RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONG/SPS/W/123/Add.1
20 May 2003
(03-2686)
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Original:  English
PARAGRAPH 5 OF THE DECISION ON EQUIVALENCE:  GUIDANCE FOR
ACCELERATED PROCEDURES FOR THE RECOGNITION OF EQUIVALENCE OF
PRODUCTS HISTORICALLY TRADED
Submission by Argentina
Addendum
I. INTRODUCTION
1. Paragraph 5 of the Decision on the Implementation of Article 4 of the Agreement on the
Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (the "Decision on Equivalence", G/SPS/19)
states that "The importing Member should accelerate its procedure for determining equivalence in
respect of those products which it has historically imported from the exporting Member".
2. On 21 March 2002, the Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Committee)
agreed on the Decision G/SPS/20, which establishes a work programme to further the implementation
of Article 4, with particular consideration of the problems encountered by developing country
Members.  One of the commitments in the work programme for the first informal and regular
meetings of in 2003 is that the Committee would, if possible, adopt the guidance for accelerated
procedures for the recognition of equivalence of products historically traded.
3. On 7 October 2001, the WTO Secretariat circulated document G/SPS/W/121, which
presented some considerations for further clarification of paragraph 5 of the Decision on Equivalence.Paragraph 8 of the document states that:
"In the discussions on Paragraph 5, a number of Members agreed that the existence of
a trading relationship between two Members could facilitate the determination of
equivalence of a new measure proposed by the exporting country primarily because
of the existence of information, in several cases, regarding an exporting country's
infrastructure and regulatory systems, and the historic contacts between the
appropriate regulatory officials of an exporting and importing country.  The extent to
which the determination of equivalence could be accelerated depended on the specific
nature of the measure being proposed as "equivalent" by the exporting Member, and
the extent to which this measure differed from the measure which historically servedas the basis for trade.  The nature of the risk associated with the proposed new
measure or the product could also be relevant, as suggested by Argentina".
4. The first recommendation included in paragraph 12 of  the document is "… that the
Committee agree that historic trade provides an opportunity for an importing Member to become
familiar with the infrastructure and measures of an exporting Member, and to develop confidence inthe regulatory procedures of that Member.  This information and experience, if directly relevant to the
product and measure under consideration, should be taken into account in the recognition ofG/SPS/W/123/Add.1
Page 2
equivalence of measures proposed by the exporting Member.  In particular, information already
available to the importing Member should not be sought again with respect to procedures to determine
the equivalence of measures proposed by the exporting Member".
5. The document remarked that the importance of this knowledge based on historic trade has
been fully recognized in the draft Codex Guidelines on the Judgement of Equivalence of SanitaryMeasures Associated with Food Inspection and Certific ation Systems.  It also noted the recognition in
the OIE draft paper on the Judgement of Equivalence of Sanitary Measures relating to International
Trade in Animals and Animal Products, and drew the attention of the Interim Commission on
Phytosanitary Measures (ICPM) to its Decision on Equivalence, and to the above clarification with
respect to paragraph 5 of the Decision.
6. In November 2002, the Committee adopted a Decision (G/SPS/19/Add.1) related to
paragraph 5 of the Decision on Implementation of Article 4 of the SPS Agreement  (G/SPS/19).  In
this Decision, Members agreed on the first recommendation stated in the Secretariat document
G/SPS/W/121 and to continue consideration of suggestions for further clarification of paragraph 5 of
G/SPS/19.
II. PROPOSAL ON GUIDELINES
7. Considering paragraph 3.3. of the Decision on Implementation Related Issues and Concerns
(WT/MIN(01)/17), Members recognize that:
• A significant improvement has been achieved in this field.
• Trade and development are directly related.
• Equivalence, in general, and the acceleration of the procedure in particular, should be
an useful tool for developing countries in order to increase market access.
• The facilitation of the procedures of importation has a direct effect on costs, and
consequently, on the possibility of being competitive in foreign markets.
• The importance  to  establish in the WTO th e general guidelines needed to ensure that
the process of determination of equivalence does not, in itself, become a disincentiveto initiating the procedure.
• Having certainty about the steps and the time required, the exporting Member will be
able to balance costs and benefits of initiating an equivalence determination
procedure with the importing Member.
• Dialogue between the exporting and importi ng Members will assist the development
of understanding and, desirably, agreement on the facilitation of the procedure.G/SPS/W/123/Add.1
Page 3
8. The Committee agree on the following guidelines:
Guidelines for Accelerated Procedures for the Recognition of Equivalence
of Products Historically Traded
Members agree as follows:
(a) Importing Members shall consider the amount of information that the sanitary
services have on the product for which recognition of equivalence is requested.
The reference to "historically imported products" as a variable for the simplification
of the procedure must be understood in the sense of amount of information, i.e., the
knowledge and reliance that the importing sanitary service has of the exporting
sanitary service.
(i) Fast track procedure:  there is enough information;
(ii) Simplified procedure:  there is some information but it is 
insufficient;
(iii) Ordinary procedure:  there is no information available.
(b) Members shall consider the existence of information between sanitary services
related to other products (different from the one for which equivalence is requested),
when this information is useful.
(c) Members shall consider the risk of the product, in order to reduce requirements and
the number of steps in the procedures in cases of low risk.
(d) Members shall not seek again information already available to the importing Member
with respect to the determination of the equivalence of measures proposed by the
exporting Member.
(e) Using the Guidelines to Further The Practical Implementation of Article 5.5
(G/SPS/15) adopted by the Committee and an objective basis of comparison, theequivalence procedure shall concentrate on demonstrating that the measures the
exporting Member proposes as equivalent have the same effect, relative to the
achievement of the importing Member’s appropriate level of protection (ALOP), as
the corresponding sanitary measures applied by the importing Member.  The
existence of information shall be considered in order to simplify as much as possible
this determination.
(f) The importing Member shall, at the request of the exporting Member, specify as
precisely as possible an objective basis for comparison of the sanitary measures
proposed by the exporting Member and its own measures.  Both Members should
enter into a dialogue concerning this objective basis for comparison with a view to
reaching agreement.
(g) The importing Member shall estimate the steps that the demonstration mentioned in
point (e) will require, and  inform the exporting Member on an estimated time
schedule for the determination of equivalence.G/SPS/W/123/Add.1
Page 4
(h) This schedule shall be agreed between exporting and importing Members, in order to
give predictability and legal certainty to the process of determination of equivalence.
(i) When more than one agency is involved in  the determination of equivalence of the
sanitary or phytosanitary measures for a certain product, the requirements of all of
these agencies must be taken into account and included in the steps and schedulementioned in points (g) and (h).
(j) The international organizations recognized by the Agreement on the Application of
Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (i.e., Codex Alimentarius Commission, OIE and
IPPC) are encouraged to develop equivalence procedures for the benefit of all
Members and especially developing Members.  In doing so, and taking into account
their recognition by the SPS Agreement, they shall observe the general guidelines set
up by this Committee, keep it informed on the progress of their work and include intheir work any further recommendations that this Committee may adopt.
__________