WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  RESTRICTED 
G/SPS/R/67 
11 September 2012 
 (12-4868) 
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures  
  
 
SUMMARY OF THE MEETING OF 10-11 JULY 2012 
 
Note by the Secretariat
1 
 
Table of Contents 
 
Page 
 
I.  ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA ............................................................................................. 3  
II.  ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON .......................................................................................... 3  
III. INFORMATION ON RELEVANT ACTIVITIES ................................................................ 3  
(a)  Information from Members ...................................................................................................... ... 3 
(b)  Information from relevant SPS Standard-Setting Bodies ........................................................... 5  
IV.  SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS (G/SPS/GEN/204/REV.12) ............................................. 5  
(a)  New Issues .................................................................................................................... .............. 6  
(b)  Issues Previous ly Raised ...................................................................................................... ....... 9 
(c)  Consideration of Specific Notifications Received .................................................................... 14  
(d)  Information on Resolution of Issues ......................................................................................... 1 4 
V.  OPERATION OF TRANSPARENCY PR OVISIONS (G/SPS/GEN/1156) ...................... 14  
VI.  IMPLEMENTATION OF SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT ................ 15  
VII. EQUIVALENCE – ARTICLE 4 ............................................................................................ 15  
(a)  Information from Members on their Experiences ..................................................................... 15  
(b)  Information from Relevant Observer Organizations ................................................................ 15  
VIII. PEST- AND DISEASE-FREE AREAS – ARTICLE 6 ........................................................ 15  
(a)  Information from Members on their Pest or Disease Status ..................................................... 15  
(b)  Information from Members on their Experi ences in Recognition of Pest- or Disease-
free Areas .................................................................................................................... .............. 16  
(c)  Information from Relevant Observer Organizations ................................................................ 16  
IX.  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND COOPERATION ....................................................... 16  
(a)  Information from the Secretariat .............................................................................................. . 16 
(b)  Information from Members ...................................................................................................... . 18 
(c)  Information from Observers .................................................................................................... . 18 
X.  REVIEW OF THE OPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SPS 
AGREEMENT ..................................................................................................................... ... 20 
(a)  Issues Arising from the Second Re view (G/SPS/W/259/Rev.3) .............................................. 20  
                                                      
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/67 
Page 2  
 
  XI.  MONITORING OF THE USE OF INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS 
(G/SPS/W/266) ................................................................................................................. ....... 23 
(a)  New Issues .................................................................................................................... ............ 23  
(b)  Issues Previous ly Raised ...................................................................................................... ..... 23 
(c)  Adoption of Annual Report ..................................................................................................... . 23 
XII. CONCERNS WITH SPS-RELATED PRIVATE STANDARDS 
(G/SPS/W/265/REV.1) ........................................................................................................... . 24 
(a)  Report on the Informal Meeting ............................................................................................... 24 
XIII. OBSERVERS ..................................................................................................................... ..... 25 
(a)  Information from Observer Organizations ................................................................................ 25  
(b)  Report of Informal Meeting on Role of Observers and Requests for Observer Status 
(G/SPS/GEN/1157) .............................................................................................................. ..... 25 
XIV. OTHER BUSINESS ................................................................................................................  26 
XV. DATE AND AGENDA OF NE XT MEETING ..................................................................... 27  
  G/SPS/R/67 
 Page 3 
 
 
  I. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 
1. The Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (the "Committee") held its fifty-
fourth regular meeting on 10-11 July 2012.  The proposed agenda for the meeting was adopted with 
amendments (WTO/AIR/3974 and addenda). 
II. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON 
2. The interim Chairperson reported that the Chai rman of the Council for Trade in Goods had 
consulted on a slate of names for the appointment of chairpersons to the subsidiary bodies of the 
Council for Trade in Goods in accordance with the established Guidelines for Appointment of 
Officers to WTO bodies.  In light of those consu ltations, the Council for Trade in Goods had approved 
Ms Maria Araceli Albarece of the Philippines as chairperson of the SPS Committee for 2012/2013.  
The Committee endorsed the selection of Ms Albar ece by acclamation, and thanked Ms Chavez for 
her considerable efforts and accomp lishments as interim chairperson. 
3. The interim Chairperson expressed her gratitude  to all Members for their cooperation and 
assistance, thanked the Secretariat for its assistance , and offered her support to the new chairperson. 
4. In assuming the role of chairperson, Ms Albarece expressed her appreciation for the 
confidence shown by Members in giving her this res ponsibility, and her interest  to continue  to support 
the work of the Committee. 
III. INFORMATION ON RELEVANT ACTIVITIES 
(a) Information from Members 
5. Australia drew attention to proposed reforms to Australia's biosecurity system and the draft of 
the legislation notified for comments (G/SPS/N/ AUS/298).  The reform aimed at meeting the 
increasing demand on biosecurity management and to deliver a more efficient and sustainable 
biosecurity system.  The reforms were underpinned by five key principles:  (i) implementation of a risk-based approach to biosecurity management;  ( ii) managing biosecurity risk across the biosecurity 
continuum, involving offshore, airport and onshore ac tivities;  (iii) strengthening partnerships with 
stakeholders;  (iv) intelligence-led and evidence- based decisions;  and (v) supported by modern 
legislation, technology, funding a nd business systems.  As part of the reform, new legislation was 
being developed to replace the century-old Quar antine Act 1908.  The legislation would have a 
number of revisions that might be of interest to Members, including with respect to Australia's Appropriate Level of Protection (A LOP) and the biosecurity import risk analysis process.  Existing 
approvals to export products to Au stralia would continue to be valid  until normal their expiry dates. 
6. Australia also reported that the use of th e Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service 
(AQIS) brand would be retired in the next year.  The Australian Department of Agriculture, Fisheries 
and Forestry would continue to  have responsibility for all Aust ralian government work regarding 
biosecurity, agricultural, fisheries, forestry, f ood production and food safety sectors.  The services 
currently provided under the AQIS brand would con tinue to be provided by the same department.  
The change would not affect the legal basis or co mpetent authority under which orders, inspections 
and certifications were undertaken, nor Australia's re quirements related to imported agricultural, food, 
plant and/or animal products.  During the trans ition period any permit carrying the AQIS brand would 
be valid for the duration of the permit.  Furthe r details on the administrative changes would be 
provided in the near future. G/SPS/R/67 
Page 4  
 
  7. Botswana announced that following the April 2011 outbreak of foot and mouth disease 
(FMD) in cattle in zone 6 of Butale Syndicate crus h, near the border with Zimbabwe, a stamping-out 
programme was implemented.  The strategy incl uded establishing a containment zone, emergency 
vaccination in cattle, goats and sheep, and ultimately depopulation of cattle in the containment zone.  
In October 2011, the OIE approved the containmen t zone and recognized the former FMD-free areas 
without vaccination as prior to the outbreak.  In May 2012, Botswana presented a re-listing 
submission to the European Union.  Following the re-listing of Botswana's export establishments in 
the EU TRACES system, on 27 June 2012, exports of beef were again possibl e into the European 
Union (see also G/SPS/GEN/1162 of 3 July 2012). 
8. The European Union congratulated Botswana fo r bringing the outbreak under control and for 
the improvements made in its cattle production and traceability systems.  The European Union also 
welcomed the reinstatement by th e OIE of the relevant areas of  Botswana as FMD-free without 
vaccination and welcomed the fact that Botswana's beef exports to the European Union could resume 
as of 10 July 2012. 
9. Japan provided an update on the current situati on and efforts made in response to the Great 
East Japan Earthquake that occurred on 11 March 20 11.  Japan thanked the international community 
for its co-operation and indicated that the infrastruct ure and economies of the affected regions were on 
a steady path to recovery and r econstruction.  Priority had been given to ensure food safety based on 
scientific evidence.  In addition, to achieve greater  consumer confidence, new and stricter limits for 
radioactive materials in food products were in troduced in April 2012 (G/SPS/N/JPN/287).  Japan had 
promptly provided accurate information about th e situation and the safety of products to the 
international community, and as a result, import rest rictions had been lifted completely by a number 
of countries including Canada, Chile, Mexico, Myanma r, Serbia and Peru.  However, some countries 
still continued to impose severe restrictions, and Jap an requested that these ensure all measures were 
based on scientific principles in line with the WTO agreements. 
10. Mexico reported that on 21 June 2012, its Nati onal Agriculture and Food Health, Safety and 
Quality Service (SENASICA) had notified to the OIE the presence of avian influenza (AI) AH7N3 in 
poultry production units in the state of Jalisco.  On 2 July 2012, the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Rural Development, Fisheries a nd Food (SAGARPA) began emergency actions to 
diagnose, prevent, control and eradicate the virus.  Since the beginning of the outbreak, Mexico had restricted exports of poultry products from the a ffected zone, before its trading partners requested 
such action.  The presence of the virus was restricted to two municipalities and the rest of the country 
remained free from the virus.  The AH7N3 virus di d not represent any food safety risk as long as the 
food was handled and cooked properly.  Mexico re quested other Members to notify any SPS measures 
applied to the import of products from Mexico in  accordance with their obligations under the 
SPS Agreement, and to adhere to the guidelines established by the OIE.  (See also G/SPS/GEN/1175). 
11. Belize reported on a project funded by the Sta ndard and Trade Development Facility (STDF) 
as of October 2011 to apply the Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Framework (MCDA), with the 
objective of using a structured process to set SPS pr iorities within a multi-disciplinary scenario.  The 
MCDA framework would build on the results of other evaluation tools Belize had undertaken in the past (e.g., the IPPC Phytosanitary Capacity Evalua tion tool;  the OIE evaluation of the performance of 
veterinary services (PVS) and gap analysis).  The application of the MCDA framework should enable 
Belize to prioritize specific SPS options in the cont ext of resource constraints, and the information 
generated through this process would be used by th e competent authority in agricultural health and 
food safety, as well as by donors and development pa rtners, to inform SPS-related planning, decision-
making and the allocation of resources.  The results  of the application of the MCDA framework were 
expected to be ready before October 2012.  G/SPS/R/67 
 Page 5 
 
