WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  RESTRICTED 
G/SPS/R/33 
7 May 2004 
 (04-2040) 
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures  
   
SUMMARY OF THE MEETING HELD ON 17-18 MARCH 2004 
 
Note by the Secretariat
1 
  
I. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 
1. The Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (the "Committee") held its twenty-
ninth meeting on 17-18 March 2004.  The Chairman of the Committee, Mr Paul Martin (Canada), 
opened the meeting.  The agenda proposed in WTO/AIR/2262 was adopted with amendments. 
II. IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AGREEMENT 
(a) Information from Members 
(i) Activities of Members 
Avian influenza in China 
2. The representative of China info rmed the Committee that highly pathogenic avian influenza 
had been confirmed in Long An County, Guangxi Autonomous Region.  As of 5 March 2004, 49 of 
the 52 reported outbreaks in sixteen provinces had been confirmed.  Of the 143,000 birds that had contracted the disease, 127,500 had died.  The Chinese Government had strict guidelines for disease 
prevention and control of avian influenza which in cluded culling and vaccination of birds.  No human 
cases had been reported.  A special meeting to di scuss the prevention and cont rol of avian influenza 
between China and ASEAN countries was held in Beijing on 2 March 2004.  Representatives from the 
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Wo rld Health Organization (WHO), and World 
Organization for Animal Health (OIE) were also present at the session. 
3. As of 16 March 2004, all 49 outbreaks had been eradicated and some countries had lifted bans 
on the import of live and cooked poultry from China.  China requested that all Members lift trade 
restrictions on Chinese poultry and poultry products in accordance with the regionalization principles 
of the SPS Agreement and relevant OIE standards. 
Avian influenza in Canada 
 
4. The representative of Canada reported that the pr esence of the low pathogenic strain of avian 
influenza H7 virus had been confirmed on a farm in British Colombia on 19 February 2004.  The 
Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) immediat ely placed the farm under quarantine, euthanized 
all infected birds and disposed of them in accordance with OIE guidelines and internationally 
accepted practices of containment.  An active surv eillance programme had been established and all 
commercial poultry farms within a five kilometre radi us of the quarantined premises were surveyed.  
As an additional safeguard, the CFIA tracked all eggs hatched by the infected birds. 
                                                      
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/33 
Page 2  
 
5. On 9 March 2004, both low and high pathogenic forms of the H7N3 virus had been confirmed 
on one farm.  Canadian officials also identifie d the highly pathogenic H7 virus on a second farm 
within the high risk area.  On 11 March 2004, a cont rol area had been establishe d in the Fraser Valley 
of southern British Colombia to prevent the spread of the avian influenza.  Permits were needed for 
the movement of birds and other affected products within as well as into the area.  The CFIA had 
committed the resources necessary to address this issu e and would continue to keep the public, the 
OIE and Canada's trading partners  informed on the situation.   
Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE) in the United States 
 
6. The United States reported that a presumptive case of BSE in an adult Holstein cow had been 
announced in the state of Washington in Dece mber 2003.  The United States Department of 
Agriculture (USDA) and other Federal and St ate agencies had immediately conducted an 
investigation and US officials had notified the OIE a nd the trading partners.  With the cooperation of 
Canada, the USDA was able to trace the origin of the cow to Alberta, Canada.  All animals related to 
the infected animal had been identified and culled; all adult animals tested negative for BSE.  Interim 
final rules to strengthen human and animal health protection regarding BSE threats had been notified 
in G/SPS/N/USA/844, 845 and 846. 
7. On 15 March 2004, the United States had announced an expanded BSE surveillance 
programme, focussing on high-risk populations of the disease.  The surveillance programme included 
the random sampling of apparently normal aged an imals and statistical geographical modelling which 
would  greatly enhance the detection of BSE.   
8. The representative of the European Communiti es noted that the Eur opean Communities had 
developed rigorous risk management procedures b ased upon scientific knowledge including testing of 
risk animals over 44 months of age, 100 per cent tes ting of all bovine animals over 30 months of age, 
and the implementation of a system of animal iden tification and registration of bovine movements to 
ensure full traceability of animals.  In addition,  the European Communities applied all measures 
specified in the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health C ode to control this disease.  He encouraged all 
Members to follow the OIE recommendations as the basis for trade rules and offered to collaborate 
with any Member that required expertise to manage  the threat of BSE to human and animal health. 
BSE  in Canada 
 
9. The representative of Canada recalled that a comprehensive and exhaustive investigation had 
been launched following the detection of a BSE-in fected animal in Canada on 20 May 2003.  The 
investigation concluded that Canada had a very low,  previously undetected incidence of BSE and that 
possible occurrence of further cases in North Ameri ca could not be ruled out.  These results and the 
risk management measures that Canada im plemented over the past decade supported the 
categorization of Canada as a minimal risk country .  On 23 December 2003, the United States notified 
Canada that BSE was detected in a dairy cow whic h might have originated from Canada.  After a 
thorough and scientifically validated investigation, Canadian officials concluded that the afflicted 
dairy cow had been born in Alberta, Canada, in Apri l 1997, prior to the introduction of Canada's feed 
ban.  There is no direct link between the two animals although the circumstances under which they would have become infected were very similar. 
10. Canada had increased its level of BSE surve illance and regulatory requirements now included 
the removal of specified risk material from all cattle slaughtered in Canada.  Canada was actively 
considering the most appropriate means of reinforci ng the feed ban introduced in 1997.  Revisions to 
Canada's BSE import policy were underway and w ould be notified to the WTO in due course.  
Canada encouraged Members to base their measures on OIE recommendations.  In particular, Canada 
would like to see the establishment of conditions to a llow for trade in safe products, such as beef and 
beef products derived from animals from which specif ied risk material had been removed, as well as  G/SPS/R/33 
 Page 3 
 
 
meat and meat products derived from species that ha ve never been associated with BSE under natural 
conditions, such as bison, lamb , goat, cervids and muskox. 
11. The representative of the OIE commended the high level of transparency shown by China, the 
United States and Canada on disease monitoring and risk management procedures. 
Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD),  classical swine fever and c itrus canker in Argentina 
 
12. The representative of Argentina stated that th e OIE recognized the area north of latitude 42 
South as being free of FMD with vaccination in July  2003 and the area south of the latitude was  
FMD free without vaccination in May 2002.  In August  2003 vesicular stomatitis was detected in the 
province of Salta  in a subsistence farm located 40 kilometr es from the Bolivian border.  This was the 
only affected area in the country in 2003.  Six months after the detecti on and implementation of 
control measures, all the animals in the perifocal ar ea tested negative for the FMD virus, indicating an 
absence of virus in that area.  Argentina began a new vaccination campaign in 2004, the seventh time 
the entire national herd had been vaccinated since April 2001. 
13. With regards to the eradication of classica l swine fever, Argentina had prohibited the 
vaccination of susceptible species throughout the c ountry.  A risk analysis had been conducted to 
identify all potential risks of classical swine feve r. Upon completion of its eradication programme, 
Argentina would be free of the disease.   
14. Argentina officials had taken corrective meas ures in response to a study which identified 
weaknesses in Argentina’s certification system for citrus canker-free status.  These corrective measures included greater flexibility and security of traceability processes, wider dissemination of 
detailed information about the programme, increased ph ytosanitary management and training of staff, 
improved budget and audit processes, and more de tailed sector-specific registration of exporters. 
15. The representative of Paraguay announced that hi s country was working w ith Argentina in the 
fight against FMD at their common border.  
(b) Specific Trade Concerns 
(i) New Issues 
Panama's restrictions on milk products 
 
16. The representative of Argentina raised concer ns on two measures adopted by Panama to 
prohibit the imports of certain products because of  FMD.  On 19 March 2001, Panama issued a 
resolution to restrict the imports of animals and by-products from Europe and South America with the 
exception of Chile.  On 1 August 2001, Panama am ended its penal code through Law 44.  Neither 
measure complied with OIE recommendations.  Howe ver, during bilateral consultations held on 
16 March 2004, Panama had proposed amendi ng Law 44 to eliminate these restrictions. 
17. The representative of Panama confirmed the pos itive outcome of the bilateral meeting and 
indicated discussions with Argentina would continue. 
India's restrictions due to avian influenza 
 
