/dl/food-110518.pdf, and other cancellations at

http://www.mhlw.go.jp/english/topics/2011eq/index.html.

Sources: FDA, “Detention without Physical Examination,” http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/ComplianceManuals/

RegulatoryProceduresManual/ucm179271.htm; and Linda Horton, “U.S. FDA Authority over Imports,”

http://www.hoganlovells.com/files/Publication/a279dfd1-c81e-464e-a4f0-b26b6da16f29/Presentation/

PublicationAttachment/4511545b-3ab8-4982-a2f6-ccfa2990c0a8/Horton.pdf. For more information on FDA’s

authority, contact CRS Legislative Attorney Vanessa Burrows (7-....).

Congressional Research Service

Japan’s 2011 Earthquake and Tsunami: Food and Agriculture Implications

Given historically low import inspection rates of food by FDA, some groups want FDA to issue

an import alert for all food and seafood imported from Japan.66

Regarding meat and poultry products, USDA points out that because of USDA’s import

equivalency requirements and other trade-related concerns, Japan has not exported any beef

products to the United States since early 2010, and Japan is not currently eligible to export any

poultry products or processed egg products to the United States.67

Some in Congress remain concerned that contaminated foods might enter the United States

through its food imports.68 Both FDA and USDA have taken steps to address the current situation

in Japan. FDA has stated: “FDA’s screening at U.S. borders will remain vigilant and will be

augmented with radiation screening of shipments” and its import tracking system “has been

programmed to automatically flag all shipments of FDA-regulated products from Japan.”69 USDA

has stated that “USDA and its federal partners through the Food Emergency Response Network

are preparing to begin sampling, if necessary.”70 Prior notification to FDA of food imports into

the United States is required under the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and

Response Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-188; 42 U.S.C. 300i), which allows the agency to readily identify

and track food shipments from Japan.

Enhanced import security measures by FDA and USDA, in conjunction with existing CBP border

inspections, are intended to address concerns about possible contaminated food imports from

Japan. As noted by USDA, CBP is “responsible for monitoring for the presence of radiological

materials in cargo shipments coming into the United States at all U.S. ports of entry. This

monitoring is a regular part of inspection procedures carried out at every port of entry

nationwide;” FDA also notes that CBP officers “routinely use radiation detection equipment to

screen food imports, cargo, and travelers.”71

Finally, existing U.S. trade laws, such as general requirements under the Tariff Act of 1930 (19

U.S.C. 1304), require all imported articles to be marked with the English name of the country of

origin. 72 Other labeling requirements also apply under other laws that govern both FDA and

USDA. For example, FDA requirements under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21

U.S.C. 301 et seq.) require that a food label must contain specified information. However, as

noted by FDA: “The law does not specifically require that the country of origin statement be

placed on the PDP [the principal display panel, PDP, or the label panel], but requires that it be

conspicuous.”73 Certain labeling requirements for meat and poultry products are also required

See, for example, “FDA Should Issue Import Alert for All Japanese Food Imports; Food and Water Protections Must

Remain Priority in Washington,” Statement from Wenonah Hauter, Food & Water Watch, March 23, 2011.

Ibid.

Press release by Representative Rosa L. DeLauro, “DeLauro Calls for FDA Testing of Imported Japanese Products,”

March 22, 2011, http://delauro.house.gov/release.cfm?id=3075; also see “DeLauro Wants All Japanese Food Bound for

the U.S. Tested,” CQ Health Beat, March 23, 2001.

FDA, “Radiation Safety,” http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/ucm247403.htm.

USDA, “USDA’s Radiation Safety Questions and Answers,” http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/%20usdahome?

contentidonly=true&%20contented=radiation_safety_qa.html.

USDA, “USDA’s Radiation Safety Questions and Answers,” March 22, 2011; and FDA, “Radiation Safety,”

http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/PublicHealthFocus/ucm247403.htm#food.

Customs and Border Protection’s Guidance is at http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/ComplianceManuals/

CompliancePolicyGuidanceManual/ucm074567.htm. See regulations at 19 CFR 134.

21 CFR 101. See FDA, “Guidance for Industry: A Food Labeling Guide,” October 2009, http://www.fda.gov/Food/

(continued...)

Congressional Research Service

Japan’s 2011 Earthquake and Tsunami: Food and Agriculture Implications

within laws administered by FSIS, including the Federal Meat Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 601 et

seq.) and the Poultry Products Inspection Act (21 U.S.C. 451 et seq.). Only plants in countries

certified by USDA to have inspection systems equivalent to those in this country are eligible to

export products to the United States. Regulations issued under these laws have required that

country of origin appear in English on immediate containers of all meat and poultry products

entering the United States.74 Other USDA-administered programs also provide for additional

country-of-origin requirements for certain types of foods.75

Author Contact Information

(name redacted)

Specialist in Agricultural Policy

[redacted]@crs.loc.gov, 7-....

(...continued)

GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/GuidanceDocuments/FoodLabelingNutrition/FoodLabelingGuide/

ucm064872.htm.

Regulations are at 9 C.F.R. 327.14 and 9 C.F.R. 381.205.

Includes (1) Country of Origin Labeling (COOL); see CRS Report RS22955, Country-of-Origin Labeling for Foods;

and (2) Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act (PACA) of 1930 and the Produce Agency Act of 1937 (7 U.S.C. §

499a et seq., and §1622, respectively); see CRS Report RL32746, Fruits, Vegetables, and Other Specialty Crops: A

Primer on Government Programs.

Congressional Research Service

EveryCRSReport.com

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) is a federal legislative branch agency, housed inside the

Library of Congress, charged with providing the United States Congress non-partisan advice on

issues that may come before Congress.

EveryCRSReport.com republishes CRS reports that are available to all Congressional staff. The

reports are not classified, and Members of Congress routinely make individual reports available to

the public.

Prior to our republication, we redacted names, phone numbers and email addresses of analysts

who produced the reports. We also added this page to the report. We have not intentionally made

any other changes to any report published on EveryCRSReport.com.

CRS reports, as a work of the United States government, are not subject to copyright protection in

the United States. Any CRS report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without

permission from CRS. However, as a CRS report may include copyrighted images or material from a

third party, you may need to obtain permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or

otherwise use copyrighted material.

Information in a CRS report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public

understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to members of Congress in

connection with CRS' institutional role.

EveryCRSReport.com is not a government website and is not affiliated with CRS. We do not claim

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.