 
  (b) Information from relevant SPS Standard-Setting Bodies 
12. The OIE highlighted important developments at  the World Assembly of OIE delegates in 
May 2012, including the adoption of  a number of new and revised OIE standards (G/SPS/GEN/1164).  
In the Terrestrial Animal Health Code, a new chap ter on veterinary legislation (chapter 3.4) was 
adopted.  A major revision was made to consider  also the disease impact on wildlife when a new 
disease was added to or removed from the disease list (chapter 1.4).  The chapter on rabies was 
updated to clarify the case definition and disease status  based on the latest scientific information.  
African horse sickness was included among the diseases e ligible for OIE official disease recognition.  
In the Aquatic Animal Health Code, new chapters  on communication and on antimicrobial resistance 
were added, resulting in better harmonization with the Terrestrial Animal Health Code. 
13. The International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) secretariat reported on the adoption by 
the Commission on Phytosanitary Measures (CPM) of  IPPC's strategic framework.  The strategic 
objectives of the framework were to protect sustai nable agriculture and enhance global food security 
by protecting the environment, forest and biodive rsity from plant pests;  facilitating economic and 
trade development through the promotion of harmoni zed scientifically-based ph ytosanitary measures;  
and developing members' phytosanitary capacity.  IPPC highlighted the implementation of the new 
IPPC standard-setting process, and reported on some  of the draft ISPMs being considered by the 
Commission, such as the revised appendix on el ectronic certification and a draft annex on the 
establishment of fruit fly quarantine areas within a p est-free area in the event of an outbreak.  The 
Standards Committee had approved specifications fo r developing a standard on the safe handling and 
disposal of waste with potential pest risks gene rated during internationa l voyages.  Additional 
consultations were on-going for the drafting of speci fications for ISPMs including on the international 
movement of cut flowers and branches, and th e international movement of grains;  these 
specifications would serve as a blueprint for interna tional standards.  The IPPC encouraged Members 
to report obligatory information through the Internati onal Plant Portal (IPP), and drew attention to the 
creation of the ePhyto webpage ( http://ephyto.ippc.int/ ).  The IPPC was actively engaged with the 
OIE and Codex on some cooperative activities such  as addressing information technology needs in a 
sustainable way, including the possibility of Codex and OIE using the IPPC's online comment system.  
More detailed information can be found in G/SPS/GEN/1171. 
14. Codex highlighted information from vari ous Codex committees (G/SPS/GEN/1182).  The 
Committee on Contaminants in food revised its risk analysis principles and proposed maximum 
residue levels (MRLs) for melamine in food and liquid infant formula, as well as MRLs for total 
aflatoxins in dry fish, which were adopted by th e Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC);  new work 
will include the level of radionuclides in food.  The Committee on General Principles reviewed 
several texts related to risk analysis, and discussed  various issues of procedures and mechanisms for 
co-operation between Codex and OIE.  The Comm ittee on Pesticide Residues revised provisions on 
the classification of food and animal feed for th e purposes of establishing MRLs for pesticides.  The 
Committee on Residues of Veterinary Drugs pro posed MRLs for veterinary drugs which were 
adopted by the CAC, as well as a sampling plan for residue control in aquatic  animal products.  The 
35th session of the CAC adopted a number of standa rds and related texts, including the MRL for 
ractopamine, which was exceptionally adopted by  vote as opposed to the usual adoption by 
consensus.  The "Guidelines on the application of pr inciples of food hygiene to the control of viruses" 
was also adopted by the CAC.  The CAC is curr ently preparing a strategic plan for 2014-2019, 
however budgetary constraints are affecting th e funding of FAO/WHO scientific expert bodies. 
IV. SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS (G/SPS/GEN/204/REV.12) 
15. The Chairperson recalled that this agenda ite m was designed to allow Members to raise any 
specific trade concerns they may have with respect  to the implementation of the SPS Agreement.  She 
would follow the normal practice of first giving the floor to the Member(s) raising the issue, then G/SPS/R/67 
Page 6  
 
  open the floor to other delegates who wished to address the same issue before inviting the Member 
whose measure was being discussed to respond. 
(a) New Issues 
(i) Japan's Restrictions Related to  FMD - Concerns of Argentina 
16. Argentina expressed deep concerns about Japan 's undue delay in res ponding to Argentina's 
requests for recognition as an FMD-free area without  vaccination, and Japan's failure to open its 
market to deboned fresh and mature beef meat.  Arge ntina's first request dated to April 2003.  After 
no response, in March 2004, Argentina submitted to Japan's Ministry of Agriculture, Fishery and Forestry (MAFF) a specific report concerning the FMD-free area without vaccination and a technical 
proposal for risk mitigation in the import of m eat from FMD-free areas with vaccination.  Japan 
refused to address both subjects at the same time an d instead proposed to fi rst focus on the recognition 
of the FMD-free area without vaccination and afte rwards discuss the exportation from the FMD-free 
area with vaccination.  In June 2005, Argentina sen t a technical mission to Japan to formally request 
recognition as an FMD-free area in line with Article 6 of the SPS Agreement.  On that occasion, the 
MAFF authorities stated: i) the need to conduct a technical mission of experts from the National 
Institute of Animal Health to Argentina, whic h took place in December 2007, and ii) that Argentina 
had to reply to a lengthy questionnaire, which w as only received after more than three years (in 
December 2008) and which, among other things, proposed to follow eight steps to advance the 
procedure (including that of carrying out a risk analysis for both areas).  In January 2010, Argentina had replied to the questionnaire for the risk anal ysis of the FMD-free area without vaccination, 
submitting additional technical information.  Since then, no replies had been received from Japan to 
enquiries, meetings and notes submitted on several  occasions during 2010 and 2011.  Argentina was 
officially recognized by the OIE as a country free of FMD with three areas:  one area FMD-free without vaccination (Patagonia) and two areas FM D-free with vaccination (north region and the 
border region).  In spite of this fact and despite the intense efforts undertaken for almost ten years, 
Japan had not yet formally recognized these areas.  Bearing this in mind and considering Articles 2.2, 
5.1, 3, 6 and 8, among other provisions of the SPS Ag reement, Argentina respec tfully requested that 
Japan conclude without undue dela y the on-going proceedings in line w ith the international standards. 
17. Japan responded that an additional questionnaire w ould soon be sent to Argentina to request 
further information necessary for the development of a risk assessment.  Japan's SPS measures were 
based on a risk assessment taking into account the OIE Terrestrial Animal Health Code and the 
disease-free status officially recognized by the OIE.  It was important to take fully into account the 
available scientific evidence and to ensure transparency in the process  of risk assessment, and Japan 
would continue to work closely with  Argentina to resolve this issue. 
(ii) Trade Restrictive Measures due to the Schm allenberg Virus – Concerns of the European 
Union 
18. The European Union stated that it had been fully transparent with stakeholders and third 
country partners since the detection of the Schma llenberg virus (SBV).  Recent evidence confirmed 
that SBV had a minor impact on livestock production, and that the risk of infection to humans exposed to SBV was absent or extremely low.  In  May 2012, OIE's World Assembly of Delegates had 
concluded that the risk posed by commodities such  as meat, milk, semen and embryos was negligible, 
that the conditions to consider the infection as an emerging disease were no longer met and that the 
disease did not meet the criteria for listing by the OIE.  The European Union requested all countries 
that had adopted restrictive measures on EU pro ducts to remove those restrictions.  Any WTO 
Member maintaining trade restrictions should be able to provide scientific justification for the 
measure and demonstrate that the measure was propor tionate to the risk.  These Members should also 
be able to demonstrate that they were free from SBV and that similar measures were also applied  G/SPS/R/67 
 Page 7 
 
 
  against other viruses of the Simbu serogroup, both in their own territory and when dealing with other 
trading partners.  The European Union urged Memb ers to withdraw all restrictions imposed on its 
exports due to the occurrence of Schmallenberg vi rus.  More detailed information can be found in 
G/SPS/GEN/1161. 
19. Switzerland indicated that it had also encountered  restrictions on its exports of live animals 
and genetic material, even though SBV had never been detected in the country.  Switzerland agreed 
that SBV should be treated in the same way as othe r viruses of the same group, and that SBV-related 
trade restrictions on exports of ruminants and th eir products were unjustified.  Switzerland requested 
that such restrictions be withdrawn without delay. 
(iii) Chinese Taipei's MRLs for Roasted and Po wdered Coffee (G/SPS/N/TPKM/255)– Concerns 
of India 
20. India stated that Chinese Taipei's Food and Drug Administration had notified a draft 
regulation on tolerance levels of mycotoxins in  food which would amend the tolerance level for 
ochratoxin A in coffee (G/SPS/N/TPKM/255).  The draft set an MRL of 5 ppb for mycotoxin in roasted coffee powder and instant coffee.  Codex had not prescribed limits for ochratoxin A in coffee, 
and only the European Union had notified MRLs fo r ochratoxin A at 5 ppb and for soluble coffee at 
10 ppb.  The uniform limit for roasted and ground coffee, as well as soluble coffee, set by Chinese Taipei seemed arbitrary and not based on scientific  evidence, as during the manufacture of soluble 
coffee ochratoxin A was concentrated, leading to a higher presence of this compound than in ground 
coffee.  Chinese Taipei's requirements would adversely affect India's growing exports of coffee.  India 
urged Chinese Taipei's competent authority to take into consideration India's comments when 
finalizing the measure on tolerances of mycotoxins in foods. 
21. The European Union shared the concerns of  India, and had submitted comments on the SPS 
notification.  The new levels proposed for ochr atoxin A in soluble coffee would need to be 
scientifically justified.  Chinese Taipei was encour aged to notify again the new amended  measure to 
the SPS Committee so that all trading partners could comment on the amended proposed level. 
22. Colombia requested Chinese Taipei to provide  the technical basis on which the limits for 
ochratoxin A had been set, and recalled that Code x had not yet established limits for this toxin. 
23. Chinese Taipei stated that in recent years consumption of coffee had increased and that the 
tropical climate of Chinese Taipei favoured the gr owth of mould on this product.  The government 
had carried out a local background survey and a risk  assessment on ochratoxin A in coffee, taking into 
account the measures of other countries, before draf ting the proposed requirement.  The draft standard 
was notified to the WTO on 19 April 2012, with a deadline for comments of 11 June 2012.  
Nonetheless, Chinese Taipei would still accept furthe r comments on the draft, and encouraged India 
to submit its comments in writing to the competent authorities. 
(iv) European Union's Modification of Testing of Residues of Pesticides – Concerns of India 
24. India expressed concerns over the EU notifica tion which proposed to include in Annex I of 
the Regulation (EC) No. 396/2005 new fruits, vegetabl es and cereals that had become available on the 
EU market (G/SPS/N/EU/22).  In the modified regulation, paddy rice would be tested for residues instead of the whole rice grain.  Testing for MRLs was usually undertaken on the food ready for 
consumption.  In the case of rice, which could not  be consumed raw, testing should be on the whole 
grain rice instead of the paddy rice.  Paddy rice woul d always have higher leve ls of pesticide residues 
as pesticides were sprayed directly on it, but paddy rice was not directly consumed.  This was 
recognized, for example, in Part 180, title 40 of the US Code of Federal Regulations on "Tolerances 
and Exemptions for Pesticide Chemical Residues in  Food".  Exporters would find it more difficult G/SPS/R/67 
Page 8  
 