18. The representative of the European Communiti es raised concerns on measures applied by 
India on 3 March 2004 on imports of live birds, fre sh poultry meat and fresh poultry meat products 
due to avian influenza.  Contrary to Annex B of the SPS Agreement, these measures had not been 
notified.  In addition, India's restriction on EC products was disproportionate to the health risks 
associated with these imports sin ce the European Communities was fre e of highly pathogenic avian G/SPS/R/33 
Page 4  
 
influenza.  He reminded India of existing OIE sta ndards on avian influenza and requested that India 
lift the restrictions on EC products. 
19. The representative of the United States stated that  it shared the concerns of the European 
Communities. 
20. The representative of India explained that r estrictions on poultry imports were temporary 
measures to address the emerging threat of introduc tion of highly pathogenic avian influenza.  He 
explained that the measures were intended to pr otect farmers for whom poultry production was an 
essential source of income.  Delays in the reporting of outbreaks increased the risk of the virus 
spreading into other countries.  In addition, poultry infected by the virus did not always exhibit clinical signs of the disease.  Given the structure of the poultry industry in India, it would be 
impossible to control the spread of the disease once introduced.  India was taking all measures 
necessary to gather information on efforts to c ontain the disease globally and welcomed information 
from exporting Members who were free of the disease.   
US rule on artificially dwarfed plants 
 21. The representative of China stated that the US rule on the importation of artificially dwarfed 
plants in growing media from China was unnecessary and not viable given China's production system.  China had proposed measures more suited to their industry conditions but the United States had not 
accepted them. 
22. The representative of the United States recalled th at China raised the issue of penjing in 
growing media in the Committee in October 2002.  The issue had been the subject of bilateral 
discussions and he was pleased to report that the ri sk analysis for five varieties of penjing was 
completed.  On 16 January 2004, a final rule author izing the importation of five varieties of Chinese 
origin penjing plants in approved growi ng media had been published and notified as 
G/SPS/N/USA/431/Add1.  This rule built upon an ex isting regulation that was first published in 
August 2002 and notified as G/SPS/N/USA/431.  The 200 2 rule remains applicable and requires high 
risk artificially dwarfed plants, including penjing, to be produced in phytosanitary secure conditions 
for two years prior to export.  However, plants less  than two years in age are not subject to the two-
year quarantine requirement due to a lower risk profile.  This new regulation provided China with 
additional market opportunities and the United States would continue bilateral discussions with China. 
India's phytosanitary import restrictions  
23. The representative of the United States expressed concerns about India's new fumigation 
requirements, which entered into force on 1 January and 6 February 2004, but were not notified to the 
WTO until 4 March 2004 as G/SPS/N/IND/12.  Members did not have an opportunity to comment on the regulation and its scientific basis.   
24. With regards to almonds, the representative of the United States noted that phosphine had 
been used as an effective treatment  to control pests of concern to India prior to the imposition of the 
new regulations. This treatment was supported by scientific literature that the United States had 
presented to India for examination.  He requested th at India consider the information and to revise its 
measures accordingly.   
25. With regards to solid wood packing material , the representative of the United States claimed 
that India's measures deviated substantially from in ternational standard ISPM 15, particularly in 
relation to requirements for phytosanitary documenta tion and the lack of scientific justification for 
treatment requirements.  The new regulation require d the treatment of both the consignment and the 
packing material and implied that untreated consignments, or those without phytosanitary 
certification, would not be allowed to enter India.  In contrast to the ISPM 15 requirement that  G/SPS/R/33 
 Page 5 
 
 
packing material be treated with methyl bromide for 16 hours, India required treatment with methyl 
bromide for 32 hours.  The United States requested th at India provide scientific justification for this 
divergence or revise its measures accordingly.   
26. The representative of the European Communiti es reported that India's new phytosanitary 
measures were brought to their attention on 1 Ja nuary 2004.  These new measures had been published 
on 18 November 2003 but were not notified to WTO.  He rejected India's claim that these measures 
conformed to international standards and therefore did not have to be notified.  These regulations 
were amended in February 2004 and notified for the first time on 4 March 2004 (G/SPS/N/IND/12).  
This lapse of two months after implementation of the measures denied countries the opportunity to comment on them.  The European Communities request ed that India defer the implementation of the 
new measures until the normal 60-day comment period had expired. 
27. The representative of Canada shared the concer n about lack of adequate comment period, 
reporting that India's refusal to accept Canadian pulse exports was Canada's first indication of the new 
phytosanitary requirements.  India had tempor arily agreed to accept Canadian pulse shipments 
without fumigation until 30 April 2004.  However India's refusal to consider alternatives to 
fumigation treatment was unacceptable, given that Canada's climate made fumigation unnecessary.  
Canada had been free of the relevant pests for 20 years and had been shipping products to India for 
several years without problems.  Canada urged Indi a to use the least trade-restrictive measures as 
stipulated in Articles 2.2 and 5.6 of the SPS Agreement.  
28. The representatives of Chile and New Zealand shared the concerns expressed by the United 
States, the European Communities and Canada, particul arly those related to certification requirements 
and the lack of adequate comment period. 
29. The representative of India explained that the Plant Quarantine Order was intended to 
simplify India's existing plant quarantine regime , which previously had multiple instruments, 
including the Destructive Insect and Pest Act of  1914 and Order 1989 regulating imports of cotton, 
plants, fruits and seeds into India.  The new Order repealed and replaced these instruments and filled a 
gap in the old plant quarantine orders, particularly related to emerging global agricultural trade issues 
such as GMOs, germplasm, transgenic plant material , live insects, fungi and bio-control agents.  The 
Plant Quarantine Order of 18 November 2003, came in to force on 1 January 2004 and the application 
of some provisions were deferred to 1 April 2004.   The regulations were made available on the 
website immediately after its publication and a number of India's trading partners had sought 
clarification bilaterally.  The Plant Quarantine Order was amended on 6 February 2004 to increase 
clarity and take account of Members' concerns.   
30. Commenting on the US concerns the represen tative from India stated that phosphine 
fumigation, while useful for quality control, was not an effective treatment against quarantine pests in 
almonds.  Nevertheless, India agreed to examine th e research papers presented by the United States 
and requested that Members send their comments on th e issue.  With regards to solid wood packing, 
India required treatment of the whole consignmen t if it contained agricultural produce but would 
accept treatment according to ISPM 15 otherwise.  Phytosanitary certificates were required if the 
exporting country had not followed ISPM 15 treatment requirements. 
31. With regards to Canada's concerns, the new Order contained a temporary provision for the 
relaxation of specific conditions if problems arose in the clearance of consignments.  Indian officials 
ordered the clearance of Canadian pulse consig nments imported between 31 December 2003 and 
30 April 2004 and extended this decision to consi gnments from all trading partners.  While these new 
regulations were based on scientific principles, Indi a agreed to consider alternative measures proposed 
by Canada if they could be proven to be effec tive.  India had notified the WTO of these measures on 
4 March 2004 and the final date for comment was 30 April 2004. G/SPS/R/33 
Page 6  
 
China's lack of transparency for  certain SPS measures   
32. The representative of the United States commented  that China had failed to notify nearly 60 
regulations covering food, forestry  and fishery products issued sin ce 2002 by the Chinese Ministry of 
Health and the Ministry of Agriculture.  Burdenso me certification requirements for fresh, chilled and 
frozen aquatic products were imposed by AQSIQ Decr ee 31, which entered into force on 1 July 2003, 
but those measures were not notified to the WTO.   Despite holding bilate ral consultations with 
China, no progress had been made on this issue.  The United States urged China to comply with its 
SPS obligations and to notify new regulations so that Members had an opportunity to comment on 
them. 
33. The representative of China reiterated his country 's commitment to fulfilling its transparency 
obligations and stressed that China had notifie d 213 SPS measures since its accession.  Furthermore, 
China’s measures were based on international st andards and complied with the SPS Agreement.  
Chinese authorities calculate the comment period from the day the Secretariat circulated the 
notification.  There was no obligation to notify AQS IQ Decree 31, because it was an operational rule 
of a corresponding regulation, which had alrea dy been notified to WTO, and imposed no new 
technical requirements.  However, in the inter est of enhanced transparency, Decree 31 had been 
notified in August 2003 (G/SPS/N/CHN/22). 
 (ii) Issues Previously Raised 
 
Germany's measures on coffee  
 34. The representative of Papua New Guinea inform ed the Committee that it had submitted 
comments on Germany’s measures on coffee in G/SPS/GEN/470.  
35. The representative of Colombia recalled that  questions outlined in G/SPS/GEN/434 had been 
posed to the European Communitie s in the last Committee meeting.  However, no written response 
had been provided.  In bilateral meetings at the end of 2003 and in January 2004, Germany informed 
Colombia of the approval of the Bundesrat Directiv e 713/03 by the Ministry of Consumer Protection, 
Food and Agriculture.  Directive 713/03 changed the existing regulation of the maximum residue 
limits (MRLs) of Ocratoxin A (OTA) for roasted a nd soluble coffee in Germany.  Germany indicated 
at that time that the European Communities woul d also be notifying a similar measure for roasted, 
soluble and green coffee.  Colomb ia was concerned about the impact of the measure on the marketing 
of coffee in Europe and requested that the Eur opean Communities respond to the questions posed at 
the last Committee meeting. 
36. The representatives of Nicaragua, Brazil, Cuba, India, Guatemala, Mexico, Ecuador, Bolivia, 
Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Costa Rica and Pe ru shared the concerns raised by Papua New 
Guinea and Colombia.  They emphasized that any me mber that imposed higher standards than Codex 
must provide scientific justification, and they ch aracterized Germany's MRLs for OTA in coffee as 
discriminatory and scientifically unjustified.  They also requested that Germ any answer the questions 
previously posed by Colombia and take into c onsideration the special needs of coffee exporting 
developing countries. 
37. The representative of Codex explained that OT A, a mycotoxin contaminant, had been a 
standing agenda item of the Codex Committee for Food Additives and Contaminants (CCFAC) since 
its 23
rd session in March 1991.  A risk assessment on  the consequences of establishing a maximum 
level of 5 micrograms/kg or 20 micrograms/kg for OTA in cereals and cereal products had been 
conducted based on food consumption da ta for European type diets.  Cereals and wine were identified 
as major dietary contributors of the overall inta ke of OTA, while coffee and grape juice were 
considered minor contributors.  The Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives and 
Contaminants (JECFA) retained the previously est ablished Provisional Tolerable Weekly Intake of  G/SPS/R/33 
 Page 7 
 
