RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/SPS/R/27
2 August 2002
(02-4272)
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures
SUMMARY OF THE MEETING HELD ON 25-26 JUNE 2002
Note by the Secretariat1
I. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
1. The Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (the "Committee") held its twenty-
fourth meeting on 25-26 June 2002.  The Chairman of the Committee, Mr. William Ehlers (Uruguay),opened the meeting.  The agenda proposed in WTO/AIR/1838 was adopted with amendments.
II. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON
2. The Committee elected Mrs. Maria Fe Alberto- Chau Huu as Chairperson for 2002/2003, and
thanked the previous Chairman for his contributions and personal engagement in the work of the
Committee.
III. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AGREEMENT
(a) Information from Members
(i) Activities of Members
FMD situation – Information from Argentina.
3. The representative of Argentina outlined the national plan for the eradication of FMD
introduced on 5 April 2001.  He reported on the evolution of the disease in 2001 and noted that the
epidemic had been eradicated in September 2001.  In the following months, very few outbreaks were
recorded and, as of 12 June 2002, 141 days had pa ssed without an outbreak and 9 months had passed
without an epidemic.  Details of the situation in Argentina are contained in G/SPS/GEN/323.
FMD status of Paragu ay according to OIE
4. The representative of Paraguay informed the Committee of ongoing efforts in his country to
eradicate FMD.   Bovine meat exports to Brazil and Chile were rising and the Separate CustomsTerritory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu (Chinese Taipei) had recently decided to reopen its
market to beef imports from Paraguay.  The European Communities were also expected to increase
imports in the near future.  On 28 May 2002, the OIE recognized Paraguay as a country free from
FMD with vaccination.
Classical swine fever situation in EC member States5. The representative of the European Communities indicated that a number of outbreaks of
classical swine fever had occurred in some EC member States in 2002.  Two different
epidemiological situations had emerged.  Several outbreaks had occurred in a small area of intensive
                                                     
1 This document has been prepared under the Secret ariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice
to the positions of Members or to their rights or obligations under the WTO.G/SPS/R/27
Page 2
pig production in Cataluña in Spain.  The high density of pig numbers rendered  the control of the
disease difficult, but the situation was now under control.  Measures introduced to regionalize the
disease could be lifted in the near future.  The other situation was an outbreak of the disease in wild
boar in Germany, contaminating Luxembourg and near by areas of France.  Although the disease had
spread to some domestic pig farms, it had been quickly controlled in all three member States.
Membership in the WTO and international standard-setting bodies – Information from the European
Communities
6. The representative of the European Communities reported dissatisfaction that the European
Communities was not a member of the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC), OIE or the IPPC,
despite its having considerable competence in all the areas covered by these three standard-setting
bodies.  The European Communities was a full member of FAO since 1991, a prerequisite to become
a member of Codex.  Codex was considering pr ocedural amendments to allow Regional Economic
Integration Organisations to become members of  the Codex Alimentarius Commission, and would
discuss this issue at its 2003 session.  The European Communities expected WTO Members to fully
support its request, which was further detailed in G/SPS/GEN/320.
7. The representative of the United States reported that at the last meeting of the Codex
Committee on General Principles (CCGP), the European Communities had indicated that it wouldprovide additional information regarding how the EC  Commission would relate to its member States
in issues addressed by Codex committees.  The United States looked forward to reviewing and
discussing this information at the next CCGP and Codex Commission meetings.
8. The representative of Canada indicated that his authorities supported the principle of the
European Communities becoming a member of the CAC.  Canada looked forward to a successfulresolution of the outstanding procedural issues that needed to be resolved within Codex.
9. The representative of Codex noted that the CCGP had considered the EC request at its last
session in 2002 and had agreed to seek the advice of the FAO Committee on Constitutional and Legal
Matters on the proposed amendments of the procedures, especially in regard to the voting rights of EC
member States.  Based on the advice provided by  the FAO Committee, the CCGP would consider the
issue again at its next session in April 2003.  She added that the Republic of Kurdistan and the
Commonwealth of Bahamas had joined Codex, bringing total membership to 167.
(b) Specific Trade Concerns
(i) New Issues
US import restrictions on meat and meat products – Concerns of Switzerland
10. The representative of Switzerland said that following the outbreak of BSE in Switzerland, the
United States had introduced an import ban on meat  and meat products from his country.  The ban
applied also to meat products processed in Switzerland with meat imported from countries free of
BSE, such as Argentina or Brazil.  He stressed that Switzerland was considered a country with a low
incidence of BSE in terms of the OIE International Animal Health Code  and the US measure was in
contradiction with international standards.  Moreover, the US double inspection procedure was in
violation of the SPS Agreement.  Switzerland had conducted very useful consultations with the UnitedStates since the circulation of its submission (G /SPS/GEN/321) and some of the questions raised in
that submission had been clarified. Bilateral consultations would continue and he expected that trade
of meat and meat products would resume in the near future.
11. The representative of the European Communities requested to be informed of the outcome of
the discussions between Switzerland and the United States.G/SPS/R/27
Page 3
12. The representative of the United States welcomed the productive discussions held with
Switzerland, but noted that there was a further complication pertaining to the FMD status of certain
countries providing meat to Switzerland for processing and subsequent export to the United States.
China's import requirements for cosmetic s – Concerns of the European Communities
13. The representative of the European Communities noted that China had imposed import
restrictions on cosmetics beginning in March 2002.  The new regulations prohibited cosmetics
containing certain ingredients of animal origin from 18 countries having officially declared the
existence of BSE.  Cosmetics from these 18 countries required certification that they do not contain
specified products of bovine or ovine origin.  According to China's notification, the justification of the
measure was to prevent introducing BSE on Chinese territory.  The European Communities
considered that the measures were in contradiction to the SPS Agreement, China had notified its
measures as emergency measures, whereas BSE had been present in those countries for many yearsand there was no new scientific evidence indicating a particular risk from cosmetics.  In addition, the
measures had no scientific basis and went far beyond the OIE standard on BSE.  The measures also
seemed disproportionate compared to the risks, and were more stringent than in the most demanding
of Members.  The measures were also discriminatory, because they did not apply in the same manner
to all countries where identical sanitary conditions prevailed.  The representative of the EuropeanCommunities requested that China make available the scientific justification and the risk assessment
underlying the measure.
14. The representative of China indicated that he would forward the EC concerns to his
authorities.  In accordance with the OIE and WHO's relevant recommendations, China only prohibited
the importation of cosmetics derived from bovine or ovine brains, placenta, nerves, etc. from BSE-infected countries and regions.  China had notified its measure and requested exporting countries to
provide the names and signatures of the authorities responsible for issuing the certificates ensuring
that the cosmetics met the Chinese requirements.  Several EC member States had proceeded
accordingly and China had recognized, or was in the process of recognizing, the competent certifying
authorities of those member States.  China was read y to enter in bilateral consultations with other
interested WTO Members.
Cuba's import restrictions on spiced pork and salted meat products – Concerns of Argentina
15. The representative of Argentina indicated that exports of spiced pork and salted meat products
to Cuba were prohibited, reflecting Cuba's zero risk  approach with regard to FMD.  Argentina had
submitted evidence to the Cuban authorities showing that the foot-and-mouth disease virus would not
be transmitted as a result of the processing of these products.  Moreover, Argentina's proposed
certification fully complied with OIE standards.  N onetheless, Cuba only permitted imports of bovine
meat from countries free of foot-and-mouth disease without vaccination.  Argentina detailed its view
that the import ban was inconsistent with the SPS Agreement in document G/SPS/GEN/325.
Argentina formally requested Cuba to lift its restrictions, or to provide sufficient scientific evidence to
justify its measure.
16. The representative of Cuba indicated that the two delegations had initiated bilateral
consultations just prior to the SPS Committee meeting, and Cuba expected to report a satisfactory
solution to this issue at the next Committee meeting.