  than necessary to meet the proposed EU requirement s, thereby impacting trade, and India requested 
that the European Union provide its scientif ic justification for the proposed change. 
25. Pakistan and Viet Nam expressed their interest in the issue. 
26. The European Union explained that the reas on for the proposed changes to Annex I of 
Regulation EC N°396/2005 was to respond to consumer s' demands to include new fruit, vegetables 
and cereals which had more recently become available on the EU market, and to modify the parts of 
products on which the residues should be analysed.  The European Union had not modified any practices on testing of pesticides residues. On the co ntrary, the rules had been made more transparent 
for all trade partners through the publication of all available validation methods for pesticide residues 
and by providing, through the WTO channels, inform ation on all activities related to the regulation.  
After consideration of comments received and furt her exchanges with stakeholders, the European 
Union had decided to keep the current practice c oncerning rice, which meant that residues would be 
analysed on the whole grain product and not paddy rice.  The EU underlined that its legislative procedure was non-discriminatory, transparent and able  to take third country requests favourably into 
consideration, as in this case. 
(v) US Reopening of the Market for Fresh Lemons from the North West Region of Argentina – 
Concerns of Argentina 
27. Argentina expressed its concerns about the dela y for reopening the US fresh lemon market for 
exports from its North West region.  After six year s of negotiations, Argentina and the United States 
had agreed on the risk mitigation measures for citr us canker and other pests,  and in August 2000, the 
United States had opened its citrus markets for Ar gentinian exports.  Argentina recalled that in 
September 2001, the United States suspended the import of citrus products from the North West 
region of Argentina following a court ruling).  Nego tiations to reopen the market were initiated in 
2005, when citrus canker had spread to Florida and c ould no longer be the reason to restrict imports 
from Argentina.  The US Department of Agricultu re/ Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service 
(USDA/APHIS) requested, inter alia , that the fruit must originate from areas free of Citrus Variegated 
Chlorosis (CVC).  This requirement was disproporti onate and unjustified, as no other market in the 
world considered CVC to be a pest requiring quarantine measures for fresh lemons.  Although 
Argentina had agreed to carry out a study of di sease transmissibility, this was not possible as the 
absence of the disease in lemon trees did not allow for the isolation of the bacteria.  In November 2011, in agreement with USDA/APHIS, Argentina sent  a report demonstrating the absence of CVC in 
lemons.  In May 2012, Argentina requested an answer from the United States and on 4 June 2012, 
USDA/APHIS replied that despite the fact that th e report indicated absence of CVC, there was no 
information indicating the conditions under which th e lemon trees could become infected with the 
bacteria.  In ignoring the scientific evidence presen ted, the United States was acting inconsistently 
with Articles 2.2, 5.1, 5.6 and 8 of the SPS Agr eement, and the unjustified delay in reopening the 
market was seriously affecting the regional economy. 
28. The United States stated that USDA/APHIS had worked with Argentina's SENASA for 
several years to develop a pest risk assessment and a set of risk mitigation measures that would permit 
the safe import of lemons from the NOA region.  APHIS was currently evaluating the occurrence and 
transmissibility of diseases such as CVC, Citrus Canker and other pests of concern, as well as 
potential mitigation measures, before it could cons ider allowing imports from the NOA region.  The 
United States was not ignoring the scientific eviden ce from Argentina, and had sent a letter on 4 June 
2012 to SENASA communicating the outcome of APHIS' evaluation of Argentina's report on the 
transmissibility of CVC in lemons, and indicating that it would subsequently share a pest risk 
assessment for consultation.  APHIS was waiting fo r SENASA's response to the letter.  The United 
States remained committed to wo rk closely with Argentina.  G/SPS/R/67 
 Page 9 
 
 
  (b) Issues Previously Raised 
(i) US Default MRLs, Limits of Determination or  Limits of Quantification on Basmati Rice 
(STC 328) – Concerns of India 
29. India recalled that at the March SPS Committee meeting the United States had indicated that 
food was deemed adulterated if it was found to contain a pesticide for which there was no US 
established tolerance or exemption.  In light of  Articles 2.2 and 5.1 of the SPS Agreement, India 
requested the United States to prov ide the scientific justification for its MRLs for pesticides.  
Additionally, the United States should provide a sci entific justification for establishing MRLs for 
pesticides at the limits of determination (LoD).  India was working with the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to address its concerns on the 
import alert, which had been issued due to the presen ce of tricyclazole and other pesticides.  In this 
regard a letter had been set by Dow Chemicals to the US authorities providing details for fixing MRLs 
for tricyclazole at LoD.  India urged the United States to expedite the process.   
30. The United States reiterated that repeated viola tions of US law could result in putting a firm 
on an import alert, subjecting that firm to detentio n without physical examination.  Since the initial 
detection of tricyclazole in June 2011, the FDA had added 11 Indian firms to its import alert list, and a 
further seven pesticides were detected at unappr oved levels.  Since October 2011, the FDA had 
collected 70 samples of basmati rice from India, de tecting pesticide residues of illegal substances in 
36 shipments.  Shipments that were able to demons trate that they met US requirements were released 
into the US market, otherwise entry was refuse d.  FDA was working with the Export Inspection 
Council in India to establish a voluntary compliance programme to monitor basmati rice shipped to 
the United States and ensure it was free of the pes ticide.  The All India Rice Export Association had 
also reported the initiation of outreach efforts on goo d agricultural practices to limit the use of illegal 
pesticides and chemicals in an effort to improve fa rming practices.  The United States reiterated that 
the detention of shipments of basmati rice w as due to the use of unapproved pesticides and 
encouraged India to inform exporters the US tolera nce regulations;  to address the concerns of the US 
import alert;  and to work closely with the FDA and the Export Inspection Council to resolve this 
public health concern.  
(ii) Viet Nam's Ban on Offals (STC 314) – Concerns of the United States  
31. The United States recalled that in July 2010,  Viet Nam imposed a temporary ban on the 
importation of offals from all countries, including the United States.  The measure was never notified 
to the WTO and no scientific data had been provided that justified Viet Nam's food safety concerns.  
After months of discussions, in April 2011 Viet Nam provided official notification that it would lift 
the ban on imports of pork and poultry hearts, livers and kidneys (red offal), and in May 2011, for the 
same products derived from cattle, but  this was not done.  In November  2011, Viet Nam indicated that 
it would complete a regulatory review within three months of the offal trade suspension.  Having 
received no information on the status of the review, in May 2012 the United States again sent a letter 
to Viet Nam.  The United States remained concer ned by Viet Nam's continued ban on offal products 
derived from cattle, swine and poultry and urged Viet Na m to immediately lift all of the bans on offal. 
32. The European Union supported the concerns rai sed by the United States.  The ban had only 
been partially lifted for red offals in 2011, and Vi et Nam had indicated that further lifting of the ban 
was pending the outcome of the risk assessment.  Th e European Union welcomed Viet Nam's recent 
communication that the ban would soon be lifted. 
33. New Zealand expressed a systemic concern as the measure of concern had not been notified 
nor scientific justification provided.  New Zealand requested that the ban be lifted as soon as possible. G/SPS/R/67 
Page 10  
 
  34. Australia welcomed the fact that Viet Nam had lifted the ban on red offals but expressed 
disappointment that trade in white offal was still prohibited as it had a significant impact on 
Australian trade. 
35. Viet Nam reiterated that the temporary measur e aimed at protecting human health from high 
risks from contaminants, toxins and disease-causing organisms in food.  It  had strengthened its 
technical regulations and improved its human capacity to facilitate  the quality control of food and 
food stuff;  as a result, the import of red offal had resumed in 2011.  The reopening of its market to white offal was under consideration and Viet Nam re mained opened to bilateral discussions with its 
trading partners. 
(iii) South Africa's Import Restrictions on Fresh Pork Meat (STC287) – Concerns of Brazil 
36. Brazil recalled that it had previously raised  this issue on four occasions, but remained 
concerned with the embargo imposed by South Africa against Brazil's meat exports due to an 
outbreak of FMD in some Brazilian states in 2005 .  South Africa was the only country that still 
maintained an embargo against Brazilian products even though South Africa itself had been reporting 
cases of FMD in its territory, and Brazil's sanitary  status in the OIE was higher than that of 
South Africa.  The ban was unjustified and excessive.  Since 2010, the embargo had been enforced 
mainly against Brazilian swine meat, while authoriz ing the import of some cuts of bovine meat, a 
position that was highly questionable from a scientif ic perspective as the 2005 outbreak only affected 
the Brazilian bovine herd.  In 2010, South Africa had sent Brazil questions about diseases other than 
FMD.  The requested information exceeded the necessary data requirements and seemed intended to 
delay the lifting of the embargo.  The Brazilian gove rnment had engaged in consultations with South 
Africa and would evaluate the resu lts of these consultations and deci de on future steps.  Brazil sought 
a negotiated outcome within the scope of the SPS Committee. 
37. South Africa responded that the concern was very  important to both countries and that it was 
committed to finding a solution. 
(iv) EU Maximum Residue Levels of Pesticides (STC 306) – Concerns of India  
38. India recalled that this issue had been raised in five previous meetings.  No Member should 
set MRLs without scientific justification, as doing so violated the SPS Agreement.  India requested 
the European Union to provide scientific justif ication for fixing any MRLs at the Level of 
Determination (LoD) for pesticides such as Carbend azim.  The developer of tricyclazole (Dow Agro 
Sciences) had filed an application for an import tole rance in accordance with Art. 6 (4) of Regulation 
(EC) No. 396/2005, however, it was unclear whether the data submitted was acceptable or not.  India 
requested the European Union to clarify the situ ation and to work constructively on resolving the 
issue as the uncertainty and unpredictab ility adversely affected India's exports. 
39. The European Union indicated that it had a legislative framework on pesticide residues 
(Regulation (EC) No 396/2005) which completed th e harmonisation and simplification of pesticide 
Maximum Residue Limits (MRLs) within the EU.  Th is piece of legislation, which had entered into 
force in 2008, essentially stated that before an MRL could be set for a pesticide, its safety must be 
confirmed on the basis of a scientific assessment.  In the spirit of the SPS Agreement, when drawing 
up this legislation, the EU had sought to eliminate any inappropriate technical barriers to trade in the 
setting of MRLs by setting MRLs, for many pesticides – not in use in the EU - at the default level. By 
doing this, the EU, de facto, had also established a 't olerance' – albeit a very low one – for pesticides 
that were not in use in the EU, and for which th e EU was not in position to verify their safety or 
otherwise.  The modification of such tolerance le vels was not possible unless solid scientific data 
demonstrated the safety of the product.  India coul d apply for an import tolerance in cases where it 
believed that an MRL higher than the default leve l was warranted.  This procedure had been used  G/SPS/R/67 
 Page 11 
 