 
100 nanogram/kg of body weight and recommended that  overall contamination of foods, especially 
cereals, should be lowered by appropriate agri cultural, storage and processing practices.  The 
conclusion of the JECFA evaluation was availabl e from WHO as Technical Report Series 906.  
CCFAC would consider draft maximum le vels for OTA in cereals at its 36th Session.  Furthermore, 
since 2000, FAO had implemented a project called "the Global Initiative for Preventing OTA 
Contamination in Coffee" targeted at farmer s in coffee-producing countries which focused on 
education and training on best practices in the production and handling of coffee. 
38. The representative of the European Communities stated that his authorities were still 
considering Colombia's questions.  At present a dr aft Codex standard for OTA levels for cereals was 
under discussion.  Within the European Communitie s, MRLs for OTA had been established for a 
number of foods, but not for coffee.  Germany th erefore had the right to establish maximum OTA 
levels specifically for coffee.  The European Co mmunities had already determined MRLs for OTA in 
cereals and derivative products unde r EC Directive 466/2001, later modified by Directive 472/2002.  
OTA levels in beer were regulated indirectly by the maximum OTA limits set on barley.  The 
European Commission was now examining the possibility of setting maximum OTA levels for wine, 
certain dried fruits and fruit juices.  While awaiting a legislative decision at the Commission level, EC 
member States were requested to refrain from adop ting national legislation in the area.  MRLs for 
OTA for roasted and soluble coffee, wine, certain dr ied fruits and fruit juices would be determined by 
the end of 2004 and notified to the WTO in due course.  EC Directive 2002/26 established the sampling methods and criteria used for th e analysis of OTA levels in foods.   
39. In response to Colombia's specific concerns, the representative of the European Communities 
stated that Germany had not notified the European Commission under the early warning system of the 
presence of OTA in products coming from Colombia and had not rejected shipments of Colombian 
coffee due to excessive levels of OTA.  
Korea's guidelines for MRL testing 
 40. The representative of the United States recalle d that concerns on Korea's guidelines for MRL 
testing were raised in the last Committee meeting.  Under the new import inspection programme as notified in G/SPS/N/KOR/123, imported grains, fruit s and vegetables were subject to annual MRL 
testing for the presence of 196 agricultural chemical s.  Importers bore the costs of such tests which 
amount to approximately US$1,960 each.  During tr ade talks held in Washington on 27 October 2003 
and in Seoul on 25 February 2004,  the United Stat es was informed that test fees would be reduced.  
However, the Korean authorities had not finalized this decision nor addressed the issue satisfactorily. 
41. The representatives of Australia, New Zealand, Canada and the European Communities stated 
that the testing regime would impose substantial costs on imports and discriminated between imported 
products and similar products produced in Korea.  They emphasized that measures adopted by Korea  
must  be supported by science.   
42. The representative of Korea info rmed the Committee that his country was undertaking the 
relevant administrative procedures to reduce the testi ng fees.  This was expected to be completed in 
two or three weeks, but not later than the end of April.   
EC traceability and labelling of genetically modified organisms, food and feed 
 
43. The representative of the United States noted that  the EC rules on traceability and labelling of 
genetically modified organisms and on food and feed would come into effect in April 2004 but many 
questions and uncertainties remain.  He reque sted that the European Communities delay 
implementation and enforcement of the regulati ons until the implementing guidance on sampling and 
testing was also issued. G/SPS/R/33 
Page 8  
 
44. The representative of Canada questioned the sci entific justification of the regulations and 
expressed concern that burdensome documentation and other requirements were placed on products 
based upon their production method.  In addition, he highlighted the ambiguity of the traceability and labelling requirements given the absence of segreg ation systems and of internationally accepted 
testing methodologies to validate the presence of genetically modified foods. 
45. The representative of Argentina expressed concer n that the regulations were discriminatory, 
posed unjustified restrictions to trade a nd would affect developing countries.   
46. The representative of Australia shared the c oncerns of the United States, Canada and 
Argentina and requested that the European Commun ities consider less trade-restrictive alternatives. 
47. The representative of the Europ ean Communities explained that EC regulation 1830/2003 had 
been adopted on 22 September 2003.   The regulation had been notified to the SPS Committee at the 
request of several Members, however the European  Communities believed that the measure was more 
appropriately categorized as a TBT issue.  The re gulation supported EC cons umer freedom to choose 
or avoid products derived from biotechnology and provided a harmonized framework that encouraged 
efficient functioning of internal markets.  The re gulations also allowed the European Communities to  
rapidly withdraw products that presented a risk to the health of consumers, animals, and the 
environment. 
EC  aflatoxin limits for Brazil nuts 
 
48. The representative of Bolivia info rmed the Committee that bilateral consultations were held 
with the European Communities on 16 March 2004 a nd details of the assessment visit for the 
certification of chestnuts for export to the European Communities had been finalized 
49. The European Communities reported that it woul d continue to cooperate with Bolivia to 
finalize the assistance programme. 
Indonesia's restrictions on importation of  agricultural products due to FMD 
 50. The representative of Argentina recalled that it ha d previously raised concerns on Indonesia’s 
FMD restrictions on products that were not su sceptible to the disease.  After conducting a risk 
analysis on dairy products, Indonesian officials concluded that Argentina's exports did not pose a FMD threat.  The veterinary service of Indonesia had informed Argentina of the lifting of these 
restrictions and Argentina considered this issue resolved. 
51. The representative from Indonesia reported that an inspection team from Indonesia had 
visited Argentina on 12-20 January 2004.  Indonesi a was satisfied with Argentina’s monitoring 
system with respect to FMD.  Two of the five pl ants inspected met Indonesia’s requirements and were 
eligible to export milk powder to Indonesia as long as they continued to meet the OIE recommended 
animal health requirements for FMD.   
Regionalization and recognition of animal disease free status 
 52. The representative of the European Communiti es indicated that the European Communities 
recognized regionalization and based its policy on Article 6 of the SPS Agreement, while some 
Members did not give the same treatment to regionalization.  The European Communities had 
provided evidence to the importing Member on regions free from the disease and access for inspection or any other relevant procedures as in accordance with  Article 6.  Nevertheless, EC member States 
continued to experience unjustified export restric tions related to assumed disease presence in those 
regions.  For example, Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands had experienced import restrictions 
due to highly pathogenic avian influenza alt hough they regained their disease free status in  G/SPS/R/33 
 Page 9 
 
 
November 2003.  France, Italy and Spain experienced unjustified restrictions related to classical swine 
fever due to the non-application of the principle of  regionalization.  Furthermore, all  EC member 
States were officially free of FMD but continued to face unjustified import restrictions.  The European Communities urged all Members to respect the oblig ations of the SPS Agreement on regionalization 
and recognize the disease free status of EC member States and remove unjustified import restrictions.  
EC requirements on animal by-products 
 
53. The representative of the United States stated th at his country remained concerned about the 
significant trade disruptions that could result from the implementation of EC regulation 1774/2002 on 1 May 2004.  This regulation was notified as G/ SPS/N/EEC/103 but questions on its implementation 
remained even though the European Communities had granted a one-year delay in its enforcement.  
The regulations would enter into force in less th an six weeks time but the European Communities had 
not published the final text of the regulation an d the US request for a risk analysis had gone 
unanswered.  He urged the European Communities to  clarify the remaining implementation questions 
and to delay enforcement of the regulation. 
54. The representative of Canada stated that a lthough the European Communities had extended 
the implementation of the regulation for third countries to 1 May 2004, it shared the concerns of the United States.  Canada requested that the Eur opean Communities provide clear information on its 
plans to formally adopt the derogations and provide details of any other transitional measures that had 
been or would be granted to third countries. 
55. The representative of the European Commun ities recalled that he  had announced the 
implementation of transitional measures in the June 2003 Committee meeting.  This proposal 
introduced new provisions that required EC member States to provisionally accept imports from third countries.  With regards to the risk analysis, th e European Communities was awaiting results from its 
Scientific Committee on Food Safety and a report w ould be available at the end of March.  The 
second postponement of EC regulation 268/2002 and delayed implementation of EC regulation 1674 
should enable trading partners to adapt to new conditions for certification of imports into the 
European Communities.  The Eur opean Communities was also studyi ng the possibility of adopting 
measures regulating the use of gelatine, collagen and other products destined exclusively for technical 
and industrial applications and banning their u se in food, cosmetic, pharmaceutical and medical 
products.  A draft bill had been submitted to the permanent committee this week and the European 
Communities would keep the United States and Canada updated on this issue. 
EC  sanitary conditions for the importation of bees, hives and apiculture material 
 