Indonesian import restrictions on dairy products – Concerns of Argentina
17. The representative of Argentina said that as a result of the outbreak of FMD in 2001,
unjustified sanitary measures had been imposed on a number of Argentine products.  Among thesemeasures was a ban on imports of milk products by Indonesia, which was inconsistent with the SPS
Agreement and OIE guidelines.  In particular, the OIE Code stipulated that milk products be acceptedG/SPS/R/27
Page 4
if the sanitary authority of the exporting country certified that the necessary requirements had been
introduced.  Indonesian authorities had prohibited the entry of milk products from Argentina, without
giving the National Agriculture and Food Quality and Health Service (SENASA) the opportunity to
certify the requirements set forth by the OIE.  Argentina requested Indonesia to provide sufficient
scientific evidence to support its departure from the OIE guidelines.
18. The representative of Indonesia said that import restrictions imposed on Argentina due to
FMD only applied to fresh milk.  Other dairy products including skimmed milk, cream, butter, cheese
and yoghurt were not restricted.  Restrictions on fresh milk were based on the fact that Argentina was
not listed by the OIE as a country with zones free of FMD.
South Africa's restrictions on beef and pork – Concerns of Brazil
19. The representative of Brazil stated that on February 2002, South Africa had informed his
authorities of its decision to suspend imports of beef and pork from Brazil, because FMD vaccinationwas practised there.  South Africa's import ban ra ised serious concerns because it was not based on
the OIE standards nor on scientific evidence or risk assessment nor had the measure been notified.
The representative of Brazil argued that Articl es 3.1, 3.3, 5.4, 5.6 and Annex B of the SPS Agreement
had been violated and requested South Africa to lift the ban and accept the risk mitigation procedures
established by the OIE.
20. The representative of South Africa took note of the Brazilian concerns and indicated that his
authorities were committed to bilateral consultations with a view to find a quick solution to the
problem.  He hoped to inform the Committee of the successful outcome of these consultations by the
next Committee meeting.
China's food safety regulations affecting agricultural products produced from modern biotechnology
– Concerns of the United States
21. The representative of the United States reported that on 8 April 2002, the Ministry of Health
in China had issued a decree on biotech safety and labelling.  The decree would take effect on 8 July,
but the Ministry of Health had not issued implementing regulations.  Additionally, the decree had not
been notified.  His authorities believed that mandatory labelling for biotech products that weresubstantially equivalent to their conventional counterparts had no scientific justification.  Under such
circumstances, labelling wrongly implied a possible risk to the consumer.  US companies exported to
China a wide variety of biotechnology products, including soybeans and corn, and processed products
derived from these commodities.  This trade was valued at over US$ 1 billion/year.  The United States
requested an interim period of implementation of the decree, that would allow sufficient time for
compliance by US exporters.
22. The representative of Canada shared the US concerns and regretted the fact that China had not
notified the proposed measure, thus impeding the incorporation of comments from interested
Members into the final measure.  His authorities and Canadian companies were having difficulties in
understanding the complexities of the Chinese regulations and in getting clear information from the
Chinese regulatory authorities.  Canada would also welcome an interim period before the
implementation of the Chinese regulations, so th at their design, implementation and enforcement
could be done in a transparent, predictable and systematic way.  The representative of Argentina
shared the US and Canadian concerns.
23. The representative of China responded that his authorities had unintentionally forgotten to
notify the measure sufficiently in advance of its en try into force.  However, China invited Members to
send comments to its Enquiry Point or directly to the Ministry of Health.  Late notification ofmeasures was a reflection of Chinese difficulties to correctly understand and implement the SPSG/SPS/R/27
Page 5
Agreement, and China would welcome technical assistance in this regard. China would also welcome
bilateral consultations with interested WTO Members.
Brazil's import requirements for seed pota toes – Concerns of the European Communities
24. The representative of the European Communities reported that Brazil had notified new
measures on imports of seed potatoes.  As one of the main suppliers to Brazil, the EuropeanCommunities had commented on the measures, in particular on the lack of delay for their
implementation, the need for technical justification and the need to respect transparency.  In its initial
response Brazil had not addressed the EC's concerns and, in particular, had not identified the pest risk
assessment justifying its measure.  This information had been provided during bilateral consultations
held before the SPS Committee meeting.  The European Communities would examine this
information and was looking forward to continuing the bilateral process with Brazil.
25. The representative of Canada expressed concern with Brazil's required export certification for
non quarantine regulated pests, in contradiction to internationally agreed principles and practices.
Canada was also involved in bilateral discussion with the Brazilian authorities and had requested
Brazil to withdraw its measure.
26. The representative of Brazil acknowledged the EC and Canada's statements and indicated that
since the last Committee meeting the parties had been involved in a bilateral process of consultations.He expected that subsequent technical consultations would resolve the issue.
Japan's official control restrictions on citrus and other fresh fruits and vegetables – Concerns of the
United States and New Zealand
27. The representative of the United States recalled that he had previously raised concerns
regarding the basis and application of Japan's phytosanitary legislation in the SPS Committee.Despite many years of bilateral consultations, Japan continued to impose costly and unjustified
quarantine actions when pests were detected on imported US fruits and vegetables, even though the
same species were commonly found in Japan.  In many  instances these actions included treatment that
damaged and destroyed the commodity in question.  Japanese practices lacked a scientific basis and
were inconsistent with IPPC standards on official control and risk assessment for quarantine pests.The result was an arbitrary and unpredictable system facing US horticultural exports to Japan.  The
United States supported Japan's efforts to bring its plant laws into line with international standards
and hoped that bilateral technical discussions w ould result in the termination of unjustified
requirements.
28. The representative of New Zealand noted that his authorities were concerned with Japan's
continuing practice of fumigating consignments of New Zealand's fresh products, due to the
interception of pests that did not meet the definition of quarantine pests under the IPPC.  There hadbeen discussions with Japan for several years, but Japan's policy did not change.  A significant
proportion of New Zealand's exports of vegetables, fruits, flowers and related products was subject to
fumigation under Japan's requirements.
29. The representative of the European Commun ities stressed that the European Communities
fully adhered to the international standards relevant to this particular problem, in particular theInternational Standard for Sanitary Measures No.5 (Glossary of Phytosanitary Terms), and its latest
amendment.  For this reason, the European Communities fully supported the US statement.
30. The representative of Japan recalled that during bilateral consultations with the United States
in November 2001, the United States had requested Japan to consider abolishing fumigation for
detection of California red scale and Fuller rose weevil infesting US produce as non-quarantine pest,because those pests were endemic in Japan.  He noted that California red scale was under domesticG/SPS/R/27
Page 6
control in Japan as a target pest of forecasting programmes and was subject to fumigation for
detection at import inspection.  Fuller rose weevil had limited detection only with three points and
was under government-oriented control aimed at eradication.  It was not possible in these conditions
to exclude those species from quarantine pests.  Japan remained open to further consultations.
China's import ban on products of Dutch orig in – Concerns of the European Communities
31. The representative of the European Communitie s stated that the Chinese authorities had
suspended imports of all products of animal origin from the Netherlands after detection of one
positive consignment in a single category of products.  He considered the Chinese measure to be more
trade restrictive than required to achieve the appropriate level of protection in violation of Article 5.6
of the SPS Agreement.  In a similar situation with regard to Chinese products, the European
Communities had given China sufficient time to solve problems of detection of the presence of
chloramphenicol in their products.
32. The representative of China noted that the use of chloramphenicol in animal foodstuffs had
been prohibited in EC member States since 1994.  When the substance had been detected in Dutch
products, China had imposed a provisional ban and immediately alerted the Dutch authorities.  China
had received part of the information requested, and was waiting for further information so as to
review its measure.  The representative of China reported that the problem apparently arose due toDutch imports of feedstuffs from some eastern European countries, which gave rise to concerns
regarding Dutch import control measures, residue monitoring systems and export control measures.
He stressed that this measure was not related to the EC's ban on Chinese foodstuffs of animal origin.