 
  successfully by India to apply for a higher import to lerance for isoprothiolane, a pesticide used by 
India in the production of rice, a major export crop of interest to India.  The case of isoprothiolane 
demonstrated that the procedure in place was non-di scriminatory, transparent, delivered results and 
offered predictability to exporters. 
(v) China's Quarantine and Testing Procedures fo r Salmon (STC 319) – Concerns of Norway 
40. Norway recalled that the issue had been ra ised at previous Committee meetings and 
bilaterally.  After December 2010, China had begu n to report a tenfold increase in the number of 
notifications of "contaminants" in Norwegian salm on, amounting to a total of 24 in 2011.  A large 
number of these notifications identified a microorganism that was not an issue in Norwegian aquaculture due to the prevailing low water temper atures.  Active co-ope ration between technical 
experts from both parties was necessary to discuss and clarify the issue and ultimately normalize 
trade, but it had not been possible to hold such  technical bilateral meetings despite Norway's 
numerous requests.  However, Norway was encourag ed that during the recent Trade Policy Review, 
China agreed to address the issue in a mee ting between relevant technical experts. 
41. Switzerland shared the concerns raised by Norw ay and requested China and Norway to meet 
in order to resolve the issue. 
42. China observed that Norway was one of the main  suppliers of salmon to China;  however, in 
recent years more and more shipments of unqua lified salmon were being detected.  In 2011, 
19 shipments of salmon were deemed as unqualifie d for the Chinese market.  The diseases found in 
shipments of salmon from Norway were considered  to pose food safety risks by the Chinese National 
Food Safety authorities and their presence was prohibite d in food products.  Ch ina was in the process 
of revising the limits on pathogens in food products  and would set new food safety standards.  The 
new draft standard had been notified to the WT O for comments.  China remained committed to 
continue bilateral discussions with Norway. 
(vi) US Failure to Recognize South Patagonia as FMD- free and to Import Beef from North of the 
42nd parallel (STC 318) – Concerns of Argentina 
43. Argentina reiterated its concerns regarding undue delays in the US authorization of imports of 
fresh, chilled or frozen bovine meat from FMD-free w ith vaccination areas, and in the recognition of 
areas as FMD-free without vaccination, requests ma de in 2006 and 2003, respectively.  After 
finalizing its risk analysis, the United States ha d committed itself to allow imports of meat from 
FMD-free with vaccination areas, under certain conditions .  The United States had also stated that the 
import of ruminants and ruminant products from the FMD-free without vaccination areas represented 
a negligible FMD risk to animal health.  The Un ited States had informed Argentina that it would 
prepare a report for the US congress.  Argentina qu estioned the need for the intervention of a political 
organ, and the legal basis for this process.  A lthough the scientific phase had been completed with 
favourable results of the risk analysis for both areas,  there had been no advancement on the requests.  
Argentina requested the United States to explain the delays in the necessary administrative procedures 
to allow the import of meat from both areas of Arge ntina, and to indicate th e time foreseen for the 
completion of the process. 
44. The United States reported that in 2007 it had pub lished a proposed rule recognizing Southern 
Patagonia as FMD-free.  Several stakeholders had expressed grave concerns regarding the potential 
risks of the spread of FMD to th e United States.  Given this response, the US Congress had required 
USDA to submit a report to Congress regarding the FMD risk associated with importing animal 
products from Southern Patagonia in 2009.  Since th at time, USDA had been in consultation with the 
relevant stakeholders and legislative bodies to re view the issue.  Imports of cooked products from G/SPS/R/67 
Page 12  
 
  Argentina were not prohibited.  The United Stat es recognized the priority Argentina placed on the 
request and was committed to resolving th e concern as expeditiously as possible. 
(vii) Import Restrictions due to BSE (STC 193) – Concerns of the European Union 
45. The European Union observed that many trad ing partners continued to impose unjustified 
bans or restrictions relating to BSE, although more than half of these countries did not benefit from 
official BSE classification by the OIE as did the EU  member States.  Despite having raised this 
concern for a long time, no trading partner had yet provided any scientific assessment that would 
justify their deviations from the relevant internati onal standards.  The European Union urged Korea to 
make tangible and predictable progress to bring its im port conditions into line with the OIE standards.  
This request was particularly urgent as Korea had opened its market to other trading partners which 
had the same BSE status as most of the EU member  States.  China was still keeping its market closed, 
claiming a lack of scientific information, althou gh there was sufficient evidence regarding the EU 
BSE situation.  The European Union requested Chin a to provide the scientific risk assessment that 
would justify deviations from the OIE standard, or to immediately start the administrative procedures 
to implement the international standards.  The Eu ropean Union requested Japan to continue progress 
on pending applications so that trade could soon r esume.  The European Union noted the recent steps 
taken in the United States towards bringing its re quirements into line with the OIE standards, and 
urged all Members to fully align with the OIE standards and establish fair, non-discriminatory, 
transparent and science-based rules. 
46. China indicated that bilateral talks had taken place with the European Union on the BSE issue 
at various levels.  China had repeatedly presented its views on BSE and emphasized that no 
international organization could deny countries the right to present their views based on science.  A 
lot of work had been carried out by China on risk analysis regarding BSE. 
47. Japan recalled that its food safety committee ha d started the risk assessment of beef from 
France and Italy, and this was being discussed by e xperts.  As for other EU member States, additional 
consultations were needed.  Japan remained open fo r further co-operation with the European Union to 
resolve the issue. 
48. Korea noted the on-going active communication between Korea and the European Union on 
the issue at the technical level.  Additional discussions  at the technical level were needed, and were in 
the interest of both sides. 
(viii) Indonesia's Restrictions on Market Access for Horticultural Products (STC 318) – Concerns 
of New Zealand 
49. New Zealand reported on fruitful discussions with  Indonesia that had addressed and resolved 
some of the concerns related to the importati on of NZ horticultural products.  Indonesia should 
provide better clarity about its trade measures that may affect agricultural products through timely notifications under the relevant WTO agreements, and engage in consulta tions on these regulations 
with relevant WTO Members. 
50. South Africa supported the request that regulations pertaining to the closure of the port be 
notified to the WTO.  Indonesia's notification about  the regulations in May 2012, however, did not 
provide a specific timeframe for Members to comment  before the regulations  were implemented on 
19 June 2012.  South Africa had nonetheless provide d comments on the regulations, but received no 
response from Indonesia.  Indonesia w as also asked to clarify media reports on the reinstatement of 
imports through Jakarta harbour for products from so me Members, and to elaborate on what basis the 
exemption was made.  South Africa wished to disc uss the matter with Indon esia bilaterally on an 
urgent basis, in light of the start of South Africa's export season.  G/SPS/R/67 
 Page 13 
 
 
  51. The European Union shared the concerns raised by New Zealand and stated that despite the 
new regulations implemented by Indonesia to open up  additional ports for imports, the situation had 
not improved significantly.  Indonesia had granted a few countries preferential access to the main entry port of Jakarta based on country recognition, but had not granted such access to the European 
Union despite its high food safety and plant health st andards.  This was clearly a trade restrictive 
measure and it created a competitive disadvantage fo r EU exporters as bringing fruits and vegetables 
via other ports meant longer travel times, increasing costs and raising difficulties for the quality of the 
highly perishable products.  Additionally, the measure had not been notified to the WTO.  The European Union urged Indonesia to lift the unnecessar ily trade restrictive measures and to implement 
measures in line with the SPS Agreement, includi ng giving advance notification through the SPS 
notification system, allowing comments and allowing sufficient time for economic operators to adapt 
to any new measures. 
52. Japan expressed interest on the measures related to the port closure put in place by Indonesia 
and stated its willingness to work closely with  the Indonesian government on this issue. 
53. Australia shared New Zealand's concerns and th anked Indonesia for the constructive bilateral 
engagements on a range of SPS-related issues.  Au stralia also encouraged Indonesia to notify all 
measures to the relevant WTO Committees. 
54. Korea supported the concerns raised by New Zealand and welcomed Indonesia's recent 
decision to postpone the implementation of the ne w import regulation on horticultural products until 
September.  Korea sought bilateral discussions with Indonesia to find a solution. 
55. Indonesia clarified that the previous regulati ons of concern had been revoked and replaced by 
the decrees of the Ministry of Agriculture No 42/2012 and 43/2012, which had been notified to the 
WTO in July 2012 (G/SPS/N/IDN/53, G/SPS/N/IDN/54 and G/SPS/N/IDN/54/Corr.1).  These concerned plant quarantine actions for the import of certain fresh fruits and/or fresh vegetables, and 
fresh plant products in the form of fresh bulb vege tables, into the territory of Indonesia effective 
19 June 2012.  Since the March 2012 SPS Committ ee meeting, Indonesia had conducted constructive 
bilateral and technical meetings in Jakarta with interested Members and had addressed most of the 
issues bilaterally, but remained open for further bilateral discussions. 
(ix) Application and Modification of  the EU Regulation on Novel Foods – Concerns of Peru 
(No. 238)  
56. Peru recalled its previously raised concerns about the EU novel foods regulation (258/97) that 
restricted foods which were not marketed  in the European Union before May 1997 
(G/SPS/GEN/1137).  Peru considered that its traditiona l products were a sign of the sustainable use of 
its biodiversity and argued that this  regulation particularly affected trade in traditional foods.  This 
regulation had negative economic a nd social impacts, including the loss of trade revenue, the 
administrative costs faced by importers and the potential effect on the general health of consumers worldwide as a result of the decrease in consumpti on of traditional products  with high nutritional 
value.  Peru urged the European Union to refra in from applying Regulation No. 258/97 to traditional 
products or to facilitate the entry of products wi th a history of safe consumption outside the EU 
market. 
57. Cuba supported the concerns of  Peru and indicated that the measure was discriminatory, 
highlighting the unjustified effect that the measure  was having on the access of traditional products to 
the EU market.  Colombia and Ecuador also supporte d Peru's concerns and urged the European Union 
to implement the reforms to the regulation on novel foods. G/SPS/R/67 
Page 14  
 
