WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/SPS/W/139
20 October 2003
(03-5529)
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Original:  English
CHINA'S TRANSITIONAL REVIEW MECHANISM
Questions to China from the United States in the context of the Transitional Review Mechanism
under Paragraph 18 of the Protocol of Ac cession of the People's Republic of China
The following communication, dated 3 October 2003, has been received from the delegation
of the United States, with the request that it be circulated to Members, for the purposes of the
Transitional Review to take place at the Committee's meeting on 29-30 October 2003.
_______________
1. The United States is concerned about certain Chinese measures and their consistency with
China's obligations under the WTO SPS Agreement.  Some of the new requirements, which have
effects on trade, may not have been notified to the WTO.  Others may be based on uncertain scientificrationale, or may raise questions of fair treatment for imports.
A. Notification of Measures
2. China's Decree 31, Certification Requirements for Fresh/Chilled, Frozen and Processed
Aquatic Products, was published by AQSIQ on 6 November 2002, but has not been notified to theWTO.
(i) What role does the State General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection
and Quarantine (AQSIQ) play in monitoring the development and implementation of
China's regulatory controls for seafood, including Decree 31?
(ii) When does AQSIQ intend to notify Decree 31, as China committed to do in the June
2003 SPS Committee Meeting (see paragraph 60 in G/SPS/R/30)?
B. Science-based Measures
3. In August of this year, China's State Administration for Quality Supervision, Inspection and
Quarantine (AQSIQ) announced plans to suspend soybean imports from four US companies, as wellas companies from Argentina and Brazil, based on detections of Phytophthora sojae in shipments of
soybeans.  The United States does not agree that a valid scientific basis exists for a suspension of
shipments.
(i) Could China describe the results of any risk assessments that it has conducted in this
regard?
Decree 31, referenced above, also raises questions regarding the nature of risks addressed by the
Decree and the scientific basis for the measure.G/SPS/W/139
Page 2
(ii) What are the risks that Decree 31 is endeavouring to mitigate?
(iii) What is the scientific justification for this certification requirement?
4. In October 2002, China's Ministry of Health (MOH) published on its website nearly one
hundred new draft regulations covering food, forestry and fishery products.
(i) What role does AQSIQ play in monitoring the development, implementation and
notification of laws and regulations published by MOH?
(ii) Have risk assessments been completed on the products for which standards and
tolerances have been established at levels more restrictive than the relevant
international standards?
5. The following are examples of proposed MOH regulations for which the scientific basis is
uncertain:
-- The maximum residue level (MRL) for selenium is much more restrictive than other
national standards.
-- Zero tolerances for commonly occurring microbes, such as Staphylococcus aureus  in
meat and poultry, are unrealistic.
-- A very strict MRL for vomitoxin in wheat has been set for which there is no US or
international standard.
-- Some of the regulations confuse technical standards, such as pasteurization, with
procedures, such as sterilization and testing methods.  The scientific basis for theserequirements is unclear.
-- Certain regulations refer to standards and references that are not available for review.
6. The United States is concerned that the notification of these nearly one hundred MOH
regulations would, in their current form, compel the initiation of an immense set of complex testing,
grading and risk assessment reviews.  Such reviews as currently envisioned will unjustifiably deny
imports of products, such as grain, processed foods, dairy, meat and poultry into China.
C. National Treatment
7. The United States has concerns that some regulations regarding SPS matters appear to set
differing standards for imported products than for like-products produced domestically.
(i) Will the one hundred MOH regulations, referred to above, apply equally to domestic
and imported products?
(ii) AQSIQ's Decree 44, Certification Requirements for Live Aquatic Products mandates
different practices for imports.  Does a risk assessment support this differing
treatment?
(iii) The United States notes that certain meat and poultry standards are significantly
stricter than those set by Codex and are blocking the entry of imports.  Does China
have in place the same standards for domestically produced meat and poultry?  WhatG/SPS/W/139
Page 3
is the scientific rationale for these meat and poultry standards for imported products,
and have risk assessments for such standards been completed?
D. Inspection and Approval Procedures
8. The United States remains concerned about the procedures provided for in AQSIQ
Ordinance 7, Administrative Measures for the Entry-Exit Inspection and Quarantine for Grains and
Feed Stuff (effective 1 March 2002).  The United States is equally concerned with AQSIQ Decree 25,
Administrative Measures for Entry Animal and Plant Quarantine (effective 1 September 2002).  Both
of these affect entry of agricultural products such as livestock, poultry, grains, oilseeds, planting
seeds, horticultural products, even hides and skins.
(i) Could China describe the steps that it has taken to ensure that these two measures
comply with its obligations under Article 8 and Appendix C of the Agreement on theApplication of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures?
__________