Chinese Taipei's polices regarding quarantine and non-quarantine pests – Concerns of the United
States
33. The representative of the United States expressed concern that Chinese Taipei's Plant
Production and Quarantine Act did not distinguish between quarantine and non-quarantine pests
which was detrimental to US exports.  Chinese Taipei  had agreed to amend this act, however this was
expected to take some time.
34. The representative of Chinese Taipei indicated that problems arose due to inconsistency
between the Chinese and English version of the Act.  His authorities had agreed to amend the Act to
bring it into conformity with the standards of the IPPC.
Romania's SPS measures on animal products – Concerns of Moldova
35. The representative of Moldova indicated that Romania had begun to impose EC requirements
on imports of meat and animal products althou gh Romania did not meet these requirements
domestically.  As a result, meat, milk and egg exports from Moldova were in effect banned from the
Romanian market, which normally absorbed about 80 per cent of Moldova agricultural exports.Romania had not provided any scientific justification for its measure.  Its failure to notify the measure
meant that exporters had not had any time to adapt to the new requirements.  The concerns of
Moldova were detailed in G/SPS/GEN/334.
36. The representative of China recalled the obligations of Article 5.1 that SPS measures be based
on a risk assessment and take into account the conditions of the supplying country.  He urgedRomania to review its measures in this area.
37. The representative of Romania argued that the measure in question was a result of its
harmonization with the acquis communautaire  of the European Union, and was necessary to ensure
consumer protection.  He stated that this was not a new SPS measure, so it had not been notified.G/SPS/R/27
Page 7
Nonetheless, the Romanian Ministry of Agriculture was considering ways to address the difficulties
posed to Moldava from its implementation.
(ii) Issues Previously Raised
EC restrictions on Brazil nuts due to aflatoxin – Concerns of Bolivia
38. The representative of Bolivia noted that his country had voiced concerns regarding the EC
aflatoxin requirements since September 1998.  Although the larger Bolivian exporters were able to
meet the EC requirements at considerable costs and difficulties, smaller exporters could not fulfill the
EC's exaggerated requirements regarding aflatoxin levels.  He requested information from the
European Communities on the manner in which the requirements of the quality control system were
being applied.
39. The representative of the European Communities indicated he was perplexed by Bolivia's
continual raising of this issue since no consignments of Brazil nuts from Bolivia had been blockeddue to aflatoxin.  In fact, both the volume and value imported from Bolivia had increased in recent
years.  The representative of the European Communities stated that the EC Scientific Committee for
Food had identified aflatoxins as among the most carcinogenic and mutagenic substances known, and
so intake had to be reduced to the lowest levels pos sible.  He recalled that following various bilateral
meetings with Bolivian officials, the European Commission had agreed to accept certification fromauthorized Bolivian laboratories, to avoid inspection on arrival in Europe.  However, Bolivia had not
provided the necessary information re garding the authorized laboratories.
Poland's restrictions on imports of bovine semen and gelatin – Concerns of Switzerland
40. The representative of Switzerland stated that Poland's restrictions on imports of bovine semen
and gelatin from Switzerland due to BSE concerns were unjustified and contravened therecommendations of the OIE.  The OIE concluded that bovine semen and gelatine did not present a
risk regardless of the BSE status of the exporting country.  Switzerland's concerns were detailed in
G/SPS/GEN/322.  The representative of the European Communities indicated that EC member States
had similar concerns regarding Poland's measure.
41. The representative of the OIE clarified that Chapter 4 of the International Animal Health
Code recommended no restriction on bovine semen.  No BSE risk had been identified from gelatin
made exclusively from hides, however certain treatments were recommended with respect to gelatin
made from bones if the exporting country were not free from BSE.
42. The representative of Poland indicated that its restrictions on imports of several animal
products from Switzerland had been notified as G/SPS/N/POL/25.  He clarified that bovine semen had
never been covered by the Polish regulation in question.  Furthermore, the regulation had just been
amended, and restrictions on gelatine from bovine hides had been removed.  Poland announced itsintention to notify this new regulation.
Import restrictions on bovine semen – Concerns of the European Communities
43. The representative of the European Communities drew attention to the fact the OIE
International Animal Health Code clearly stated that no restrictions should be applied on bovine
semen as a result of the BSE status of the exporting country.  The representative of Poland reiteratedthat bovine semen had never been covered by Poland's regulation on BSE.G/SPS/R/27
Page 8
Colombia's restrictions on bovine meat – Concerns of Argentina
44. The representative of Argentina recalled that at the last meeting of the Committee, the
representative of Colombia had indicated that his country was examining the methods used by
different Argentine plants to deactivate the FMD vi rus.  However, imports from Argentina continued
to be restricted.
45. The representative of Colombia reported that no plants in Argentina were currently certified
to export to Colombia.  However, her authorities had identified 10 plants in Argentina for which it
needed to update information, and another 38 plants which it proposed to visit for the first time.  To
date, only 21 of these establishments had provided the information needed before the Colombian
Agricultural Institute could proceed to arrange its visits for the purpose of certification.
Venezuela's import restrictions on bovine meat – Concerns of Argentina
46. The representative of Argentina noted that despite bilateral contacts following the last
meeting of the Committee, Venezuela had not provided any further information nor its risk
assessment to Argentina.
47. The representative of Venezuela indicated that his authorities recognized the region of
Argentina south of the 42nd parallel as free from FMD without vaccination, and Venezuela was
prepared to import meat from this region.  With respect to the other regions of Argentina, Venezuelafollowed the OIE recommendations, however it was willing to consult with Argentina on the matter.
Import restrictions on meat and meat products – Concerns of the European Communities
48. The representative of the European Communities reported that most Members had lifted their
restrictions related to the FMD outbreak in Europe.  The OIE had just revised its list of countries
recognized as FMD-free, which included all 15 EC member States.  However, some Memberscontinued to apply restrictions or requirements which served as administrative bans on EC products,
in particular UK meat and meat products.  The representative of Argentina noted that his country also
continued to suffer long-term negative effects from measures kept in place without justification.
49. The representative of Japan reported that the Domestic Animal Infectious Disease Control
Law had been amended on 14 June, permitting resumption of imports of pork meat and products fromFrance and Ireland.  The comment period regarding a proposed lifting of the import ban on Dutch
products had just concluded, and if there were no problems, the ban could be lifted as of mid-July.
China's import restrictions for citrus and other fruits related to fruit fly – Concerns of Argentina
50. The representative of Argentina noted that her country had raised this issue at the previous
meeting, and had held bilateral consultations with China.  However, the issue was not resolved.
51. The representative of China indicated that his authorities were prepared to consider
alternative treatments, but had not yet received any technical data demonstrating that establishing pestfree production places and cold treatment could provide equivalent protection to the establishment of
pest-free areas.
Japan's import measures on fireblight  – Concerns of the United States
52. The representative of the United States reported that his country had requested the
establishment of a dispute resolution panel with respect to Japan's measures related to fireblight.  Therepresentative of New Zealand indicated that Japan's measures lacked scientific justification and
limited NZ exports of horticultural products.  Both he and the representative of the EuropeanG/SPS/R/27
Page 9
Communities indicated that their countries shared the US concerns and would participate in the
dispute resolution procedure as third parties.
53. The representative of Japan indicated that during the bilateral consultations held following the
US request, Japan had indicated its willingness to consider relevant data submitted by the United
States, however nothing had been provided.  Fireb light was a serious plant quarantine disease which
did not occur in Japan and which could severely damage the production of apples, pears and other
fruits.  He asserted that Japan's measures were indispensable in order to prevent the entry of fireblight,
and were fully justified on the basis of scientific evidence.
Venezuela's restrictions on imports of potatoes,  garlic and onions – Concerns of Argentina
54. The representative of Argentina stated that there had been no progress in resolving the
problems arising from Venezuela's restrictions on potatoes, garlic and onions.  Argentina was waiting
for the onsite visit which Venezuela indicated was necessary before trade could resume.