  58. The European Union explained that revision of  the novel foods rules had started in January 
2008 in an effort to facilitate applications for n ovel foods authorizations and to simplify EU market 
access for traditional foodstuffs from third countries w ith a history of safe use.  However, the co-
legislators had not agreed to the proposed revision and the European Union was now engaged in preparing the next steps in the hope of facilitati ng the consensus necessary to allow a revised novel 
food regulation to be adopted into law.  The Eur opean Union would make public the next steps it was 
taking once these were agreed.  The Commission was currently preparing a legislative proposal based 
on the overall agreement reached with EU co-legisla tors, with adoption expected in 2013.  Any new 
regulation on novel foods would contain a centralized  and quicker authorization procedure for novel 
foods and specific measures would be put in place for traditional foods from third countries to access 
EU markets.  A related legislative proposal on an imal cloning was planned to be adopted by the 
Commission in 2013, based on the results of an impact assessment which was currently underway.
 
(c) Consideration of Specific Notifications Received 
59. No Member provided any information under this agenda item. 
(d) Information on Resolution of Issues 
60. Costa Rica reported that its specific trade concern on the " Prohibition of Ornamental Plants 
Larger than 18 inches" (No. 292) had been resolved following the publication by the United States of 
a modified regulation addressing the concerns of Costa Rica.  The United States thanked Costa Rica 
for its outstanding co-operation and collabor ative efforts in resolving the concern. 
V. OPERATION OF TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS (G/SPS/GEN/1156) 
61. The Secretariat recalled that it no longer produced  paper copies of the c ontact lists of National 
Notification Authorities and National Enquiry Points, but electronic lists were constantly updated and 
available through the SPS Information Management System (IMS) ( http://spsims.wto.org ).  Members 
should verify the accuracy of the lists of Enquiry  Points and National Notification Authorities, to 
ensure that these would receive important documen ts and invitations to training activities.  The 
Secretariat would no longer generate the monthl y summary list of notifications, as Members could 
generate such lists through the SPS IMS. 
62. The Secretariat reminded Members of the system for submission of SPS notifications online 
(SPS-NSS).  Notification Authorities were invited to request a password to access the system and 
submit notifications directly on line.  The syst em worked very quickly and Members who often 
submitted many notifications were particularly enco uraged to use it.  Notifications submitted online 
would be given priority by the Secretariat.  About  36 Members had already requested a password and 
18 Members had actually begun to submit their no tifications electronically.  Ecuador, France, 
Indonesia, Mexico and Mozambique had recently  begun using the SPS-NSS, and Mozambique had 
submitted its first notification to the SPS Committee through this system. 
63. The Secretariat also drew attention to the upcoming October 2012 Workshop on 
Transparency, which would specifically focus on the hands-on use of the SPS-NSS and IMS.  The 
WTO Global Trust Fund would sponsor  participation of approximately 50 government officials from 
LDCs and developing countries in this workshop, on  the basis of applications from NNAs and ENQs.  
In total, the Secretariat had received 136 applicati ons for funded participation in this workshop.  The 
Secretariat was in the process of completing the selection process and would shortly inform all applicants of whether they were selected for WTO funding.  All WTO delegates could attend the 
Transparency Workshop, not only those who had appl ied for funding from the WTO.  The Secretariat 
invited Members to submit comments on the dr aft programme (G/SPS/GEN/1156) by 17 August 
2012.  G/SPS/R/67 
 Page 15 
 
 
  64. The Secretariat explained that there were three types of e-mail lists to which Members could 
subscribe to receive information and documentation from the Secretariat.  Documents were provided 
through the various e-mail lists in the original language in which they were submitted by Members 
but translations of these documents were accessible through the SPS-IMS.   
65. The Secretariat noted that numerous discu ssions in the Committee revolved around measures 
that had not been notified and reminded Member s of their legal obligation to notify proposed 
measures in advance of their finalization, unless they were emergency measures.  Members were urged to actively use the various stages of the no tification process, such as notifying, reviewing, 
reacting to and modifying draft regulations in  order to address potential trade problems. The 
Secretariat also highlighted the importance of Memb ers reviewing TBT notifications, as in some cases 
notified measures could have elements rela ted to both the SPS and TBT Agreements.  
66. Chile observed that the SPS NSS worked well a nd rapidly, and had helped Chile achieve 
good results.  Concern was raised about the small number of Members that were currently using the 
NSS, with all of the benefits involved.  
VI. IMPLEMENTATION OF SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT 
67. Pakistan suggested that it might be useful for Members to give consideration, or to consult 
with the Chair, on how to make more use of this ag enda item.  It would be useful to determine the 
reasons for the lack of use of this agenda item an d to identify ways to make this agenda item an 
effective forum for discussions on issues rela ted to special and differential treatment. 
68. The Secretariat recalled that considerable di scussion had taken place under this agenda time 
in the past, particularly when the Committee was developing the procedure for Members to request 
Special and Differential Treatment or technical assistance (G/SPS/33/Rev.1).  However, in recent 
meetings, Members had not submitted specific proposals or documents related to this issue, and as 
result there had been no discussion under this agenda item.  
VII. EQUIVALENCE – ARTICLE 4 
(a) Information from Members on their Experiences 
69. No Member provided any information under this agenda item. 
(b) Information from Relevant  Observer Organizations 
70. No Observer Organization provided any information under this agenda item. 
VIII.  PEST- AND DISEASE-FREE AREAS – ARTICLE 6  
(a) Information from Members on their Pest or Disease Status 
(i) Argentina – Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) Status 
71. Argentina reported that the OIE recognized th e entire territory of Argentina as FMD-free, 
with the following three zones:  (i) Patagonia - FMD -free zone without vaccination;  (ii) Centro Norte 
- FMD-free zone with vaccination;  and (iii) Cor dón Fronterizo - FMD-free zone with vaccination.  
This sanitary status entitled Argentina to export fr esh meat and meat products as well as live animals 
and other FMD-susceptible animal by-products, sin ce it complied with the sanitary requirements set 
forth in Chapter 8.5 of the Terrestrial Code for free zones where vaccination either is or is not 
practised.  In the specific case of bovine meat, the OIE's recommendations were set forth in Article G/SPS/R/67 
Page 16  
 
  8.5.23 of the Terrestrial Animal Health Code.  Additional information on Argentina's sanitary status 
could be found in the following documents:  FM D-free status in G/SPS/GEN/1179;  current health 
status with regard to BSE in G/SPS/GEN/1180;  and recognition of areas free of fruit fly in 
G/SPS/GEN/1178.  
(b) Information from Members on their Experiences in Recognition of Pest- or Disease-free 
Areas 
(i) European Union – Applica tion of Article 6 of the SPS Agreement as regards Pest- or Disease-
Free Areas and Areas of Low P est or Disease Prevalence  
72. The European Union reported on its experience in the implementation of zoning or 
regionalization for animal diseases.  The EU zoning  policy was in line with OIE standards and the 
provisions in Article 6 of the SPS Agreement.  In  the last decade, success had been achieved in 
containing, controlling and eradi cating outbreaks of diseases, such as FMD, classical swine fever and 
avian influenza.  The experience gained by the EU  in applying the concept of regionalization to 
ensure a proper functioning of the EU single market  had demonstrated that it could meet the objective 
of maintaining a high health status while minimizi ng barriers to trade.  Regionalization in third 
countries exporting to the European Union was fully accepted on the basis of transparency, 
equivalency and mutual trust between the competen t authorities.  The European Union invited all 
trading partners to accept the con cept of regionalization and its be nefits both in terms of disease 
control and of minimizing trade restrictions, and to  apply similar systems of their own.  Additional 
information on the EU experience could be found in G/SPS/GEN/1159 of 29 June 2012. 
(ii) Chile –  Recognition of Pest- and Disease-Free Areas 
73. Chile communicated its recognition of almost 30 departments in Colombia as FMD-free areas 
with vaccination.  Although Chile had been fr ee from FMD without vaccination for more than 
25 years and the OIE had classified its risk level for BSE as insignificant, this had still not been 
recognized by some Members.  Chile welcomed the progress made with other countries, including 
Australia which sent a mission to Chile in April in relation to sanitary recognition. 
74. Colombia expressed its thanks to Chile for r ecognition of its FMD-free areas with vaccination 
and indicated that it was an exemplary demonstration of the implementation of the provisions of the 
SPS Agreement which enabled countries to elimin ate unnecessary trade barriers. Other Members were 
urged to grant similar recognition to Colombia 's FMD-free areas with vaccination.  The Chair 
commended both Members on the use of the guidelines of the SPS Committee (G/SPS/48). 
(c) Information from Relevant  Observer Organizations 
75. No observer organization provided in formation under this agenda item. 
IX. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND COOPERATION 
(a) Information from the Secretariat 
(i) WTO SPS Activities 
76. The Secretariat reported that since the last Co mmittee meeting, four seminars had been held 
in Ethiopia, Maldives, Rwanda a nd Uganda, and one regional SPS work shop had been held for Latin 
America, organized in collaboration with the Inter-American Development Bank, in Chile on 25-
29 June 2012.  The Regional SPS Workshop for La tin America was different from other regional 
workshops in that it focused on border quarantine i ssues and their relation to trade facilitation, with  G/SPS/R/67 
 Page 17 
 