56. The representative of Argentina recalled the c oncerns he had raised at the last Committee 
meeting on the EC draft decision on importation of b ees, hives, queen bees and their attendants from 
third countries.  No case of the small hive beetle (Aethina tumida)  and the Tropilaelaps  mite had been 
reported in Argentina.  The European Communities had not taken into consideration the differing 
sanitary status of exporting countries.  Countries that did not have the two pests were required to fulfil 
the same difficult control procedures as those co untries that had them, which created export 
challenges.  A bilateral meeting with the Europ ean Communities was held on 16 March 2004 to seek 
a practical solution to this problem.  
57. The representative of the United States commented  that the state of Hawaii was free from the 
two pests and encouraged the European Communities to consider this factor.  
58. The representative of the European Communities i ndicated that the two pests of concern were 
very difficult to eradicate once introduced into a territory becau se the treatments were difficult to 
implement, were not very effective, and left  pesticide residues in the honey.  The small Tropilaelaps 
mite, which transformed into a flying insect in the adult stage and could fly up to six kilometres per G/SPS/R/33 
Page 10  
 
day, could have devastating effects on honey an d other agricultural production.  The European 
Communities needed measures to protect its disease- free status and the proposed measures were not 
disproportionate to the risks.  Bees could be allowed from third countries or from regions of third countries that had a competent veterinary service approved by the European Communities and where 
the existence of the two pests was required to be notified.  The bees must also be accompanied by a 
sanitary certificate issued by the competent author ity declaring that the bees came from within a 30-
kilometre radius of the beehive and that this area was free of the two pests.  Argentina satisfied these 
two conditions.  During the bilateral consultations with Argentina, practical problems faced by 
Argentina in the implementation of the control measures had been identified and the European 
Communities agreed to find altern ative solutions to these problems.  
Japan's  official control restrictions  
 
59. The representative of New Zealand noted that it ha d consistently raised the issue of Japan’s 
official control restrictions over the last few years but its concerns remained unresolved.  In 
November 2003, New Zealand presented a submission on its concerns as part of Japan’s review of its 
plant quarantine processes and looked forward to having these concerns addressed in an early and 
trade facilitating manner. 
60. The representative of the United States reported that on 8 October 2003, the United States had 
presented its concerns on the classification of el even specific species as quarantine pests to the 
Japanese plant protection division.  In contrast to  internationally accepted definitions of quarantine 
pests, Japan's legal definition of pests included pests that were already present in Japan and not 
subject to official control.  As a result, imported products faced discriminatory treatment compared to 
domestic products since they were subjected to fumiga tion for pests that already existed in Japan.  He 
requested that Japan provide clarification and info rmation on actions taken to eradicate and contain 
the eleven specific pests and their di stribution in Japan, and on its effort s to align its plant health laws 
with international standards. 
61. The representative of the European Communities supported the concerns of New Zealand and 
the United States. 
62. The representative of Japan recalled that at the last Committee meeting, Japan and New 
Zealand had agreed to resolve the issue from a tec hnical perspective and on a case-by-case basis.  As 
a result of bilateral discussions, new quarantine me asures were to be introduced in May 2004, based 
on trials of orchard control for Fuller Rose Weevil on kiwifruit.  Furthermore, quarantine trials for 
reducing fumigation on lettuce from the United St ates were conducted from July 2003 to March 2004 
and the results were under evaluation.  Japan had received requests for 39 species of pests from New 
Zealand and 11 species from the United States to be designated as non-quarantine pests.  Members' 
concerns on the inconsistency of Japan’s plant hea lth laws with internati onal standards were under 
review.  The consultative group on plant quarantine established by Jap an's plant quarantine authorities 
had held four meetings but experienced a delay in compiling its recommendations.  The consultative 
group meetings would be reactivated to work on recommendations which would be considered by 
plant quarantine authorities for further action. 
Venezuela's import restrictions on potatoes, garlic and onions 
63. The representative from Argentina informed th e Committee that a technical document had 
been presented to Venezuela during bilateral discu ssions held on 16 March 2004.  Argentina and 
Venezuela agreed to hold further discussions and hoped for a resolution on this issue. 
64.
 The representative from Venezuela reported that  it had received the documents requested 
from Argentina and hoped for an early resolution on the issue.  G/SPS/R/33 
 Page 11 
 
 
Japan's restrictions on mangoes 
65. The representative of Brazil stated that the Japanese authorities had reacted favourably to 
technical data provided by Brazil last year.  The evaluation process had entered a new phase and Brazil hoped to come to a satisfactory solution including the signing of a protocol on packaging, storage and transportation of mangoes to Japan. 
66. The representative of India noted that while India was a fruit fly free area its request for 
market access for mangoes in to Japan had been under review for ten years.  India had submitted data 
to Japan and hoped for a favourable response. 
67. The representative of Japan  stated that techni cal evaluation of data submitted by Brazil was 
in the final stages.  With respect to India’s concerns, Japan had not received technical data from India 
but looked forward to receiving such data. 
(c) Consideration of Specific Notifications Received  
G/SPS/N/USA/844 - US prohibition on the use of  specified risk materials and requirements for 
disabled cattle  
 68. The representative of Argentina stated that  notification G/SPS/N/USA/844 was published on 
23 January 2004 as a standard, non-emergency notifi cation.  Although the final date for comments 
was on 12 April 2004, the proposed date of adoption and entry into force was on 12 January 2004;  hence Members did not have adequate opportunity  for comment.  Although Argentina had never had a 
case of BSE and complied with the requirements to be considered free of BSE, Argentina was required to comply with the same requirements imposed on countries affected with BSE.  He 
requested that the United States clarify this matter. 
69. The representative from the United States explai ned that the USDA had instituted a number 
of  interim measures on 12 January 2004 after th e announcement of a presumptive case of BSE in 
Washington State on 23 December 2003.  Under the US regulatory system, interim final rules were 
enforced immediately but there was a concurrent comment period of 90 days.  The comment period 
for G/SPS/N/USA/844 would expire on 12 April 2004.  He encouraged Members that were free of 
BSE and interested in seeking recognition of a lternate control measures equivalent to the US 
measures as announced in G/SPS/N/USA/844, 845 and 846, to submit their comments within the 
deadline for consideration in the develo pment of a final set of BSE rules. 
(d) Any Other Matters Related to the Oper ation of the Transparency Provisions 
G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.4 
 
70. The Secretariat drew attention G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.4, which summarized all specific trade 
concerns which had been raised since 1995.  In the next revision of this document, at the end of 2004, 
the Secretariat intended to separate G/SPS/GEN/204/  into two volumes to facilitate information 
retrieval and document circulation.  The first vol ume would contain trade concerns with reported 
solutions and the second volume would contain outsta nding trade concerns.  However, only 29 out of 
the 183 trade concerns have been reported to be r esolved.  The Secretariat urged Members to report 
solutions to their concerns so that the document could be made more functional. 
71. The representative of Mexico informed the Committee that Item 133 of document 
G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.4 had been resolved with Ni caragua.  The representative of Nicaragua 
announced that on 8 March 2004, Nicaragua had no tified the Dispute Settlement Body of its 
withdrawal of consultations with Mexico on the issue of restrictions on dry beans. G/SPS/R/33 
Page 12  
 
72. Members expressed appreciation to the Secretariat for the work done on 
G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.4 and were supportive of categoriz ing trade concerns into two groups based 
upon how recently the concerns had been raised in  SPS Committee meetings.  The representative of 
the European Communities suggested that "non-current" trade concerns could be defined as concerns 
that had not been raised in the last three Comm ittee meetings, although these issues could be moved 
back to the "current issues" volume if a Member  subsequently raised the issue in a Committee 
meeting.  
Report on the informal meeting 
73. The Chairperson reported that the report of the special meeting on the operation of enquiry 
point, Mexico and Egypt's proposals on pre-notifi cation, China's analysis of SPS notifications, 
unofficial translations of documents referred to in  notifications, and the FAO international portal on 
food safety, animal and plant health had been di scussed at the informal meeting of the Committee 
held on Monday, 16 March 2004.  The report on the special meeting (G/SPS/R/32) highlighted the different situations of Members and identified pragmatic ways of dealing with common problems 
encountered by Members.  Several Members had propo sed that similar meetings be held on a regular 
basis.   
74. Mexico and Egypt had drawn attention to para graph 5(a) of Annex B of the SPS Agreement, 
which they believed imposed a separate obligation from  the notification procedure in paragraph 5(b).  
Their proposals (G/SPS/W/136 and G/SPS/W/143) for pre- notification would fulfil this obligation.  A 
number of Members had agreed with Mexico and Egypt on the benefits of pre-notification but 
indicated that pre-notification should be done on a voluntary basis.  Some Members had expressed the 
view that the primary focus should be on fulfilling current obligations rather than burdening Members 
to comply with more procedures.   
75. China had reported that its analysis of notifica tions circulated in 2003 indicated that a large 
number of Members were not fulfilling their notificat ion obligations.  Several Members indicated that 
China's proposal that the 60-day comment period be triggered when the Secretariat circulated the 
notification would be difficult to implement be cause of their domestic regulatory procedures and 
uncertainty about when the Secretariat would actuall y circulate notifications after receiving them from 
Members. 
76. Members had welcomed a proposal by the Secret ariat to provide information on the location 
of unofficial translations of the draft regulations notified by Members.  This would be done via a 
Supplement (in the three official languages of the WTO) to the notification supplied by that Member.  
This mechanism could be implemented immediately.   The Secretariat would not take responsibility 
for the quality of translations.  Several Members had stressed that the translations would be unofficial 
with no liability on the part of the government that provided them.   
77. The observer from FAO had reported on progress on  creating an international portal on food 
safety, animal and plant health.  The internet b ased portal supported increased transparency in SPS 
measures by providing a single access point to a wide range of international and national standards, 
regulations and other official materials relating to  SPS measures in food and agriculture and was an 
extremely useful tool.   
78. The Chairperson concluded that Members con tinued to be concerned about transparency 
issues and proposed that a future in formal meeting address this issue. 
79. In commenting on the Chairperson's report, th e representative of Canada clarified that the 
discussions on Article 5(a) and Article 5(b) were not whether these were separate obligations but 
rather, whether Members could meet both provisions at  the same time or in a sequential manner.     G/SPS/R/33 
 Page 13 
 