55. The representative of Venezuela replied that his country had made some revisions to its
requirements, and was now organizing a technical visit to examine the pest surveillance systems in
Argentine producing areas, with the hope of finding a solution to the problem.
EC agricultural biotechnology approval process – Concerns of the United States
56. The representative of the United States indicated that there had been no change in the EC
situation since the last meeting of the Committee.  His country was becoming frustrated with the
situation and was considering what steps to pursue.  The representative of Canada added that the EC
moratorium essentially operated as a ban on imports of certain products for over four years, without
any scientific basis.  The moratorium resulted in trade disruptions and discrimination based on
production methods without regard to the assessment of risks.  Canada considered the EC moratoriumto be inconsistent with the SPS Agreement and the GATT, and requested the European Communities
to put in place a science-based approval process, as well as to consider alternative measures.
57. The representative of the European Communities replied that the matter was following
political procedures as previously described.  At this time, the European Parliament was considering
the matter, and the Council of Ministers should examine the documents in the coming months.Internal procedures had to be followed to apply the proposed Directive.
US import conditions for clementines – Concerns of the European Communities
58. The representative of the European Communities reported that Spain and the United States
continued bilateral efforts to find a resolution to this problem.  Spanish clementine exports to the
United States had occurred since 1987 on the basis of a bilateral protocol detailing the treatment to be
applied.  However, after three Mediterranean fruit fly larvae had been found in US stores, trade had
been suspended.  The concern now was to ensure that exports would be possible next season, on thebasis of a new import protocol.  However, the procedures being followed by the United States were
slow and might not be concluded by October, in time for the new season.  If this were to occur, the
European Communities might invoke the dispute resolution procedures.
59. The representative of the United States expressed appreciation for the cooperation of the
Spanish authorities in the matter.  He noted that the comment period had been extended in order topermit all relevant parties the opportunity to comment on the US risk assessment.G/SPS/R/27
Page 10
(c) Consideration of specific notifications received
G/SPS/ARG/65 - BSE-related measures
60. The representative of Canada indicated that Argentina appeared to have copied the EC
geographical BSE risk categorization scheme (GBR),  and had not followed an international standard
or conducted a risk assessment.  Canada was surprised to have received a level two rating, sinceArgentina had not requested any data from Canada.  This rating could unjustifiably damage Canada's
reputation.  The representative of Canada questioned why the scheme had been notified as an
emergency measure, and why Argentina had followed the EC measures instead of carrying out its
own analysis.  He also questioned why Argentina had not asked Canada for information or data prior
to putting the measure in place.  The representative of the United States shared Canada's concern and
encouraged Argentina to consider the BSE risk assessment and data from the Harvard Center for Risk
Analysis.
61. The representative of the European Communities clarified that the GBR had started in 1998
and was currently under revision.  The Scientific Steering Committee worked on the basis of
information provided by exporters.
62. The representative of Argentina explained that its measures were based on the available
information.  If a Member felt the categorization was unjust, it should present the necessary technicalinformation, in which case the review would be given priority.  Argentina believed its system was in
compliance with the OIE Code.  Argentina had to ta ke urgent action to update its BSE measures and
any delay would have posed unacceptable risks to Argentina's own BSE status.
63. The representative of Brazil noted that automatic procedures in this area could be harmful to
the reputation of countries.  Members should consult with each other first.
(d) Any other matters related to the operation of the transparency provisions
64. The Chairperson noted that the notifications received since the last Committee meeting had
been summarized, on a monthly basis, in G/SPS/GEN/312, G/SPS/GEN/317, G/SPS/GEN/319.  The
most recent lists of national notification authorities and of enquiry points were contained in
G/SPS/NNA/3 and G/SPS/ENQ/13.
65. The Secretariat informed the Committee that it had sent a fax to all enquiry points and
national notification authorities to inform them of  the adoption of the new transparency procedures
(G/SPS/7/Rev.2), and requested that they use the revised notification formats as of 1 May 2002.  The
Secretariat drew the Committee's attention to the new document de-restriction policy adopted by the
General Council  (WT/L/452).  The Secretariat also  informed Members that a new rubric was being
created on the WTO website covering upcoming and past SPS Committee meetings.  While the public
website contained only unrestricted documents, the password-protected Members-only site provided
access to both restricted and unrestricted documents related to Committee meetings.
66. The representative of Argentina expressed concern regarding the de-restriction of documents
after only 60 days, since developing countries often would not have had a chance to read them.G/SPS/R/27
Page 11
Report of informal meeting on transparency
67. The Chairperson indicated that the Committee had continued its discussions on the proposed
revisions to the recommended procedures for implementing the transparency provisions of the SPS
Agreement and of the notification of equivalence agreements.
68. At the informal meeting, Egypt recalled that Ministers at Doha had mandated the WTO to put
the needs and interests of developing countries at the heart of the work program, and to continue
efforts to ensure that developing countries secure a share in the growth of world trade through
enhanced market access, balanced rules and well targeted assistance.  Special and differential
treatment was important in this regard.  The effectiveness of the SPS Agreement in facilitating trade
between countries depended on countries' abilities to participate effectively in the Agreement.  Many
developing countries faced restricted market access because of lack of capacity, technical expertise,
recent technologies, etc.  Studies revealed that sanitary measures posed significant problems fordeveloping country products, which could be reduced if developed countries took into account the
impact on developing countries of any SPS requirements they were promulgating.
69. The objective of Egypt's proposal, the inclusion of a new box in the notification format, was
to operationalize the special and differential (S&D) treatment provisions of the Agreement and assist
developing countries to identify measures which could affect their exports and the types of technicalassistance they could get in order to comply with such measures.  One form of S&D could be the
listing of the names of any developing country Members affected by the measure.  Another form of
S&D could be the application of international standards, or when these did not exist, the continued
application of previous measures on imports from developing countries until such time as technical
assistance permitted developing countries to meet the new requirements.  Finally, developed countriesshould identify the effects of their measures on exports of developing countries and least developed
countries.  This information was already suggested, to some extent, in boxes 4 and 6 of the existing
notification format.  Egypt also proposed that this information be provided in the case of emergency
notifications.  Furthermore, developed countries should also provide technical assistance to help
developing and least-developed countries comply w ith new or modified emergency measures through
a period of 6 months.
70. Cuba supported the position put forward by Egypt.  Other Members expressed concerns about
the introduction of new boxes in the notification format that might rarely be filled.  Other existing
boxes already addressed the Egyptian concerns. Unlike other agreements to which S&D treatment
could easily be applied, such as through lower tariffs, in the SPS area this was a concept of limited
effectiveness because of the  regulatory nature of SPS measures.  Furthermore, SPS measures were
already supposed to be the least restrictive to trade possible.
71. One approach suggested was that the usual notification of a proposed measure should first be
made.  However, during the comment period, interested developing countries should identify their
difficulties.  The notifying country and the developing country should then work out a solution taking
into account Article 10.2, and the provision of tech nical assistance.  Any S&D provisions should be
identified in the addendum format used to notify the final measure.  Additionally, if comments from a
developing country were received after the comment period, the importing country should consider
the need to revise its measure.
72. The discussions at the informal meeting had then moved on to the notification of equivalence
agreements.  Members first agreed that the definition used in the ongoing discussions of the Codex
Proposed Draft Guidelines on the Judgment of Equivalence of Sanitary Measures Associated withFood Inspection and Certification Systems should serve as a reference for the Committee.
73. It had been stressed that in order to be considered equivalent, measures had to be different and
that the trigger for the notification of an agreement on equivalence was the determination ofG/SPS/R/27
Page 12
equivalence.  However, some Members argued that determination of equivalence was different from
recognition of equivalence.  Determination was related to the process followed of examining the
equivalence of a measure, whereas recognition reflected a positive decision in this regard.
74. The Chairperson indicated that in the light of discussions, the Secretariat had prepared a
revised format for the notification of equivalence agreements.
75. The representative of Canada emphasized that there had been broad agreement about the
concerns underlying the Egyptian proposal, but not on how to address these concerns. Canada
reiterated its offer to submit an alternative approa ch for consideration at the November meeting, in
consultation with Egypt.