 
  heavy involvement of customs officials.  More  general training on the SPS Agreement had been 
provided to participants in the Advanced Trade Po licy Course in French (Geneva), the Regional Trade 
Policy Course for the English-speaking Africa  Region (Swaziland) and a SPS Risk Assessment 
Seminar organized by the Agadir Technical Unit (Jordan). 
77. Upcoming SPS training activities by the WTO Secretariat included three regional SPS 
workshops:  for English-speaking African countries in  Ethiopia (24-27 September);  Asia and Pacific 
countries in Chinese Taipei (6-9 November);  and for Central and Eastern Eu rope, Central Asia and 
the Caucasus in Austria (20-23 November).  The 201 2 Advanced SPS Course would be held in French 
from 8-26 October and the Workshop on the Transp arency Provisions of the SPS Agreement would 
be held on the margins of the October SPS Co mmittee meeting from 15-16 October 2012.  Other 
national workshops were scheduled for the Philippi nes (18-20 July), India (28-30 August), Chile (4-
7 September) and Morocco (18-19 September).  Na tional workshops had also been requested by 
Burkina Faso, Mexico and Zambia. 
78. The Secretariat reported that it had receive d over 500 applications for the planned 2012 
technical assistance activities and that the selection pr ocess would be finalized in the coming weeks.  
The respective Missions would be informed of the proposed selection of candidates from their 
government before the final selection. 
79. The Secretariat highlighted the Follow-up S ession to the 2011 Advanced SPS Course, which 
was held 4-13 July and attended by 20 particip ants from LDCs and developing countries who had 
participated in the Advanced SPS Course in 2011. 
80. The Secretariat recalled that the E-learning course on the SPS Agreement was available all 
year long in the three WTO official languages, and noted that further information on SPS-related 
technical assistance provided by WTO could be obtained from document G/SPS/GEN/997/Rev.2 and the WTO website.  The Chair reminded the Committ ee that a demand-driven approach was used for 
technical assistance activities and urged Members to request technical assistance, as needed. 
81. Chile thanked the Secretariat for the opportu nity to have hosted the Regional SPS Workshop 
for Latin America, which was successful in its fo cus on border issues related to plant and quarantine 
health.  Chile had previously benefitted from the training recei ved through national seminars for 
officials at the introductory level and looked forwar d to the upcoming seminar, which would be at a 
more advanced level.  The Secretariat reminded Me mbers that national seminars could be tailored to 
meet the technical level of participants  and to address specific national issues. 
82. Jamaica thanked the Secretariat for organizi ng the Follow-up Session to the 2011 Advanced 
SPS Course which was under way, and highlighted  the importance of the training received in 
equipping officials to effectively undertake SPS responsibilities. 
(ii) Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) 
83. The STDF Secretariat provided an update on STDF Activities since the last Committee 
meeting and highlighted some of STDF's pla nned initiatives (G/SPS/GEN/1158).  The STDF would 
hold a seminar on International Trade and Invasive Alien Species (IAS), in close collaboration with 
the OIE and IPPC secretariats, immediately following the SPS Committee meeting on 12-13 July 2012.  The seminar would raise awareness and create synergies between SPS and environmental institutions about IAS as a trade-related issue, with  a specific focus on how to make capacity building 
more collaborative and effective. 
84. As part of its 2012 Work Plan, the STDF initiate d the preparation of a global level event on 
the links between SPS and Trade Facilitation that w ould take place in 2013.  The objectives of this G/SPS/R/67 
Page 18  
 
  work would include raising awareness about the synergies between SPS and Trade Facilitation and 
identifying lessons learned and good practices to stre ngthen future work and technical co-operation in 
this area;  a briefing note was available.  Memb ers were encouraged to share examples of their 
activities in the area of SPS and Trade Facilitation with the STDF Secretariat by e-mail. 
85. The STDF continued its work on the multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) tool to inform 
SPS decision making and resource allocation.  The tool had been applied in several countries in Africa 
and would now be applied in other regions.  Th e STDF had provided seed funding to Belize to apply 
this tool, based on the interest expressed, and would also participate in the application of the MCDA 
tool in Viet Nam in September 2012 as well as in  a regional workshop for Asia scheduled for 
November 2012. 
86. The first STDF electronic newsletter had been r ecently issued and Members were encouraged 
to register to receive this newsletter on the STDF website.  Work was under way on the development 
of the STDF virtual library, which would facilitate the management of all documentation available on 
SPS capacity building, and should reduce the duplica tion of work.  New publications on public-
private partnerships and trade-related project de velopment were available on the STDF website, as 
well as translations of previously p ublished documents and the STDF film. 
87. The STDF had devoted 47 per cent of project res ources to LDCs, ensuring that it continued to 
meet its target.  Additional information on th e approved projects and PPGs could be found in 
G/SPS/GEN/1158.  The next deadline for f unding applications was 20 July 2012. 
88. Belize thanked the STDF Secretariat for the opp ortunity to participate in the Seminar on 
International Trade and Alien Invasive Species, and the SPS Committee meeting.  Belize appreciated 
the Project Preparation Grant from STDF to appl y the Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) 
approach in Belize and looked forward to further sharing its experiences. 
(b) Information from Members 
89. Japan reported on the technical assistance it ha d delivered to devel oping countries over the 
period April 2009 to March 2012 (G/SPS/GEN/1160).  Japan's overseas aid programme was managed 
primarily by the Japan International Co-operation Agency (JICA).  Thirty-five SPS-related technical 
assistance programmes targeting various geographi c regions, including Asia, the Pacific Region, 
Central America, South America, Central Asia and Africa had been provided, for a total of 
approximately Yen 2.2 billion. 
90. Chile reported on its technical assistance progr amme on animal husbandry, agricultural 
services, sanitary and phytosanitary services whic h provided assistance to neighbouring countries. 
91. Gabon reported on its experience in establishing an SPS Committee, highlighting some of the 
difficulties.  Although Gabon had not been listed as having a national coordination mechanism in the 
STDF study on National SPS Coordination Mechanisms , efforts were under way to complete the 
process.  Gabon expressed its appreciation for th e assistance of the WTO, the Economic Community 
of Central African States (CEMAC) and the PAN-S PSO Programme supported by the African Union.  
Concern was expressed regarding the ease with whic h technical assistance could be accessed through 
the JICA programme.  Japan indicated that it would follow-up on this issue. 
(c) Information from Observers 
92. OIE continued its efforts to provide assistance to strengthen veterinary services through the 
OIE PVS Pathway and to provide technical assistance to countries (G/SPS/GEN/1164).  OIE 
presented the newly adopted veterinary legislati on chapter, providing information on:  (i) the  G/SPS/R/67 
 Page 19 
 
 
  background of its adoption;  (ii) objectives;  (ii) basic principles;  (iii) contents of the standard;  
(iv) the standard's role in OIE's SPS capacity build ing activities;  and (v) OIE's role in supporting its 
member countries to formulate, modernize and stre ngthen their veterinary legislation.  The OIE 
presentation is available at:  http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/oie_presentation_e.ppt  
93. The STDF Secretariat supported the need for c ountries to update their SPS-related legislation 
and raised queries in relation to:  the rationale for the adoption of a standard on veterinary legislation 
as compared to a guideline or recommendation;  the nature of OIE collaboration with other 
organizations with longstanding experience in drafting ve terinary legislation e.g. FAO;  and the effect 
of lengthy timeframes associated with the implemen tation of legislation.  OIE indicated that its 
members, in particular developing countries, st rongly supported the adoption of the guidelines as a 
standard and underscored the importance of colla boration, highlighting the involvement of FAO 
experts in the OIE expert group drafting the standa rds.  OIE acknowledged the inherent difficulties of 
the implementation phase, but emphasized that th e responsibility remained with its members to 
demonstrate strong support and commitment in orde r to address these issues.  OIE also highlighted 
the flexible nature of the veterinary legisla tion chapter to accommodate various scenarios in 
developing national legislation.  
94. Codex provided information on the work of the Trust Fund, including the implementation of 
its mid-term review and the new Monitoring and Ev aluation Framework of the Trust Fund.  Several 
regional workshops would be he ld in conjunction with the F AO/WHO Coordinating Committees 
between September 2012 and January 2013.  Codex highlighted its coordination with other bodies in 
capacity building, such as ISO and OECD.  Additional information on Codex technical assistance 
activities could be found in G/SPS/GEN/1182. 
95. IPPC reported that the first meeting of its  recently established Capacity Development 
Committee (CDC) would be held together with th e Expert Working Group on Capacity Development 
(EWGCD) on 3-7 December 2012, in Rome, Italy.  Other EWGCD activities were outlined in relation 
to the development of the phytosanitary technical resources page ( http://www.phytosanitary.info ).  An 
open call would be issued to Regional and Nationa l Plant Protection Organizations for candidates for 
membership of the CDC, with the Bureau making the final selection.  Information on the status of the 
application of the phytosanitary capacity evaluation tool (PCE) was provided.  Additional information 
on IPPC technical assistance activities could be found in G/SPS/GEN/1168. 
96. IICA announced that the project "Promoting Participation of the Americas in Codex 
Alimentarius Committees", initially funded by th e United States and IICA for three years, had 
continued with support from Canada.  The aim was to support the participation of the countries of 
Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) in the mee tings of the Codex Pesticide Residues and Food 
Labelling Committees.  Other IICA activities included providing inputs to IPPC on the virtual course on Pest Risk Analysis for the Andean Region and promoting the modernization of SPS services through the use of its PVS instruments, which ha d now been applied in Jamaica, Haiti and Ecuador.  
Thirty-four professionals from 20 countries had be en trained in the second series of the Executive 
Leadership in Food Safety (ELFS) Program held in Panama, jointly organized with the Pan American 
Health Organization (PAHO) and the University of  Minnesota.  A simulated roundtable exercise on 
foot and mouth disease was held for the Caribbean region, involving online si multaneous participation 
in 11 countries or territories, completing a four-year IICA/USDA project to establish an 
epidemiological monitoring network in animal safe ty in the Eastern Caribbean.  A project for the 
creation of a Virtual Regional Food Inspectors School for Central America and the Dominican 
Republic had been approved by the STDF, with im plementation to begin in July 2012.  Additional 
information on IICA technical assistance ac tivities could be found in G/SPS/GEN/1163. 
97. ITC provided information on an EIF-funded pr oject on sector competitiveness and export 
diversification in the Gambia (2012-2015) that provided support for cashew nuts, groundnuts and G/SPS/R/67 
Page 20  
 