 
Some delegations, like Mexico and Egypt, felt that these provisions were to be fulfilled in a sequential 
manner;  other delegations disagreed. 
80. The representatives from Mexico and from Egypt c onfirmed that their interpretation was that 
Article 5(a) had to be fulfilled be fore Article 5(b) could be implemented.  They suggested further 
informal discussions on pre-notification proposals at the next Committee meeting. 
81. The Chairperson drew attention to the upda ted list of National Notification Authorities 
(G/SPS/NNA/6.Corr.1 and Add.1) and National Enqui ry Points (G/SPS/ENQ/16. Corr.1 and Add.1).  
An updated list of Member's implementation of the transparency provisions was contained in 
G/SPS/GEN/27/Rev.12.  Monthly summaries of notifications received by the Secretariat since the last Committee meeting could be found in G/SPS/GEN/453, 460, 462, 465 and 471.  The annual listing of 
all SPS documents distributed in 2 003 was contained in G/SPS/GEN/467. 
82. The representative of Mexico recalled a discussi on held in the last Committee meeting on 
document G/SPS/GEN/426 and Corr.1. and requested an update from the Eur opean Communities.  
This discussion was summarized in G/SPS/R/31, pa ragraphs 54-56.  The objective of document 
G/SPS/GEN/426 was to inform Members that the te n new candidate members joining the European 
Communities would include in their legislati on all EC SPS-related legislation or Acquis 
Communautaire but would not notify these changes individually.  In response to Mexico's concerns that the new candidates were not fulfilling their transparency obligations, the European Communities 
had agreed to transmit Member's concerns to capit als and to require the individual notification of 
legislation for the ten new members. 
83. The representative of the Europ ean Communities stated that th e ten members would join the 
European Union on 1 May 2004 and had already inco rporated the EC legislation into their domestic 
regulations.  There was insufficient time for notific ations to provide a comment period, however he 
would relay Mexico's concerns to officials in Brussels. 
III. THE SPS AGREEMENT AND DE VELOPING COUNTRIES 
(a) Implementation of the Provisions for Special and Differential Treatment 
Report on the informal meeting 
 
84. The Chairperson reported that the Committee had considered three issues related to special 
and differential treatment: the elaboration of the Ca nadian proposal on transparency of special and 
differential treatment, Egypt's proposal for the inclus ion of a special and differential treatment box on 
notification formats and the proposals referred by the General Council.  He drew the Committee's 
attention to the submission from Papua New Guin ea (G/SPS/GEN/469), which touched upon all items 
under discussion.  It was the only new submission on this issue since the last meeting of the SPS 
Committee meeting in October.   
85. With regard to the elaboration of the Canadi an proposal to enhance the transparency of 
special and differential treatme nt, the Committee had focused on the proposed US modifications 
(G/SPS/W/141) to the procedures drafted by the Secretariat (G/SPS/W/132/Rev.1). 
86. A number of delegations had reite rated that they were ready to adopt the procedures described 
in G/SPS/W/132/Rev.1.  However, they had concer ns with at least some of the modifications 
proposed by the United States.  One common co ncern was that some of these modifications, 
particularly relating to Steps one to four, were deviations from what had already been adopted as 
Recommended Procedures for Implementing the Tran sparency Obligations in G/SPS/7/Rev.2.  
Suggestions that the exporting Member provide a "justification" for the request for an extension of the 
comment period and that the importing Member "consid er granting" such an extension were given as G/SPS/R/33 
Page 14  
 
examples.  The United States had replied that the ex tension of a comment period should not always be 
seen as a positive step since it could dela y improved market access opportunities. 
87. There were also some concerns that the modifi cations proposed to Step five would allow for a 
discussion of concerns related to a proposed measure only during the comment period but not afterwards, possibly leading to the adoption of a measure without due consideration of comments by 
exporters.  Some Members had also objected to the proposed emphasis on "technical assistance" in 
Step 6, emphasizing that technical assistance was only one component of special and differential 
treatment, which encompassed a larger realm of possible actions by the importing Member.  In addition, Members had commented that these procedures did not address the difficulties faced by developing countries in responding  to emergency notifications. 
88. A number of delegations had welcomed the incl usion of a provision to review the proposed 
notification process one year after its adoption.   
89. No consensus had been reached  on the procedures during the informal meeting.  The 
Chairperson had asked delegations to submit their re -drafting suggestions in writing to the Secretariat 
and had suggested continuing the discussions during the regular meeting. 
90. With respect to the Egyptian proposal (G/SPS/ GEN/358) for the inclusion of a special and 
differential treatment box in the notification format , a number of delegations had stated that while 
they had not considered Egypt's document as a spec ific proposal but as a paper for discussion, they 
recognized the role Egypt's submission had played in advancing the Committee's work on the related 
Canadian proposal.  At the same time, Members ha d noted that the Canadian proposal embodied an 
ex-post rather than ex-ante approach  to transparency in special and differential treatment, contrary to 
Egypt's proposal.  Members had suggested that the Committee should complete the work on the 
elaboration of the Canadian proposal and in reinfo rcing the capacity of Enquiry Points before taking 
up other related issues.   
91. With respect to the proposal s referred to the SPS Committee by the General Council 
(Job(03)/100), the Chairperson recalled that althoug h the Committee had completed the work plan 
envisaged for 2003, it had not been  able to reach a decision on any of the specific issues raised.   
There had been no substantive comments on this issue at the informal meeting.  The Chairperson had 
pointed out that the issue of special and differentia l treatment remained a standing agenda item for the 
Committee.   
Further consideration of proposals for special and differential treatment 
 92. The representative of Jamaica offered amendments to document G/SPS/W/132/Rev.2 which 
had been circulated by the Secretariat after the Informal Meeting on Special and Differential Treatment.  These were based on consultations among a number of Members.  The representatives of the European Communities, St. Kitts and Nevis, Uruguay, Argentina and Me xico supported adoption 
of the amendments to G/SPS/W/132/Rev.2 presented by Jamaica. 
93. The representative of the United States acknowledge d that after listening to the Committee's 
current deliberations and other cons ultations, he could agree that the wording of Steps three and four 
of G/SPS/W/132/Rev.2 should reflect the wording of the recommended procedures for transparency  
found in G/SPS/7/Rev.2.  The United States also sup ported the other revisions introduced by Jamaica. 
94. The representative from Canada also suppor ted amendments to G/SPS/W/132/Rev.2 as 
presented by Jamaica and highlighted the fact that the discussion of proposals in this area began in 
March 2002.  He reminded Members that the Committee had previously agreed in principle to accept 
the Canadian proposal (G/SPS/W/127) as one step  for immediate implementation by Members, 
subject to further elaboration of the notifi cation procedures as described in G/SPS/W/132 and  G/SPS/R/33 
 Page 15 
 
 
subsequent revisions.  Recalling previous Committe e discussions which had highlighted challenges in 
the implementation of Article 10.1, the representati ve of Canada also reflected that the proposed 
notification procedures would encourage countries to ask for, and to give, special and differential 
treatment when appropriate.  By implementing these procedures Members would gain experience in this area and the Committee could review them in  one year to evaluate their effectiveness.  
95. Several delegations, including Brazil, India and Malaysia, expressed concerns with the 
amended text of G/SPS/W/132/Rev.2 and requested more time to consider the changes.  The 
representative of India expressed apprehension that footnote two implied that developing countries 
must comply with all procedures, except the no tification of addenda and it created confusion over 
whether both developed and developi ng countries were obliged to follow the notification procedures.  
Both India and Egypt proposed word ing changes to footnote two in a ttempts to encourage a consensus 
on this text.   
96. The representative of Malaysia stated that the procedural guidelines should clearly state that 
developed countries should provide special and differential treatment to developing countries, 
specifically taking into account the needs of developing countries in the preparation of SPS measures.   
97. The Chairperson recalled that when the Committ ee had adopted, in principle, the proposal 
from Canada, it had explicitly recognized that this would not fully resolve the issue of special and differential treatment but was one step in addressing the problem of implementation of the special and differential treatment provisions of the Agreement.  The Committee had also agreed to consider other 
proposals and possible actions.  The decision curren tly under discussion related to the limited matter 
of how to make transparent the provision of special  and differential treatment with regard to notified 
measures.  The Chairperson proposed to circulate a clean text of the amended document presented by 
Jamaica as G/SPS/W/132/Rev.3, inco rporating comments from the current discussion.  He requested 
that Members submit any specific modifications to the proposed text to the Secretariat prior to 
30 April 2004.  If no suggestions were received, the Chairperson would encourage his successor to 
present this proposal for adoption at the ne xt Committee meeting in June 2004.   
Proposal by Egypt   
98. The representative of Egypt emphasized that a special and differential treatment box on the 
notification format would enhance the implementati on of the transparency provisions in respect of 
Article 10.1 of the SPS Agreement.  In addition, he argued that the information included in this type 
of box would complement information provided through alternative procedures, such as those 
described in G/SPS/W/132/Rev.2.  The proposed  additional box would include, for example, 
information on the kind of technology that could be used, by an exporting country, in order to comply 
with the notified measures. 
99. The representative of the European Communities described a simulation exercise in which a 
number of previous notifications had been revised to include the information requested in Egypt's 
proposed box.  The simulation highlighted two distinct  categories of notifications:  those that applied 
to all countries or those that applied to specific trading partners.  He expressed doubts about the 
practical use of this box in the notification format  given the difficulties of pre-determining technical 
assistance needs, particularly for measures applying to all countries. 
Special and differential proposals referred by the General Council 
100. There were no comments from the floor on these proposals. G/SPS/R/33 
Page 16  
 