76. The Committee adopted the format for the notification of determination of the recognition of
equivalence of sanitary and phytosanitary measures (G/SPS/7/Rev.2/Add.1), and requested that the
Secretariat bring this directly to the attention of national notification authorities and enquiry points.
IV. THE SPS AGREEMENT AND DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
(a) Implementation of the provisions for special and differential treatment
77. The representative of Canada, supported by Brazil, the European Communities and the United
States, noted that this issue was under discussion in the Committee for Trade and Development
(CTD), which had instructions to examine specific ways to make S&D provisions more effective andto help developing countries make more use of existing S&D provisions.  Canada suggested that the
SPS Committee examine this issue at its November meeting.  The Chairperson could report on these
discussions to the CTD. The representative of Egyp t could not agree to such a decision at the time.
The representative of India pointed out that the CTD had to report on its discussions by 31 July 2002.
78. The representative of Brazil recalled that Brazil had a proposal on transparency related to
S&D treatment.  Brazil was currently re-examining this proposal in light of the new transparency
procedures.
79. The Chairperson took note of the comments and indicated that since S&D treatment was a
standing item on the agenda of the SPS Committee, the subject could be discussed at the November
2002 Committee meeting, without prejudging the outcome of these discussions.
V. EQUIVALENCE - ARTICLE 4
(a) Report of informal meeting on equivalence
80. The Chairperson reported that the Committee's informal discussions on equivalence had
focussed on the adopted programme for further wo rk on equivalence (G/SPS/20), in particular the
actions to be undertaken at the regular meeting of the Committee.  The informal discussions on the
clarification of paragraphs 5 and 6 and 7 of the Decision on equivalence (G/SPS/19) had been based
on papers submitted by Australia and New Zealand, and on Argentina's clarifications of it earliersubmissions (G/SPS/W/116 and W/117).
81. With regard to determining how information based on historic trade could be used to
accelerate the determination of equivalence in the light of paragraph 5 of the Decision, Australia had
noted that there was still some confusion between the concepts of equivalence and conformity with
the requirements of the importing country (conformity determinations).  Other Members had agreedthat the Australian paper clarified these concepts.  New Zealand had stressed that the Committee
should retain its focus on principles and concepts, and avoid duplication with the work of the three
standard-setting organizations.  New Zealand was also of the view that the Committee did not need toG/SPS/R/27
Page 13
expand much further with regard to paragraph 5 of the Decision.  Some Members had disagreed with
New Zealand’s approach regarding the risks of duplication and noted that, in accordance with the
Doha Declaration, the Committee should undertake further work, irrespective of the work of the
standard-setting bodies.  Issues were not exclusively technical and they considered it the
responsibility of the Committee to guide the actions of Codex, OIE and IPPC.  Other Members haddisagreed and noted that such an approach was contrary to the spirit of the Agreement.  Moreover,
further work did not necessarily require the development of guidelines.
82. One Member had noted that the technological gap between developing and developed
Members caused serious difficulties.  The Director-General's efforts to coordinate with the three
standard-setting organizations were welcome, but more concrete actions were necessary, including
financial support to expand developing countries participation in the work of the these organizations.
83. The Secretariat had been requested to prepare a paper on possible approaches to deal with
issues related to paragraph 5, based on Members’ comments and submissions.
84. With regard to the clarification of paragraph 6, Australia had noted that it was necessary to
avoid the perception of a causative linkage between the submission of a request for recognition of
equivalence and taking action to address compliance problems in existing trade.  Restrictions on trade
had to be justified in accordance with the SPS Agreement.  There had been no disagreement with thisapproach and participants in the informal meeting ag reed that there was no need for further discussion
of this paragraph.
85. In the discussions regarding paragraph 7, one Member had observed that the importing
country did not always identify the ALOP;  that the ALOP was an abstract and often imprecise notion;
and finally that the importing country's own meas ure did not always achieve the desired ALOP.
Therefore, it was suggested that an exporting country's measures should only need to meet the same
level of protection provided by the importing country’s measures.  A number of Members had agreed
that a complicated situation could arise when there was a disparity between the level of protection
required by the importing Member and that achieved by its own measures.  In particular, a situation in
which the importing country's measure exceeded its own level of protection raised the question ofwhat should be requested from an exporting country.
86. However, some Members had recalled that the “Consistency Guidelines” (G/SPS/15)
recognized that the ALOP was normally reflected in the importing country's measure.  Moreover, the
problem of non-statement of the ALOP was being dealt with by CCFICS, for example by indication
of food safety objectives.  The concern had been raised that the determination of the ALOP should not
be left to dispute settlement panels as such a solution had serious economic implications for
developing country Members.
87. The representative of the OIE had informed Members of the status of the OIE draft paper on
equivalence.  One Member had expressed concern with the notion of equivalent level of protection
used in the OIE draft paper.  The OIE representative indicated that such notion was used in response
to a situation in which the entirety of the importing country's level of protection was not met because
equivalence dealt with only one part of a measure or one process.  However, OIE intended to studythe CCFICS guidelines and, if necessary, revise its paper accordingly.
(b) Information from Members on their experiences
88. The representative of New Zealand noted that one of the main points of its paper
(G/SPS/GEN/326) was the importance of clarifying the meaning of the concept of equivalence.
According to New Zealand, equivalence as applied in the SPS area was about whether the alternativesanitary or phytosanitary measures proposed by the exporting Member delivered the importing
Member's appropriate level of protection - not an "equivalent level".  The issue was the equivalence ofG/SPS/R/27
Page 14
measures  to achieve a certain outcome and not the equivalence of outcomes .  Second, New Zealand
referred to the appropriate roles of the relevant international organizations working on equivalence
and the need to avoid duplication.  Third, New Zealand opined that the Committee need not provide
much further clarification of paragraph 5 regarding accelerated procedures for determining
equivalence based on historical trade.  New Zealand recognized the difficulty in determiningequivalence in practice, and the challenge of moving to standards based on more rigorous science.
New Zealand supported both ways of overcoming th is challenge mentioned in the Decision:  the
development of international standards and technical assistance.  New Zealand urged Members to
share their experiences with equivalence to enable the Committee to identify issues for the standard-
setting bodies to consider in their technical texts.   This would also help to identify gaps where
supporting systems, such as transparency and technical assistance, could be targeted to facilitate
equivalence agreements.
(c) Information from relevant observer organizations
89. The representative from the IPPC indicated that the IPPC was not yet carrying out specific
work on equivalence, because the ICPM had decided it should first address the issue of measuring the
efficacy of measures.  The representative of Codex indicated that there had been no change in the
situation since the late February meeting of the CCFICs.  The next CCFICs meeting had beenadvanced to December 2002 instead of March 2003.
90. The representative of the OIE indicated that  the OIE draft paper on equivalence would be
modified and circulated again for comments before being proposed for possible adoption in May
2003.  He clarified that the reference to the equivalent level of protection was meant to address
situations where the importing country's measure comprised more than one step or sub-measure, forexample (1) disease surveys on farms of origin, (2) use of a commercial processing plant, (3) heat
treatment of the meat, and (4) use of clean packing boxes.  If an exporting country proposed
equivalence of the entire measure, then the consideration would be whether the importing country's
ALOP was met by the equivalence proposal.  The exporting country might, however, propose an
alternative for only one step (or sub-measure), for example, cold marinade instead of heat treatment.In that case, considerations would be whether cold marinade provided an equivalent level of
protection  to heat treatment, or whether cold marinade met the importing country's sanitary objective
for that step .
(d) Consideration of specific provisions of the Decision
91. The Secretariat agreed to prepare a document summarizing submissions related to
paragraph 5 of the Decision, as requested during the informal meeting.  The Committee could then
determine whether there were sufficient elements, or whether further work needed to be undertaken.The representative of Singapore requested the opportunity to further discuss paragraph 6 at the next
Committee meeting.  The Chairperson indicated that discussions of paragraph 7 would continue
during an informal meeting, to be held prio r to the next formal meeting of the Committee.