  sesame, including for quality enhancement and food safety issues.  A project on export development 
in Peru's northern corridor (April 2012 – March 201 3) was underway, in order to assist small- and 
medium-sized enterprises to understand and im plement food safety systems based on HACCP.  
Creation of a competitive and sustainable value ch ain for mango exports to Europe from the Niayes 
region in Senegal was the focus of a Dutch-funded pr oject.  ITC continued its work on developing its 
Standard Map and three papers had been published on this subject, available at:  
http://www.standardsmap.org .  Other ITC activities included its work on non-tariff measures (NTMs).  
A new ITC Senior Advisor on export quality ma nagement had been appointed.  Additional 
information on ITC technical assistance activities could be found in G/SPS/GEN/1181. 
98. OIRSA reported on its numerous project and tr aining activities aimed at providing technical 
and financial assistance to address SPS issues in various countries in the region (G/SPS/GEN/1172).  
Support was provided for the participation of four  delegates of National Codex Committees in the 
35th Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission.  Details were being finalized for the launching 
of the Huanglongbing Bacterium (HLB) and HLB vector control project, with support from Chinese Taipei's International Cooperation and De velopment Fund (ICDF).  OIRSA continued its 
work on the STDF-funded project (STDF/PG/284) ai med at strengthening national SPS committees.  
STDF had also approved the draft regional veterinary  legislation project for OIRSA member countries 
(STDF/PG/358).  OIRSA continued to focus on strengt hening its strategic alliances for the promotion 
of health and trade through establishing tech nical cooperation framework agreements and 
participating in related activities.  
X. REVIEW OF THE OPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SPS 
AGREEMENT 
(a) Issues Arising from the Second Review (G/SPS/W/259/Rev.3) 
(i) Use of Ad Hoc Consultations – Report on Informal Meeting 
99. The Chairperson read a report from the former  Chairperson on the informal meeting on the 
use of ad hoc consultations held on 9 July 2012.  The discussions at this meeting were based on the 
communication of 14 June from the former Chairpers on, in which she had requested delegations to 
first reflect on five unresolved elements impedi ng progress in the work, rather than engaging in 
detailed discussions of the revised draft text prepared by the Secretariat. 
100. Regarding the first element, the nature of th e procedure, several Members had agreed that 
there was a difference between mandatory participa tion and a mandatory procedure.  Some Members 
had stressed that the procedure should remain completely voluntary, noting that according to 
Article 12.2, the Committee shall "encourage and fac ilitate" ad hoc consultations.  They were of the 
view that consultations could only be successful  if both Members freely chose to participate. 
101. Others had indicated that a minimum level of engagement from the responding Member was 
essential, for example to provide a written response to the substantive points made in a request for 
consultations.  Several Members had argued that for the new procedure to add value, it should go 
beyond raising a specific trade concern in the Co mmittee – which already required a response from 
the Member concerned within a certain timeframe. 
102. Some Members were of the view that participa tion in a first information exchange should be 
mandatory.  They had stressed that Article 5.8 already gave Members the right to request an 
explanation for an SPS measure, and the Member maintaining the measure had the obligation to 
respond.  The second phase would be voluntary, as in  Article 12.2.  Other Members were concerned 
about making links between Article  12.2 and Article 5.8, which they believed could be used 
independently.  G/SPS/R/67 
 Page 21 
 
 
  103. The Secretariat had recalled that the Committee had already developed six procedures or 
guidelines.  None of these were legally binding,  because the Committee could not change Members' 
rights or obligations.  In all except two cases, th e procedures used the word "should".  In the 
guidelines on equivalence and on special and differe ntial treatment, there was a mix of "should" and 
"shall".  The Committee could develop a procedure which Members might agree to follow, but they 
had no formal obligation to do so. 
104. Summing up the discussion, the former Chairperso n had noted that the procedure would be 
voluntary, since this Committee could not create a ny new legal obligations.  The question was what 
procedure would be followed when the responding Me mber said "yes" to a request for consultations.  
Many had suggested that the exchange of informa tion should be a mandatory element once the request 
for consultations was accepted.  Beyond this, she suggested that the procedure could be absolutely 
voluntary and subject to bilateral decisions on whic h elements should be included in the procedure. 
105. Regarding the second element, the issues of tran sparency and confidentiality, some Members 
were of the view that the Secretariat or the Co mmittee should be informed when:  (1) consultations 
were requested;  (2) there was a response to the re quest;  and (3) the consu ltations had concluded.  
Requiring more transparency might discourage use of the procedure.   
106. While some Members were of the view that a ll information should remain confidential unless 
there was agreement to disclose it, others thought that  it should be the other way around;  i.e. that all 
information should be considered non-confidential unless a Member declared it to be confidential. 
107. One Member had noted that G/SPS/1 already required the Chairperson to report to the 
Committee on the general outcome of a consultation.   In addition, the agenda item on specific trade 
concerns gave an opportunity to provide inform ation about a specific issue, and to inform the 
Committee that consultations were taking place.  Within dispute settlement , consultations and good 
offices were confidential.  This Member had pr eferred to maintain the existing mechanisms. 
108. In her summary, the former Chairperson had i ndicated that there seemed to be a consensus 
that some information should be delivered to th e Committee, including information on a request for 
consultations, on the response, and on the result.  Additional information coul d be provided only if the 
Members involved agreed.  She had suggested that no  confidential information would be given to the 
Committee unless the parties involved agreed to do so. 
109. Third, Members had discussed the role of the facilitator.  Many Members agreed that the 
basic role of the facilitator would be to facilitate  the dialogue, with a focus on the process.  Some 
thought that if the parties agreed, the facilitator coul d give an opinion or express advice.  Others were 
of the view that the facilitator should not be allowed to express an opinion or advice.  They feared that 
this would discourage use of the procedure, particul arly if the facilitator expressed an opinion on the 
consistency of a measure with the SPS Agreement. 
110. Other Members thought that the facilitator should have flexibility to contribute to the process, 
e.g. by involving specialists, if the Members involved agreed.  
111. The former Chairperson had concluded that Memb ers all agreed that the primary role of the 
facilitator was to facilitate the exchange between th e parties.  Beyond that, she suggested that the 
parties should decide all the parameters, including  the schedule and place of meetings, whether to 
request technical advice, the nature of the repor t to the Committee, etc.  These parameters would 
depend on the particular issue at hand.  The fac ilitator should work on the process, and only become 
involved with the substance if the Members involve d agreed.  The former Chairperson also proposed 
that Members should assume that the facilitator woul d normally be the Chairperson.  If the Members 
involved agreed, they could of course request that a different person act as facilitator. G/SPS/R/67 
Page 22  
 
  112. Regarding the fourth element, timeframes, ma ny Members had indicated agreement with the 
timeframes suggested in the Chairperson's communication, as long as there was flexibility for the 
Members involved to agree on different timeframes if  they wished.  Some Members preferred to leave 
all timeframes up to the involved Members, while ot hers thought that timeframes were one of the key 
areas where the procedure offered an added value, by making the process more predictable.  Some 
Members found the proposed timeframes too short or  too long, and there was some discussion on 
whether timeframes should be expressed in calendar days or working days. 
113. The former Chairperson had indicated that when embarking on a consultation process, 
Members had an expectation for the resolution of an  issue, and timeframes added some predictability.  
In particular, it would be useful to agree that th e response to the initial request be given in perhaps 
20 working days, and that Members agree that 6 months be the reference timeframe for completing 
the whole procedure, with the possibility for Member s to decide otherwise.  Of course Members could 
decide to conclude the consultations at any time. 
114. Regarding the last element, the relationship between the procedure of the SPS Committee and 
other on-going initiatives in the context of the Doha  negotiations, some Members had argued that any 
horizontal outcome reached by consensus would preva il.  Other Members were of the view that the 
SPS procedure was independent of the NAMA ne gotiations.  The SPS Agreement contained a 
provision on ad hoc consultations, and any horiz ontal NAMA mechanism could be considered as a 
complementary tool, rather than a replacement.  Some proposed that the SPS procedure be reviewed 
in light of an horizontal mechanism, if and when one were adopted.  A few Members had recalled that 
it was not at all certain whether the horizontal me chanism would apply to agricultural products. 
115. The Secretariat had recalled that the SPS Committee was a subsidiary body of the Council for 
Trade in Goods, which in turn was subsidiary to the General Council, and the Ministerial Conference.  
These bodies could mandate the SPS Committee to apply a certain mechanism, with or without making modifications, instead of or as a comp lement to any procedure developed by the SPS 
Committee. 
116. The former Chairperson had indicated that th e disclaimer to be included in the procedure 
would need to be sufficiently flexible.  Member s did not know if there would be an horizontal 
mechanism or what it would be like, whether the SPS Committee would be asked to apply this 
procedure as was, or whether it might include a mutatis mutandis  provision. 
117. The former Chairperson had requested the Secret ariat to prepare a new revision of the draft 
document to reflect in particular her conclusions of  the discussions.  She proposed that this document, 
which should make use of text in previous versions, should be the b asis for the next informal meeting 
in October.  Delegations could of course discuss th ese issues during the intervening period, and such 
exchanges could be useful in narrowing differences in views. 
118. Following the presentation of the oral report by  the former Chairperson, the Chairperson 
requested that the Secretariat reflects the out come of those discussions, based on the former 
Chairperson's summary, in a new version of the do cument, to be circulated as G/SPS/W/259/Rev.4.  
Members would have the opportunity to submit  comments in writing on this revision until 
17 September 2012.  The Secretariat would subseq uently prepare a new revision of the document, 
taking into account the comments re ceived, for discussion at an inform al meeting in the margins of 
the October meeting of the Committee.  G/SPS/R/67 
 Page 23 
 