Submission by Papua New Guinea 
101. The representative of Papua New Guinea presen ted document G/SPS/GEN/469 on special and 
differential treatment, transparency and technical assistance which outlined the difficulties that Papua 
New Guinea has experienced in the application of the SPS Agreement.  The delegate welcomed 
written comments from Members and promised to convey these comments to capital.   
IV. EQUIVALENCE  (ARTICLE 4) 
(a) Consideration of Specific Provisions of the Decision on Equivalence 
102. The Chairperson recalled that the Committee had adopted clarification of paragraphs 5 and 6 
of its Decision on Equivalence at its meeting in Oc tober 2002 and had also adopted a clarification of 
paragraph 7 in its meeting in J une 2003.  The Committee had consid ered further clarification of 
paragraph 5 at its October mee ting 2003 (G/SPS/W/142).  At that time, there had been broad 
consensus on this clarification but some Members had requested additional time to consult with 
capital. 
103. The Committee adopted G/SPS/W/142.  The Ch airperson requested that the Secretariat 
circulate a revision of G/SPS/19 which would reflect the Decision and the various clarifications that 
had been agreed. 
(b) Information from Members on their Experience 
104. No information was provided under this agenda item. 
(c) Information from Relevant  Observer Organizations 
105. The representative of the International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) reported that the 
IPPC is developing a draft standard on the equiva lence of phytosanitary measures.  In addition, 
proposed revised wording for International Standard  for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM) 1 (Principles 
of plant quarantine as related to international trad e) refered directly to the draft standard on 
equivalence.  The IPPC Standards Committee would consider both the draft ISPM on equivalence and 
the revised ISPM 1 in April.  At the earliest, the Standards Committee could approve these measures 
in its seventh session, which w ould be held in spring 2005. 
106. The representative of the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) stated that comments 
made during last years' sessions had been examin ed and some minor changes to the OIE Code would 
be considered at the next General Session.   
107. The representative from the Codex Alimentarius Commission (Codex) mentioned that the 
Codex Committee on Food Import and Export Inspection and Certification Systems at the last session 
proposed new appendices to the guidelines on the j udgement of equivalence of sanitary measures 
associated with food inspection and certification systems.  This new work would start after official 
approval by the Commission in June 2004. 
V. DISEASE-FREE AREAS (ARTICLE 6) 
(a) Report of Informal Meeting 
108. The Chairman reported that at the informal m eeting on the clarification of Article 6, the 
Committee's discussions benefited from presentations by the representatives of the OIE and the IPPC.  
In addition Members discussed submissions fro m Chile, Mexico, Argentina, the European 
Communities, the United States and Canada.  G/SPS/R/33 
 Page 17 
 
 
109. During the informal meetings, the representative of the OIE had stated that in May the OIE 
would consider for adoption a revised chapter with simplified definitions and procedures for 
regionalization and compartmentalization.  When a dopted, this chapter would provide Members with 
recommendations on regionalization fo r a broad range of diseases of terrestrial animals.  Due to the 
complexity of developing procedures for aquatic animals, the OIE had not progressed as far in the 
development of similar recommendations  for these typ es of animals but continued to pursue this goal.   
For most major diseases, existing OIE recommendati ons for how countries could achieve, maintain, 
and regain pest-free status also incorpor ated the concept of regionalization.   
110. The representative of IPPC had briefed the Committee on continuing efforts to develop 
standards related to the designation of pest-free ar eas and areas of low pest prevalence.  Existing 
standards in this area include ISPM 4, which cont ains detailed requirements for the establishment of 
pest-free areas and ISPM 10, which contained in formation on pest-free areas of production.  In 
November 2003, a standard was drafted on require ments for the establishment, maintenance and 
verification of areas of low pest prevalence.  The Interim Commission on Phytosanitary Measures 
meeting later in March would consider a list of pr iorities for future specific standards, however the 
Interim Commission had not established a procedure for officially recognizing pest-free areas. 
111. Many delegations had emphasized the important role played by the international standards 
organizations, particularly related to the development of scientific standards.  Because the scientific 
basis of technical regulations affected their implem entation, several Members had suggested that these 
standard-setting bodies could provide useful recomm endations about procedural issues related to the 
designation of pest- and disease-free areas.  Anothe r Member had highlighted the expertise available 
in these organizations which could help in the evaluation of regionalization decisions. 
112. A number of Members had supported the propo sal by Chile that the Committee establish 
procedural guidelines for implementation of regi onalization measures.  Several delegations had 
stressed the importance of developing recommended time schedules for recognition of pest-free status 
in order to discourage unnecessary delays.  Othe r delegations were concerned that timeline 
recommendations could not be effectively implemen ted given the diverse regulatory environment and 
the complexity of science involved in evaluating pest-free status.  
113. Members had raised concerns that developing countries might face a disproportionate burden 
with respect to achieving and maintaining pest-free status and had suggested that assistance be made 
available to them. 
114. Members of the Committee had highlighted the importance of sharing details of 
regionalization experiences in order to establish r ecommendations on best practices, to provide useful 
information to relevant standard setting bodies, an d to promote continued dialogue on the effective 
implementation of  Article 6. 
115. In commenting on the Chairperson's report , Chile, Peru, Argentina, Uruguay and Mexico 
proposed that the Committee address th e issue of regionalization similar to the way it had treated the 
issues of transparency and equiva lence. These Members were particularly interested in pursuing the 
development of guidelines for the recognition of pest-free status, with a focus on the ability of 
developing and least-developed countries to effectiv ely plan future trade activities with countries 
seeking to achieve pest-free status. 
116. The representative of the United States observed that regionalization differed from the other 
issues considered by the Comm ittee because Members already ha d many diverse experiences in 
regionalization both for plant pests and animal disea ses.  He stressed that accurate disease and pest 
reporting as called for under OIE and IPPC were necessar y to signal the strength and credibility of the 
veterinary and phytosanitary structure of exporting countries. G/SPS/R/33 
Page 18  
 
117. Many delegates supported further work by the Committee on this issue, including the 
continued exchange of information among Me mbers on good and bad experiences related to 
regionalization.  Members noted that future deliber ations of the Committee could lead to calls for 
further work in the international standard setting bodies.   
118. The Chairperson concluded that the Committee agre ed that further work on this issue would 
be useful, however there was no consensus on wh ether the Committee should develop guidelines or 
procedures.  He proposed that the Committee continue  to work in an informal mode, to discuss the 
presented papers and to share experiences. 
(b) Information from Observer Organizations 
119. The representative of the OIE offered to report to the next informal meeting about the OIE 
regulatory decision-making process relating to disease-free recognition. 
VI. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND COOPERATION 
(a) Information from the Secretariat 
120. The Secretariat drew attention to Antigua a nd Barbuda's response to the questionnaire on 
technical assistance (G/SPS/GEN/295/Add.35).  The Secretariat had received responses from 32 
Members and encouraged other Members reply to th e questionnaire as this information would be used 
to prioritize future activities. 
121. The Secretariat briefly described past and futu re regional and national workshop activities and 
thanked the Codex, IPPC and OIE for contributin g expertise to these technical assistance activities. 
The Secretariat had completed the following activities since the last meeting:   
 Regional workshop in Uganda in Nove mber for six East African countries 
 Regional workshop in Sri Lanka in December for seven South Asian countries 
 Regional workshop in Mozambique in early  February for twelve SADC countries 
 Regional workshop in Chile in March for six Latin American countries 
 National workshop in Mozambique following the regional activity 
 A national SPS workshop in Algeria funded by the French Government, and 
 An information and training session for particip ants in the Codex Alimentarius Committee on 
Food Import and Export Certification Sy stems (CCFICS) meeting in Brisbane. 
122. The Secretariat had seven regional activities planned for this year.  The first two regional 
workshops were: 
 4-6 May in Lebanon at the UNESCWA headquarters for training for nine Middle Eastern 
countries, and  
 18-20 May in Nepal for training for South Asian countries.  
The Secretariat had received seven additi onal requests for national workshops.   
123. The Secretariat also reported that the Joint Technical Assistance Program (JITAP) would 
carry out a programme under Cluster 5 "Strengt hening Reference Centres and National Enquiry 
Points".  The JITAP would focus on sixteen Afri can countries in 2004, beginning with Mozambique,  G/SPS/R/33 
 Page 19 
 