VI. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND COOPERATION
(a) Presentation of the Phytosanitary Capacity Evaluation by the Chairman of the Interim
Commission on Phytosanitary Measures
92. The representative from the IPPC regretted that the chairman of the ICPM could not be
available for this meeting.  However, he could give this presentation at the next SPS Committee
meeting if desired.G/SPS/R/27
Page 15
(b) Information from Members on the technical assistance questionnaire
93. The Secretariat introduced its document on Technical Assistance and Capacity Building in the
Context of the SPS Committee (G/SPS/GEN/332), which summarizes the relevant discussions and
documents circulated in the SPS Committee to date.
94. The representative of Indonesia indicated that exporters were still facing many problems in
meeting SPS requirements in their markets.  Indonesia required capacity building and training related
to pest risk analysis and pest diagnostic and detection techniques (G/SPS/GEN/295/Add.6 refers).
The representative of Morocco drew attention to its response to the questionnaire, circulated as
G/SPS/GEN/17, and requested clarification regarding the follow up from the Secretariat.  The
representative of Costa Rica indicated that its reply to the questionnaire was only partial and
preliminary (G/ SPS/GEN/295/Add.18).
95. The representative of China announced that China would soon submit its reply to the
questionnaire.  After the March meeting of the SPS Committee, China had received delegations from
Canada and from the European Communities to help identify technical assistance needs.
96. The representative of Egypt informed the Committee that during a recent meeting of the TBT
Committee, a representative of the Technical Cooperation Division had presented information on
planned activities including the development of a database on technical assistance.  The representativeof Egypt enquired whether a representative from the Technical Cooperation Division could provide
similar information at the next SPS Committee meeting.
97. The Secretariat replied that the Agriculture and Commodities Division was participating the
development of the database on technical assistance, and would request the Technical Cooperation
Division to provide information on SPS-related activities.  The Secretariat drew Members' attention todocument WT/COMTD/W/95/Rev.3, which contained the Coordinated WTO Secretariat Annual
Technical Assistance Plan for 2002.  The Secretariat indicated that it would do its best to include in its
programme for 2003 the requests for technical assistance made in the responses to the questionnaire.
The programme for 2003 would be finalized at the end of July 2002.  However, because of limited
resources and expertise available, much of the technical assistance requested on the questionnairescould not be provided by the WTO Secretariat and w ould have to be addressed bilaterally or by other
international organizations.
(c) Technical assistance activities
98. The Secretariat reported that since the Committee meeting in March 2002, it had been
involved in ten technical assistance activities.  For the second half of 2002, the Secretariat was
planning activities involving 50 countries, including seminars or workshops in Zambia, Russia,
Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Argentina, Paraguay, Uruguay, Thailand, Yemen and Angola.  TheSecretariat highlighted the importance of regional organizations in providing technical assistance in
Latin America and Asia, while in Africa no regional organization was playing such a role in providing
a joint response to problems.  The greatest weaknesses were still found in the legal and institutional
frameworks of many countries and technical assistance in this area required more attention.  There
were often complaints that developing countries were encountering unjustified trade barriers indeveloped countries; these developing countries could provide evidence and raise their concerns in the
SPS Committee meetings.  Participation in the Committee and in standard-setting bodies continued to
be a concern.
99. The Secretariat announced that it was exploring the possibility of holding a workshop or
symposium on SPS-related capacity-building immediately preceding the SPS Committee meeting inNovember.  The objective would be to bring together those operating technical assistance
programmes with those identifying needs.G/SPS/R/27
Page 16
100. The representative of Argentina expressed concern that although some developing countries
had become more active participants in standard -setting activities, the current economic situation
faced by some countries made such participation more difficult, especially given the large number of
meetings to attend, overlap in meeting dates and the distance to some of the meeting places.
101. The representative of the Philippines, on behalf of ASEAN, stressed the need for a more
targeted approach to technical assistance, fo cussing on market access, and combining capacity
building with special and differential treatment.  Developing country needs did not always match the
priorities of donors, and technical assistance should focus on products of interest to developing
countries.
102. The representative of the United States provided an update of its technical assistance activities
(G/SPS/GEN/181/Add.2).
103. The European Communities provided information on a project implemented in Madagascar in
1997-2002 designed to help Madagascar export animal products to the European Communities.
Assistance had been required with respect to legislat ion, the veterinary service, reference laboratories,
HACCP procedures, financial aid for small enterpri ses, regional laboratories for small exporting
businesses, and improvement of hygiene in facilities.  Most assistance had been provided by the
French aid agency.  Before the project, Madagascar was not allowed to export to the EuropeanCommunities because of the insufficiency of the sanitary services.  However, exports had been
possible after the project.
104. The representative of the Codex reported th at both FAO and WHO were pursuing capacity-
building and technical assistance programmes covering a farm (or sea) to table systems-management
approach to food quality and safety, founded on the work of the Codex Alimentarius Commission.This was part of an integrated framework based on the concept of the Global Facility on Food and
Agricultural Safety and Quality for LDCs.  FAO sought the involvement of other interested partners
including UN Agencies, WTO and the World Bank in the Facility.  The Codex Executive Committee
was considering a proposed trust fund for developing country participation in Codex, and there was a
good chance that this fund would be activated in 2003.
105. The representative from ITC reported on a joint project of the ITC and the Commonwealth
Secretariat to determine technical assistance needs in the SPS and TBT areas (G/SPS/GEN/335).  The
project included case studies in Kenya, Mauritius, Uganda, Namibia, Jamaica and Malaysia, which
identified difficulties in the implementation of rights and obligations of the SPS Agreement.  The case
studies had also identified examples of appropriate technical assistance, including development of an
export market access strategy for specific products, identification of SPS barriers and technical
assistance required to overcome them.  Capacity building was required, for example, to develop anSPS capacity database and a framework to assist in setting technical assistance priorities;  related to
tertiary education;  to establish and/or strengthen SPS enquiry points;  to encourage the provision of
tangible technical assistance under Article 9 of the SPS Agreement;  to review the modus operandi of
international standards organisations;  to strengthen  regional capacity for non routine (i.e. reference)
testing;  for record keeping;  and to challenge sp ecific measures applied over and above international
standards by some importing countries.
106. The representative from IICA highlighted some of the activities described in more detail in
G/SPS/GEN/333.  An International Seminar on Anim al Health Equivalence and Risk Analysis had
been organized in Bolivia.  IICA, the Colombian Institute of Agriculture, the US Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service (APHIS) and United States Agency for International Development(USAID) had signed an agreement for the implementation of the Andean Center for Risk Analysis
Studies, in Bogota, Colombia.  The third module of the Executive Series on Leadership in Food
Safety had been held in April 2002 in Chile.  A seminar on SPS in Central America had been held in
Panama in June, and  several activities were planned in the Caribbean for the near future.G/SPS/R/27
Page 17
VII. MONITORING THE USE OF INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS
(a) Fourth Annual Report on the Procedure to Monitor the Use of International Standards
107. The Committee adopted the fourth annual report on the procedure to monitor the use of
international standards (G/SPS/21).
(b) New issues
108. No Member raised a new issue under this procedure.  The Secretariat noted concerns that this
procedure was not being used.  In the past, when issues had been identified, the response from the
relevant standard-setting organizations had been irreproachable and the procedure had worked
extremely well.  It was possible that the non-use of the procedure was related to the requirement to
raise new issues 30 days in advance of the Committee meeting.
