WORLD TRADE G/SPS/GEN/66
12March 1998
ORGANIZATION(98-1069)
Original: English Committee onSanitary andPhytosanitary Measures
USRESTRICTION ONTHE IMPORTATION OFRUMINANTS, MEAT
AND MEAT PRODUCTS FROM RUMINANTS AND
CERTAIN RUMINANT PRODUCTS
Submission bytheEuropean Community atthemeeting of12-13 March 1998
Introduction
1. On18December 1997, theUnited States notified asG/SPS/N/USA/106 anemergency measure
concerning thetemporary suspension ofimport permits forcertain ruminants andruminant products
intotheUnited States fromEuropean countries withunknown BSEstatus. Theprohibition waseffective
retroactively from 12December 1997. Theabove-mentioned temporary regime wasfollowed bya
furthernotification,G/SPS/N/USA/106/Rev.1of23January1998,whichreferstothe6JanuaryFederal
Register (docket N.97-127-1). Thenewdraftrefers tothebackground oftheactions taken bytheUnited
States, tothereasons forthenewrestrictions andtheprocedures tobefollowed bycountries requesting
theremoval ofthesaidrestrictions.
2. TheEuropean Community shares thedesire oftheUnited States tocontrol BSEandtoprotect
consumers. However, itconsiders thattheabove interim ruleisdiscriminatory, scientifically unjustified
andcontrary totheobligations oftheUnited States under theSPSAgreement.
Specific consideration
3. Inaccordance withArticle 5(8)oftheSPSAgreement, theEuropean Community requests an
explanation ofthereasons fortheinterim rule,inparticular inresponse tothefollowing points. Under
theheading "Background", itisstated that:
"BSE could become established intheUnited States ifmaterials carrying theBSEagent,
suchascertain meatandotheranimal products andby-products fromruminants infected
withBSE, areimported intotheUnited States andarefedtoruminants (emphasis added)
intheUnitedStates.BSEcouldalsobecomeestablishedintheUnitedStatesifruminants
from countries orother regions inwhich BSEexists areimported."
- TheEuropean Community understands thattheUnited States hasintroduced abanon
feeding ruminant protein toruminants, which should preclude theriskofBSEbecoming
established intheUnited States evenifinfected bovine material enters theUnited States. Does
theUnited States consider thatthisbanisinadequate, ornoteffectively enforced?
- Under therulesestablished bytheOIE,ruminants andruminant products maybetraded
from countries where BSEexists. WhyhastheUnited States notfollowed theOIErules?
4. Inthesame section, itisstated thattheUnited States considers itnecessary torestrict imports
from countries andregions which haveimport requirements lessrestrictive thanthose oftheUnited
Statesand/orhave"inadequate"surveillance.However,therestrictionsapplyonlytoEuropeancountries.G/SPS/GEN/66
Page2
- Would theUnited States provide theinformation which ithasconcerning import
requirements andsurveillance programmes which leadsittotheconclusions which ithasdrawn?
Would italsoprovide theinformation tosubstantiate itsclaim thattheonlycountries orregions
which havethedeficiencies claimed areEuropean countries?
- DoestheUnited States consider itjustified tobanimports fromcountries onthegrounds
thattheydonothaveimport restrictions asrestrictive asthose oftheUnited States, which are
more restrictive thanrequired bytheOIE?
5. Under theheading "Reasons forNewRestrictions", itisclaimed thatBSEcases inBelgium
andLuxembourg wereprocessed andentered theanimal foodchain, andthatthis"potentially infected"
feedmayhavebeenmoved toother European countries. Moreover, itisclaimed thatthefinding of
BSEinfectivity intissues previously notknown tobeinfective increases theriskposed bythis"potential"
movement.
6. TheEuropean Community points outthatEClegislation requires cadavers tobeprocessed
ataminimum of133C,3barpressure, for20minutes (Commission Decision 96/449/EC) inorder
toremove BSEinfectivity. Furthermore, EClegislation forbids thefeeding ofmammalian protein
toruminants. Inaddition, there isnoreason tosuppose thattherange oftissues which arepotentially
infective increases anypossible risktotheUnited States, since alltissues aresubject tothesame
processing rules andfeedban.
- WhydoestheUnited States consider theabove factors tobeajustification foramending
itsrequirements inrespect ofEuropean countries?
7. Itisstated thatthenewresearch findings concerning infectivity inbonemarrow, dorsal root
ganglion andtrigeminal ganglion arethereason fortheUnited States tobantheimport, previously
allowed, ofdeboned meatfromwhich nervous andlymphatic tissues havebeenremoved. However,
theEuropean Community isunaware ofanynewresearch findings inrespect ofsuchmeat, andpoints
outthatthetissues referred tobytheUnited States areremoved inthedeboning process.
- WhydoestheUnited States notapply theOIErules fortrade indeboned meatfrom
countries withBSE?
8. Under theheading "Procedures forRequesting Removal ofRestrictions", certain information
isrequested. Wewould make thefollowing remarks:
- Point 2requests information ontheexistence andprevalence ofthe"BSE agent". Since
nosuch"agent" hasbeenidentified, howdoestheUnited States consider thatthisquestion
could beanswered?
- Point3requestsinformationonthestatusofadjacentregionswithrespecttothe"agent",
andpoint 5requests information ontheseparation ofregions by"physical orother barriers".
Given thatBSEisspread bytheuseofinfected feed, asstated inthe"Background" section
oftheUSdocument, whatistherelevance ofthese questions?G/SPS/GEN/66
Page3
Conclusion
9. TheEuropean Community hopes thattheabove comments willbetaken intoaccount asrequired
byAnnex BoftheSPSAgreement. TheEuropean Community looks forward todeveloping the
discussion withtheUnited States andurges them toreview andmodify theinterim ruleinorder to
ensure thatitisbased onavailable scientific advice, existing international recommendations anddoes
notconstitute anunnecessary restriction tointernational trade.
__________