 
to underline the importance of transparency, to clarif y rights and obligations, and to provide training 
and equipment when necessary.   
124. The STDF website (www.standardsfacility.org), which could be reached via a link on the SPS 
home page, included useful training materials submitted by the WTO, World Bank, OIE, IPPC, and the Codex.  Spanish and French language versions of the STDF website would be available in early 
April.  The website included the calendar of events for the main partner organizations.  The database 
of technical assistance, which  provided inform ation on WTO, OECD-DAC and other partner 
organizations' activities, was now searchable by a variety of categories. 
125. The Secretariat further reported that STDF pa rtners were developing a business plan which 
would include a strategy for future activities.  When partners had approved the business plan they 
would be able to use this document in fund-raising efforts. 
126. At the STDF Working Group meeting, held in Washington D.C., the Working Group had 
approved a project, in principle, which would identify model arrangements for SPS stakeholders 
involvement in national level policy making.  The goals of this project would include determining 
parameters for success, managing information flow s to OIE, IPPC, and Codex contact points, and 
exploring the idea of having national committees to facilitate communication among stakeholders.  
The Secretariat commended the World Bank's work on compliance costs, encouraged Members to 
take note of this activity, and recommended that  the World Bank representative report to future SPS 
Committee meetings on the results of their work.   
(b) Information from  Members 
127. The representative of Australia described her country's bilateral technical assistance to 
developing countries (G/SPS/GEN/472).  These pr ogrammes were funded mainly through the 
Australian Agency for International Developm ent (AusAID) and the Australian Centre for 
International Agricultural Research  (ACIAR).  One hundred fifteen technical assistance activities had 
been provided to 45 developing countries between 2000 and 2002.  Countries in the Asia-Pacific region, Africa, the Middle East and South Amer ica benefited from funds (A$56 million) as well as 
from "in kind" contributions, such as personnel  trai ning.  Australia had focused on seeking practical 
ways to assist countries to adjust to, and comply with, sanitary and phytosanitary measures in their 
export markets.  Australia would report on tec hnical assistance activities since 2002 in an updated 
report.  Australia also contributed to the WTO Global Fund, which includes work on SPS issues.   
128. The representative of Papua New Guinea express ed gratitude for the technical assistance 
provided to them by Australia. 
129. The representative of Antigua and Barbuda summarized his country's technical assistance 
needs (G/SPS/GEN/295/Add.35).  Because tourism played an essential role in the economy of 
Antigua and Barbuda, high volumes of people moved in to and out of the country.  In addition, while 
the country was a net importer of vegetables, fruits , meat, processed foods, they had limited capacity 
to conduct adequate inspection and certification of  these products.  For these reasons, the country was 
particularly vulnerable to pests and disease invasi on.  The delegate highlighted several areas of 
particular need:  (1) investment in laboratory cap acity in order to develop a multi-purpose laboratory 
that could conduct microbiological testing of plan ts, animal and foods;  (2) strengthening of port 
inspection facilities;  and (3) training in risk analysis which would enable the country to withstand international scrutiny. 
130. The representative of Nicaragua indicated th at Nicaragua had requested that the WTO 
Secretariat provide technical assistance, especially  related to the development of SPS notification 
authorities, enquiry points, and institutional coordination.  The Secretariat noted that these issues could be addressed at a scheduled regional seminar. G/SPS/R/33 
Page 20  
 
(c) Information from Observers 
131. The representative of IPPC discussed FAO's capacity building projects which were 
continuing in all regions of the world.  The revised  Phytosanitary Capacity Evaluation tool (PCE) had 
been produced as a CD-rom and coul d be downloaded from the website 
(http://www.ippc.int/IPP/En/default.htm).  During  2003 the IPPC conducted several regional 
workshops to promote the understanding of the PC E and to assist countries in improving their SPS 
system and complying with their IPPC reporting obli gations.  In April, the Interim Commission would 
consider a proposal that regional workshops on dr aft ISPMs be used to encourage national level 
participation in the standard setting process. 
VII. MONITORING THE USE OF INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS 
(a) New Issues 
132. No new issues were reported. 
(b) Issues Previously Raised 
133. There was no discussion of issues previously raised. 
VIII.  MATTERS OF INTEREST ARISING FROM THE WORK OF OBSERVER 
ORGANIZATIONS 
(a) Information from IICA 
134. The representative of the Inte r-American Institute for Co-ope ration in Agriculture (IICA) 
described its activities related to encouraging partic ipation of Latin American Members at the national 
level and at the WTO (G/SPS/GEN/473).  IICA had also organized training activities related to 
Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HAC CP) food safety systems and specific disease and 
pest concerns.  The document identified a contact person for each of these activities. 
(b) Information from OIE 
135. The representative of OIE referred delegates to G/SPS/GEN/476 and G/SPS/GEN/478 and 
highlighted additional activities of the OIE leading up to the meeting of the General Session at the end 
of May.   Among other items, th e General Session would consider: 
 OIE expert groups recommendations concerning co untry applications for freedom from foot 
and mouth disease and BSE 
 Adoption of the first animal welfare guide lines, based upon the OIE Global Conference on 
Animal Welfare held in late February 
 Adoption of a new standard on the role of veteri nary para-professionals in veterinary services, 
and 
 Adoption of changes in the disease reporting obligations of member countries. 
136. The OIE continued to work with the Codex on the development of food safety standards, 
particularly those related to meat and poultry hygiene and on animal production food safety.  The 
OIE, working closely with FAO and WHO, had de veloped strong recommendations regarding efforts 
to improve transparency concerning the outbreaks of avian influenza in Asia.  The OIE and FAO 
websites contained useful information on this topic.    G/SPS/R/33 
 Page 21 
 
 
137. The OIE conference on vaccination for animal diseases in South America in April would 
consider the use of vaccination as an alternative to the large scale killing of animals during disease 
outbreaks.  The OIE representative urged Members w ho wish to contribute to discussions prior to the 
presentation of proposals to the General Session to discuss specific concerns with their national chief 
veterinary officers. 
(c) Information from OIRSA 
138. The representative of the International Regiona l Organisation for Plant and Animal Health 
(OIRSA) highlighted the following elements of his submission (G/SPS/GEN/474):   
 The Ministers/Secretaries of Agriculture and Livestock of the OIRSA region had agreed to 
support the third course in the Technological Masters' Degree Programme implemented by 
OIRSA with the Postgraduate College of Mexico .  This course would provide training in the 
implementation of sanitary and phytosanitary meas ures and help foster international trade in 
Mexico and Central America. The programme  covered technical material related to 
international trade policy and the support, prev ention, control and eradication of diseases and 
pests.    
 OIRSA 's monitoring of two citrus crop plagues indicated that the region was free of citrus 
canker but not of citrus leprosis.  Efforts to control the outbreak of citrus leprosis  would 
continue.   
 OIRSA was conducting information and training ac tivities related to food, health and trade, 
including on the US law on bioterrorism, E ast Nile Disease, avian influenza, and good 
agricultural practices.   
 In the FAO/OIRSA project on phytosanitary cap acity building in OIRSA member countries, 
OIRSA contributed to capacity building of regional SPS agencies by assessing capacity, 
identifying development strategies, and upda ting SPS legislation in order to encourage 
conformity with international le gislation and WTO Agreements.  
(d) Information from IPPC 
139. The representative of IPPC highlighted the following points of her submission 
(G/SPS/GEN/482):   
 IPPC had 14 draft standards available.  Th ree new standards would be presented to the 
Interim Commission on Phytosanitary Measures (ICPM) in March 2004: guidelines for an 
import regulatory system, pest risk analysis for regulating non-quarantine pests, and the 
supplement to ISPM 11 on pest risk analysis  (PRA) for quarantine pests (PRA for Living 
Modified Organisms).   
 The international forestry quarantine research group had met in February and was developing 
a process to review and accept treatment methods for wood packaging related to ISPM 15.  In 
addition, the ICPM would discuss ISPM 15 and its implementation in order to make recommendations for future actions in this area.   
 The International Phytosanitary Portal (www. i ppc.int) had been updated to allow Members to 
fulfil their reporting obligations on-line.   
 The ICPM would discuss the improvement of st andard setting, particularly related to 
commodity specific and pest specific standard s, and several issues related to technical G/SPS/R/33 
Page 22  
 