VIII.  MATTERS OF INTEREST ARISING FROM THE WORK OF OBSERVER
ORGANIZATIONS
109. The representative of the OIE indicated that  the organization now had 162 members, and
several applications in course.  Detailed information on recent and scheduled activities was contained
in G/SPS/GEN/327 and 328.  The representative high lighted that work had commenced on food safety
related to animal production, and on animal welfare.  Permanent working groups were to be
established for both subjects.  Changes had been made to both the International Animal Health Codeand to the International Aquatic Animal Health Co de, including revisions to the FMD chapter.  The
work programme for the next year included surveillance and monitoring guidelines for BSE, avian
influenza, infectious bursal disease, bee diseases, and compartmentalization (using Newcastle disease
as an example).  Regarding infectious bursal diseas e, the OIE had been waiting for research results in
order to progress in this area, but so far had not received information.  The representative of the OIEencouraged Members to provide information on this disease.
110. The representative of Argentina expressed concern about the effects that OIE
recommendations on animal welfare might have on international trade in animal products.  While a
technical approach to animal welfare in the OIE was appropriate, Argentina was concerned about the
binding nature of international standards under the SPS Agreement.  The representative of Chile askedwhat priorities the working group on animal welfare would address.  The representative of New
Zealand indicated that the OIE was well-placed to provide leadership on the issue of animal welfare,
and that the issue should not be addressed at the WTO.
111. The representative of Egypt requested more information on the OIE's new regional approach,
about the agreements between the OIE and other organizations, about the work on food safety, the
work undertaken with CGIAR and on reference laboratories (mentioned in paragraphs 5, 6, 11, 28 and
29 of G/SPS/GEN/327, respectively).   He also enquired whether the OIE was considering a fund to
increase developing-country participation in standard setting.
112. The representative of the OIE replied that no such fund was under discussion, but that the OIE
covered the cost of participation of delegates and experts in meetings.  Regarding the CGIAR activity,
information was available on the OIE website.  The other questions posed by Egypt and Chile were
answered in document G/SPS/GEN/327, including its annexes.
113. The representative from the IPPC informed  the Committee that the new standard on wood
packaging, which included a mark in lieu of certification, had encountered some difficulties because a
private firm had applied for a trademark.  Rather  than pursue legal action, the IPPC would use a
different mark, which had to be developed internally by FAO and registered.  The IPPC recommended
the Members to suspend implementation of the standard until further notice.  The first meeting of theG/SPS/R/27
Page 18
new Standards Committee had taken place in May 2002.  Draft standards had been sent to
governments for consultation, including changes to the glossary, a supplement addressing
environmental risks in quarantine pest risk assessment, and irradiation as a phytosanitary treatment.
Comments would be reviewed in November and the standards proposed for adoption in April 2003.
114. The representative from the Codex reported that the Kyrgyz Republic and the Bahamas had
become members of the Codex Alimentarius Co mmission (CAC).  Regarding the World Food
Summit held in Rome in June 2002, she reported that  governments had reaffirmed the role of Codex,
IPPC and OIE to provide effective, science-based, internationally-accepted standards; pledged to
continue to support efforts to strengthen deve loping countries' capacity with respect to the
management of food safety; pledged to strengthen FAO activities that enable developing and
transition countries to meet food safety issues; and called upon member countries, intergovernmental
and non-governmental organizations and the private sector to consider voluntary contributions to theFAO Trust Fund for Food Security and Food Safety.
115. With respect to matters of interest arising fro m the work of the CAC, the representative from
Codex indicated that the Codex Committee on General Principles (CCGP) had decided to advance the
Proposed Draft Working Principles for Risk Anal ysis in the framework of the Codex to the 50
th
Session of the Executive Committee for preliminary adoption.  These Principles were to be included
in the Procedural Manual of the CAC when finalized.  In addition, the Committee had decided to
undertake the elaboration of such principles for ap plication by governments.  The CCGP had decided
to seek legal advice on the proposed amendments to the Rules of Procedure regarding membership of
regional economic integration organizations, especially concerning voting rights.  The CCGP also
agreed to discuss the application of traceability at its next session on the basis of a document to beprepared by the Codex secretariat.  The Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues had recommended a
number of maximum residue limits (MRLs) for final adoption by the next session of the CAC.  This
Committee also agreed to prepare a document outlining the risk analysis policies used in establishing
Codex MRLs for pesticides with a view to developing specific guidelines on risk analysis for
incorporation in the Procedural Manual.  The C odex Committee on Fish and Fishery Products had
advanced a number of draft sections of the Code of  Practice for Fish and Fishery Products to the CAC
for final adoption, while returning the remaining se ctions for circulation, additional comments and
further consideration at its next session.  The Code incorporated the HACCP approach and contained
guidance on the use of HACCP as well as a pre-requisite programme covering technological
guidelines and essential hygiene requirements.  In addition, the Committee forwarded a Proposed
Draft Model Certificate for Fish and Fishery Products in relation to sanitary measures for preliminary
adoption by the CAC.
116. The representative of Canada indicated that his country supported the evaluation of Codex
being conducted by FAO and WHO, in particular its focus on management issues and mechanisms to
enhance its efficiency in the development of food standards.  Canada looked forward to results from
this timely evaluation which would advance significantly issues raised at the Doha Ministerial
Conference, such as increasing the participation of countries at different levels of development andimproving the design and delivery of technical assistance related to food standards.  Nonetheless,
Canada had serious concerns with some elements of the terms of reference for the evaluation which
identified issues either not directly relevant to Codex, or issues which the CAC had already addressed
and reached consensus on after extensive and sometimes contentious discussion spanning several
years, such as the role of "other legitimate factors".  In particular, Canada noted the references toethical and cultural issues.  The representative of Canada indicated that any erosion of the scientific
basis for Codex standards referenced in Annex A of the SPS Agreement would call into question the
privileged status of the CAC under the SPS Agreement. Canada strongly supported the current
relationship between Codex and the SPS Agreement, and therefore had concerns regarding the scope
of the evaluation being conducted by FAO and WHO and its potential adverse impact on theimplementation of the SPS Agreement.  Canada called on Members who shared these concerns to
express them when providing input to the FAO/WHO review.G/SPS/R/27
Page 19
117. The representatives of Uruguay, Argentina, Brazil, the United States, Peru, Costa Rica and
Australia shared Canada's concern and emphasized the importance of basing international standards
on scientific principles.
118. The representative of the European Communities agreed with many of the points raised by
these delegations, but recalled that Codex had two missions.  The first was setting food safetystandards, which must remain science based, but the second mission was related to trade requirements
including labelling covered by the TBT Agreement which were not based on science but on
commercial criteria.
119. The representative from the Codex explained that the evaluation of the Codex was being
carried out by an independent evaluation team which would make recommendations for consideration
by the governing bodies of FAO and WHO, the Executive Committee and the CAC.  The Codex
secretariat was not involved in this review.  The Codex representative encouraged countries andobserver organizations to contribute their views in writing to the review process.
IX. OBSERVERS - REQUESTS FOR OBSERVER STATUS
120. The ad hoc observers of the ACP Group, EFTA, IICA, OECD, OIRSA and SELA were
invited to attend the next Committee meeting.
(a) Information from the OIV
121. The representative of the European Communitie s, referring to new information provided by
the OIV in G/SPS/GEN/329, highlighted the changes ma de in the organization of the OIV.  Decisions
were normally to be made by consensus.  Thirty-five members had already signed the new agreement.
He noted that the purpose of the OIV was directly related to standards and the safety of wine products.
The United Stated indicated it continued to have reservations about accepting the OIV as an observer.
(b) Request from the Convention for Biolog ical Diversity (G /SPS/GEN/121/Add.2)
122. The representatives of the European Communities, Canada, New Zealand and Brazil favoured
accepting the CBD as an observer.  The representative of Egypt indicated that although in principle
his country supported granting observer status to the CBD, the question of whether to grant observer
status to the OIV or the CBD should be decided by the General Council and not by the SPSCommittee.
X. PREPARATIONS IN CONNECTION WITH PARAGRAPH 18 OF THE PROTOCOL
ON THE ACCESSION OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA
123. The representative of the United States requested that, for the next meeting, China describe
the actions it had taken regarding implementation of Annex B of the SPS Agreement, including steps
taken to publish measures, establish an enquiry point and notification procedures.