assistance and information exchange.  All documen ts for this meeting, as well as standards 
specific information, were available on the website.   
140. The Chairman of the ICPM, Mr. Lopian, drew atte ntion to the special trust fund for technical 
assistance established by the IPPC in 2003.  The Fund was intended to assist developing countries in 
participating in standard-setting meetings and activities, training programmes and regional technical 
consultations on standards and thei r implementation. The fund could also be used for phytosanitary 
capacity evaluation and information exchange for de veloping countries.  The trust fund was under the 
direct control of the ICPM which would make deci sions on how the available resources were spent.  
Mr Lopian invited donor agencies and member countr ies to contribute to this special trust fund on 
technical assistance.   
141. The representative of Canada noted that in  January 2004 Canada had contributed Can 
$500,000 to the IPPC fund and the same amount to a similar fund at Codex, illustrating Canada's 
commitment to supporting the participation of  developing countries in the development and 
implementation of standards. 
(e) Information from the Codex Alimentarius Commission 
142. The representative of the Codex highlighted two issues from his submission 
(G/SPS/GEN/479): 
 The 27
th session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission would be held at the Centre 
International de Conferences Genève on 28 June-3 July 2004.  In response to 
recommendations of the Joint FAO-WHO Evalua tion of Codex, the Codex would now hold 
annual meetings in order to f acilitate standard setting activities.   The session would consider a 
number of important changes to Codex Rules of Procedure.  Since a majority of Codex 
members was needed to adopt an amendment to the procedure, he stressed the added 
importance of participation in this session.   
 The threshold of US$500,000 to operationalize a new FAO-WHO trust fund for enhanced 
participation in Codex had been reached and represented the total budget for the trust fund for 
this year.  Since this amount was insufficien t to significantly increase the participation of 
Member governments in the work of Codex, th e representative of Codex encouraged further 
contributions to the trust fund.   Countries were  encouraged to submit their application well in 
advance of meetings because the secretariat of the fund, housed in FAO, anticipated at least a 
two month delay between the receiving of an application and the actual travelling to the 
meeting.  All technical and logistic informa tion related to the fund was given in English, 
Spanish and French on the WHO webs ite under the food safety programme.  
143. The representative of the European Communiti es noted that the Eur opean Communities had 
become an official member of Codex in N ovember 2003 and expressed gratitude to the Codex 
secretariat for modifying their international rul es of procedure.  The European Communities had 
committed to contributing €300,000 to the trust fund, a nd would likely continue to offer support in the 
future. 
(f) Information from the International Trade Centre (ITC) 
144. At the request of the ITC, the Secretariat informed the Committee of the publication of a 
series of studies on the difficulties faced by developi ng countries in particip ating in international 
standards setting and possible solutions to these prob lems.  The report of this project ("Influencing 
and Meeting International Standards: Challenges for Developing Countries"), published by ITC and 
the Commonwealth Secretariat was now available and copies had been provided to all WTO missions,  G/SPS/R/33 
 Page 23 
 
 
all SPS national enquiry points and national notifi cation authorities, and all TBT national enquiry 
points and national notification authorities.   
IX. OBSERVERS – REQUESTS FOR OBSERVER STATUS 
145. The Committee agreed to invite the organizati ons with current ad hoc observer status to 
participate in the next meeting of the Co mmittee (ACP Group, EFTA, IICA, OECD, OIRSA and 
SELA).  The Committee also invited all interested  observer organizations to participate in the 
informal meetings to be held in conn ection with the next Committee meeting. 
146. The Committee took no decision regarding the re quests for observer status from the Office 
International de la Vigne et du Vin (OIV), the Asian and Pacific Coconut Community (APCC), and 
the Convention on Biodiversity (CBD).  
X. ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON  
147. The Chairperson announced that informal cons ultations on a slate of names for appointment 
for the subsidiary bodies to the Council of Trade in  Goods had not reached a conclusion.  Therefore 
the election would be postponed until the first info rmal meeting of the next SPS Committee meeting 
in June (currently scheduled for 21 June ), with  the Committee briefly switching to formal mode to 
elect  the chairperson. 
XI. OTHER BUSINESS 
European Communities - Delisting of France from countries authorized to export certain meat and 
meat products to the United States  
148. The representative of the European Communities stated that on 24 February 2004 the United 
States suspended Frances' eligibility to export meat  and meat products to the United States.  He 
criticized the hasty nature of the decision, whic h did not give France the opportunity to respond to 
questions raised during an earlier inspection.  In addition, the European Communities believed that 
this decision should not be more trade-restrictive th an required to protect the safety of consumers.  
Commissioner Byrne, responsible for the health and protection of consumers, had raised this issue 
with the US Secretary of Agriculture. 
149. The representative of the United States responde d that this action was based on process 
control and sanitation deficiencies identified over a multi-year period in establishments certified by 
France as meeting US sanitary requirements.  Ba sed on information from French authorities that 
corrective action had been taken to address concerns  raised in previous inspections, US officials 
scheduled the audit of January-February 2004, and clar ified in advance the risk of suspension for non-
performance.  The second audit identif ied the same deficiencies.  French authorities had agreed to 
submit a new corrective action plan to the USDA.  Th e training of French inspection personnel in the 
implementation in pathogen reduction, and hazar d analysis and critical control point (HAACP) 
systems was key to addressing the deficiencies id entified in this audit and that assistance in 
identifying qualified experts is available. 
Paraguay - Monitoring of foot and mouth disease 
150. The representative of Paraguay reported on monitori ng efforts related to two outbreaks of foot 
and mouth disease (G/SPS/GEN/454).  In both outbreak s officials had carried out slaughtering, peri-
focal vaccinations, and serio-epidemiological mon itoring.  Paraguay's plan  to fight this disease 
included a new system of double vaccination for all cattle of all ages, implemented by public and 
private institutions.  Argentina and Brazil ha d supported Paraguay's disease monitoring and 
eradication efforts through cooperative work in bor der areas and the provision of a large number of G/SPS/R/33 
Page 24  
 
vaccinations.  Since July 2003, Paraguay had not reco rded any outbreak of foot and mouth disease.  
These results would be presented to the OIE with a view towards recovering Paraguay's status as a 
foot and mouth disease free area.   
Uruguay - Implementation of International Standar d for Phytosanitary Measures No. 15(ISPM 15) -
Guidelines for regulating wood packaging material in international trade  
 
151. The representative of Uruguay indicated that  his country was providing national level 
certification of wood packaging which was used as support material for exporte d products.  However, 
Uruguay needed more time to apply the different  phases of the certification procedure.  Uruguay 
emphasized the need to recognize the valid use of alternative sanitation methods (as described in 
section 3.3 of ISPM 15), particularly in cases in which countries did not have the necessary 
infrastructure.  The representatives of Argentina, China and Bolivia shared Urugauy's concern about 
ISPM 15, particularly relating to the explicit implementation timelines.   
Mexico - Update on beef and poultry import restrictions  
152. The representative of Mexico reported that when the United States notified the discovery of a 
case of BSE on 24 December 2003, the Government of Mexico prohibited the import of US beef 
products.  On 3 March 2004, Mexico had lifted the ban on some types of boned beef from the United 
States, including boned beef meat (less than 30 months old) and veal less than 9 months old at time of 
slaughtering.  The risks from other products, such as live cattle, were still being assessed and different 
requirements would be established for entry.  The Go vernment of Mexico was also making efforts to 
re-establish trade in chicken and turkey produc ts from the United States.  Since 8 March 2004, 
Mexico had accepted imports of both chicken and turkey paste from 39 US states.  The ban was 
maintained on 11 states, including Texas which pres ented a risk of highly pathenogenic avian flu and 
other states with lower risks of this disease. 
153. The representative of United States said his authorities were committe d to working with 
trading partners to provide them with informati on and scientific data on which to base decisions 
concerning restoring US beef and poultry trade.    
XII. DATE AND AGENDA OF NEXT MEETING 
154. The next regular meeting of the Committee was tentatively scheduled for 22-23 June  2004, 
with informal meetings scheduled for 21-22 June, although the Secretariat indicated that changes to 
these dates might be necessary.  The Committee agr eed on the following provisional agenda for its 
next meeting:  
1. Proposed agenda 
2. Election of Chairperson 
3. Activities of Members 
4. Specific trade concerns 
(a) New issues 
(b) Issues previously raised 
 Information on resolution of issues in G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.4 
(c) Consideration of specific notifications received  G/SPS/R/33 
 Page 25 
 
 
5. Operation of transparency provisions 
6. Implementation of special and differential treatment 
7. Equivalence – Article 4 
(a) Information from Members on their experiences 
(b) Information from relevant  observer organizations 
8. Pest- and Disease-free areas – Article 6 
9. Technical assistance and cooperation 
10. Monitoring of the use of international standards 
(a) New issues 
(b) Issues previously raised 
11. Matters of interest arising from th e work of observer organizations 
12. Review of the operation of the SPS Agreemen t – Consideration of procedures for the 
review 
13. Observers – Requests for observer status 
14. Other business 
15. Date and agenda of next meeting 
155. The following deadlines are rele vant for the next meeting: 
 For drafting suggestions for G/SPS/W/132/Rev.3 procedures for implementation of 
additional transparency on special and differential treatment:  30 April 2004 . 
 For identifying new issues for considerati on under the monitoring procedure:  
24 May 2004.  
 For requesting that items be put on the agenda:  9 June 2004.  
 For the distribution of the airgram:  10 June 2004.  
156. The Secretariat stated that the dates for the s ubsequent meetings of the Committee had been 
changed.  The regular meeting was now tentatively scheduled for 27-28 October, to be preceded by 
informal meetings on 25-26 October 2004. 
 
__________