124. The representative of China indicated that his country was willing to fulfill its obligations and
had been making great efforts in preparation for the transitional review.  China's obligations in this
respect were contained in paragraph 18 of the Protocol of Accession; these obligations could not be
extended.  The review was to take place at the last regular meeting of the Committee in 2002.  The
representative of China invited Members to raise relevant questions well in advance of the review at
the November meeting of the Committee.  China might also address questions to other Membersregarding measures applied against China that were inconsistent with the WTO.  China hoped that
such an exchange of views would contribute to an improved implementation by all Members and
facilitate growth of trade between China and other Members.G/SPS/R/27
Page 20
125. The Chairperson confirmed that the review would take place at the November meeting of the
SPS Committee and indicated that interested Members were invited to provide questions in advance
to China.
XI. OTHER BUSINESS
Argentina: Chile's modification to the draft standard on frozen bovine meat
126. The representative of Argentina reported that at a bilateral meeting Chile had shown its
willingness to make progress regarding Argentina's concerns over Chile's standard on frozen bovine
meat.  The representative of Chile confirmed that bilateral relations had been very positive.
Indonesia: EC restrictions on shellfish
127. The representative of Indonesia raised concerns regarding an EC prohibition on shellfish from
Indonesia due to biotoxic residues that had been applied for two years.  According to Indonesian
studies, only three gulfs were not free of biotoxins, and these had been closed to shellfish fishing.  TheEuropean Communities had agreed to send an inspection team as soon as all required information had
been provided by Indonesia.  Indonesia had se nt information to the European Communities in
response to a questionnaire and requested that the European Communities send an inspection team as
soon as possible.
128. The representative of the European Communities explained that for any country to export
these products, an approved sanitary programme was required, including control procedures.
Information provided by Indonesia had given the impression that controls were not mandatory, and in
March 2001 the European Communities had sent a further questionnaire to which no response had
been received.  The representative of the European Communities indicated that as soon as the reply to
the questionnaire was received, an EC evaluation team would visit Indonesia.  The representative ofIndonesia agreed to re-submit the response to the questionnaire to the appropriate address.
Hungary: Developments regarding Turkey's restrictions on pet food
129. The representative of Hungary recalled that in March, her country had submitted several
questions to Turkey.  However, Turkey had not provided an official response.  Hungary had requested
consultations under the DSU on 5 May 2002.  Although some progress had been made at theconsultations, the problem was still pending.  Hungary hoped to find an amicable solution by the
5 July 2002 DSU deadline.
130. The representative of Turkey indicated that since the issue was now a formal dispute,
confidentiality requirements had to be respected.  Turkey would inform the Committee of further
developments at a later stage.
Thailand: Lifting of Mexican import prohibition on Thai milled rice
131. The representative of Thailand recalled that Mexico had first imposed a ban on Thai milled
rice in 1993, listing Thailand as a country affected by the khapra beetle.  The issue had become a
regular agenda item in the SPS Committee since 1997.  Following exchanges of information and
consultations, Mexico had recognized in 1999 that Thai rice was free from this pest and announced
that the relevant regulation would be revised to lift the ban.  The representative of Thailand informed
the Committee that on 15 April 2002, Mexico had published the revised regulation.  Thailandappreciated Mexico's cooperation on this matter and thanked the Committee for its patience and
support.G/SPS/R/27
Page 21
Thailand: Request for update from European Communities on 3-MCPD
132. The representative of Thailand indicated that the European Communities had reported that 3-
MCPD was being evaluated and requested an update.  The representative of the European
Communities confirmed that 3-MCPD had been re-evaluated and found to be carcinogenic but not
genotoxic, so the ALARA principle no longer needed to be applied.  However, a scientific study onexposure of consumers to 3-MCPD and other chloropropanols was required.  The European
Communities hoped to have all necessary information by the end of 2002, at which point the
Scientific Committee would undertake a risk assessment.
Thailand: Request for an update from Australia on durian
133. The representative of Thailand reiterated concern that Australia required cutting of the
product for inspection purposes, and applied an excessive sample size.  Australia had indicated that it
was considering an alternative method, and Thailand requested an update.  The representatives ofMalaysia and the Philippines expressed interest in this issue.
134. The representative of Australia indicated that Australia was willing to consider alternatives to
destructive sampling if their efficacy was shown.  On the basis of joint trials, X-ray technology
appeared promising.  The representative of Australia offered to keep the Committee informed.
Thailand: Request for an update from Australia on cooked chicken meat (IBD virus)135. The representative of Thailand informed the Committee that in May 2002, Thailand had
submitted a risk assessment on IBD virus in Thai cooked chicken meat to Australia which showed
that the risk of introducing IBDV to backyard flocks through cooked chicken meat was negligible.
Thailand hoped that within its new food safety mandate, the OIE would undertake work on IBD.
136. The representative of Australia indicated that conditions for importation of cooked chicken
had come into effect in August of 1998, setting certain time and temperature cooking parameters.
Thailand had applied for access for product from a certain facility, and had recently provided
information.  Australia would provide a response once the Thai document had been considered by an
expert review group.
137. The representative of the OIE reiterated his request that Members submit information on IBD.
Although IBD was on the OIE's work programme, the OIE needed information to be able to make
progress with the work.
Thailand: Request for an update from Australia on prawns and prawn products
138. The representative of Thailand sought information on Australia's interim measure related to
white spot syndrome.  In particular, Thailand requested information on the period of application of the
interim measure and its scientific basis.  The representatives of Malaysia and the Philippines
expressed interest in this issue.
139. The representative of Australia replied that a report had been published on progress made,
including a summary of a meeting with stakeholders.  The next meeting of the risk analysis panel
considering the issue was scheduled for late July 2002, after which a draft risk analysis report would
be issued.  The scientific concerns on white spot syndrome which had led to the interim measure
remained.  Australia had completed an equivalence assessment, and on 25 June 2002 implementedchanges in the requirements for highly processed prawn products.G/SPS/R/27
Page 22
XII. CALENDAR OF MEETINGS FOR 2003
140. The Secretariat announced that the regular meetings of the Committee in 2003 were
tentatively been scheduled for:
• 4-6 March 2003,
• 23-25 June 2003, and
• 28-30 October 2003
These dates allowed for one day of informal meetin gs followed by two days of formal meeting, as
necessary.  The dates of the June meeting had been chosen to precede the meeting of the Codex
Executive Committee and Commission.  The Secretariat indicated that since negotiations were in
course, scheduling meetings had become very difficult, in particular since no more than two regular
meetings could be scheduled simultaneously.
141. The representatives of Canada, the European Communities and the United States expressed a
preference for formal meetings to be scheduled on Tuesdays to Thursdays to allow time for informal
consultations.
XIII.  DATE AND AGENDA OF NEXT MEETING
142. The Committee agreed on the following tentative agenda for the formal Committee meeting:
1. Proposed agenda
2. Implementation of the Agreement
(a) Information from Members
Activities of Members
(b) Specific trade concerns
(i) New issues
(ii) Issues previously raised
(c) Consideration of specific notifications received
(d) Any other matters related to the operation of transparency provisions
3. SPS Agreement and developing countries
(a) Implementation of the provisions for special and differential treatment
(b) Report to Trade Negotiations Committee
4. Equivalence – Article 4
(a) Information from Members on their experiences
(b) Information from relevant observer organizations
(c) Consideration of specific provisions of the Decision (paragraphs 5, 6 and 7)
5. Technical assistance and cooperation6. Monitoring the use of international standards
7. China Transitional Review
8. Matters of interest arising from the work of observer organizations
9. Observers - Requests for observer status
10. Chairman's Annual Report to the CTG
11. Other business
12. Date and agenda of next meetingG/SPS/R/27
Page 23
143. The next SPS Committee meeting is scheduled for 7-8 November 2002.  The following
deadlines are relevant:
• for identifying new issues for consideration under the monitoring procedure:
7 October 2002
• for requesting that items be put on the agenda:  25 October 2002
• for the distribution of the airgram:  28 October 2002 .
__________