 
  XI. MONITORING OF THE USE OF INTER NATIONAL STANDAR DS (G/SPS/W/266) 
(a) New Issues 
(i) SPS Measures and International Standards, Guidelines and Recommendations:  Joint 
Communication from Brazil (G/SPS/GEN/1165)  
119. Brazil introduced a submission regarding th e increase in demand for scientific advice to 
support food control systems (G/SPS/GEN/1165).  The WTO's recognition of Codex standards, 
guidelines and recommendations as the internationa l benchmark for food safety requirements was 
another key point related to the need for scientific support.  Governments were charged with the task 
of developing food policies to ensure that food w as safe and of adequate quality, and the FAO/WHO 
scientific advice bodies provided an essential contribution to inform and strengthen decision making 
on food safety.  The Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA), the Joint 
FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR) and the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Meeting on Microbiological Risk Assessment (JEMRA), made available international scientific advice, including 
risk assessment.  To address these concerns and to  fulfil the objectives of the SPS Agreement, Brazil 
encouraged all WTO Members to:  (i) request the FAO and WHO to provide enough financial support 
for the regular operation of the JECFA, JMPR, JEMRA;   (ii) express in different fora the importance 
of the work of JECFA, JMPR and JEMRA;  and (iii) find different means of supporting the activities 
of these committees.   
120. Argentina, Belize, Canada, Chile, the European Union, and the United States all supported the 
communication and agreed on the crucial role of the scientific advice bodies.  Belize emphasized the 
limited scientific capabilit y of developing countries, while Brazil highlighted the value of these 
organizations' scientific advice not only for inte rnational organizations but also for national 
regulators.  The European Union recalled that the other sisters supporting the work of the SPS 
Agreement, the OIE and IPPC, also needed support as independent scientific advice was indispensable to the work of all three sisters.  The European Union and Chile stressed the importance 
of seeking further funding for these scientific advice bodies.  Codex explained the budgetary 
resources of WHO and FAO, and highlighted the budge tary problems in scientific advice, while IPPC 
recalled support that had been fort hcoming (from the EU) for its work. 
(b) Issues Previously Raised  
121. The IPPC reported on the activities of its Implementation Review and Support System 
(IRSS), whose primary objective was to facilitate and promote the implementation of the IPPC and 
the international standards for phytosanitary measures (ISPMs) (G/SPS/GEN/1169).  The European 
Union had provided EUR 1.2 million in funding for th e IRSS.  The advantage of the system included 
the ability to monitor, encourage and support the harmonised implementation of the IPPC and its 
ISPMs, and to act as a means to identify and address emerging and potential implementation problems 
before they became disputes.  The IRSS webpage  included country profiles, a helpdesk and IRSS 
activities.  Information on a series of surveys and studies was also provided on the webpage. 
(c) Adoption of Annual Report 
122. The SPS Committee adopted the Fourteenth Annua l Report on the procedure to monitor the 
process of international harmonization, with modi fications.  The adopted report was subsequently 
circulated as G/SPS/59. G/SPS/R/67 
Page 24  
 
  XII. CONCERNS WITH SPS-RELATED PRIV ATE STANDARDS (G/SPS/W/265/REV.1) 
(a) Report on the Informal Meeting 
123. The Chairperson read a report from the former  Chairperson on the informal meeting on the 
use of private standards held on 9 July 2012.  Th e former Chairperson had recalled that Members had 
been invited to submit  proposals on a working defi nition of SPS-related private standards in advance 
of the March 2012 informal meeting.   On the basi s of those proposals, the Secretariat had drafted a 
proposed working definition (G/SPS/W/265), that had been discussed in March.  The former 
Chairperson had then asked the Secretariat to prepare a revision of the document G/SPS/W/265 to 
reflect the comments made in March, for cons ideration at the July informal meeting.  
124. The former Chairperson had also recalled th at the Committee had agreed to develop a 
working definition of SPS-related private standards in order to set the framework within which it 
would discuss the issue.  Agreed Action 1 (G/SPS/55)  did not propose a legal definition, but merely 
sought to limit the scope of issues considered by the Committee. 
125. The Secretariat had introduced the revised  draft working definition in document 
G/SPS/W/265/Rev.1, and the former Chairperson ha d invited the Committee to focus on the proposals 
in square brackets. 
126. With regards to the new wording of market  requirements, some Members had requested that 
the word market  be put in square brackets, while others had wanted to re-introduce the word 
voluntary  requirements.  Some Members had objected that exporters had no option but to comply 
with these requirements if they wished to sell in certain markets.  Other Members had insisted on 
keeping the text as revised, i.e. market requirements  without brackets, and some had suggested 
deleting both market  and voluntary  and referred only to requirements.   Given these differing views, 
the former Chairperson had suggested  to keep the following wording: "SPS-related private 
standards are [voluntary, market] requirements …''  
127. With regards to the words in square brackets [developed and/or] , some Members had argued 
for keeping this text while others had suggested deleting all the bracketed words and keeping only the 
wording applied by .  A few had insisted on the wording developed and applied.   The Committee 
had made no progress and would keep the current text as "SPS-related private standards … are … 
[developed and/or] applied by…''  
128. On the set of square brackets [private] [non-governmental]  entities, as well as [footnote 6] 
in G/S/SPS/W/265/Rev.1, some Members had asked that only the wording of private entities  be kept.  
Other Members had noted their preference for the term non-governmental entities,  which was used 
in Article 13 of the SPS Agreement.  There was considerable disagreement regarding the 
appropriateness of the related definition in the foot note.  As a consequence, the current text would 
remain as was, i.e. [private] [non-governmental] entities .  The Secretariat had been requested to 
check whether there was any existi ng jurisprudence on the definition of private or non-governmental 
entities. 
129. With regards to the last senten ce of the chapeau of the draft de finition, it was proposed to re-
instate the brackets around the words directly or indirectly.  An alternative to the four objectives 
currently listed was also suggested that would read: "… entities [in order to protect human, animal 
or plant life or health.]"    The Secretariat was requested to re-circulate the compilation of specific 
examples of concerns related to private standards. 
130. In concluding the discussions the former Chairp erson had invited Members to further reflect 
on, and propose other language for the sets of s quare brackets which it had not been possible to  G/SPS/R/67 
 Page 25 
 
 
  remove and which remained under discussion.  The former Chairperson had asked the Secretariat to 
prepare and circulate a further revision of docum ent G/SPS/W/265 to reflect the comments made, for 
consideration by the Committee at an informal meet ing to be held on the margins of the October 2012 
meetings.  The former Chairperson suggested that the Committee should also consider actions 2 to 5 
and the outstanding actions 7 to 12 at the October informal meeting. 
131. In commenting on the former Chairperson's repor t with regard to the suggested wording of 
"market requirements", Brazil emphasi zed its concern about the word "voluntary".  If exporters did 
not have the capacity to comply with these private requirements, they were excluded from the market, 
and so it was difficult to characterize these as "voluntary" requirements. 
XIII.  OBSERVERS 
(a) Information from Observer Organizations 
132. The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) noted that it was a non-
governmental organization that developed voluntary international standards and guidance on how to 
assess conformity with standards (G/SPS/GEN/1166).  ISO had observer status in the WTO Trade and 
Environment (CTE), TBT and SPS committees, as well as at the WHO and FAO.  Its observer status 
to the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) provi ded an opportunity for cooperation and a variety 
of ISO standards were used by Codex in its wo rk.  ISO had a formal agreement with the OIE 
regarding co-operation in specific areas since Ju ly 2011.  ISO reported on regional workshops in 
Indonesia and Kenya to enhance awareness of food saf ety and the role of different international 
organizations.  ISO's policy development committee  (DEVCD) dealt specifically with the needs of 
developing countries in standardization.  ISO consider ed that use of its international standards would 
assist regulatory authorities to achieve their aims in public health and safety at less cost to 
manufacturers and consumers, and also help them  meet their TBT and SPS Agreement obligations. 
(b) Report of Informal Meeting on Role of Observers and Requests for Observer Status 
(G/SPS/GEN/1157) 
133. The Chairperson read a report from the former Chairperson on the closed informal meeting on 
observers, held on 9 July.  The former Chairperson recalled that she had requested the Secretariat to 
prepare a background document, which had been circulated as G/SPS/GEN/1157, and had invited 
Members to submit comments and views on the role of  observers in advance of the meeting.  Chile 
and the United States had submitted a joint proposal (G/SPS/W/267). 
134. In presenting its background document, the Secr etariat had recalled the purpose of observer 
status according to the General Council decisi on (WT/L/161, Annex 3), as well as the March 1999 
decision of the SPS Committee to apply the crite ria identified in paragraph 7 of document 
G/SPS/W/98 in deciding on requests for observer status .  The document also described the role of the 
observer organizations in practice in Committee meeti ngs, including the role of the Three Sisters.  
135. Chile and the United States had indicated that th e main purpose of their paper was to remind 
Members of the importance of the Three Sisters a nd to encourage the use of their expertise and 
knowledge, whenever possible, to solve trade con cerns.  They did not propose that the Committee 
develop guidelines on risk assessment, but encouraged  the use of the guidel ines developed by the 
Three Sisters.  There had been acknowledgement that some WTO Members were not members of 
these international organizations. 
136. Based on these two documents, the Committee had a fairly general discussion on the role of 
observers, and in particular on the role of the Th ree Sisters, in the Committee.  Many Members had G/SPS/R/67 
Page 26  
 
  maintained that the Three Sister s had a specific and distinctive ro le according to the SPS Agreement, 
while others had suggested that their role did no t differ from that of other observer organizations. 
137. In concluding the meeting, the former Chai rperson had recalled that the main reason for 
having these discussions on observers was the long list of outstanding requests for observer status in 
the Committee.  Clarifying the role of observers and the criteria for granting observer status were 
therefore necessary and linked with th e outstanding requests issue.  Due to lack of time, the former 
Chairperson had asked that Members submit their comments on the two documents presented, or any other general comments on the role of observers, before 17 September.  She had proposed that an 
informal meeting be scheduled prior to the next re gular meeting of the Committee to discuss:  (i) the 
role of observer organizations, and the criteria for gr anting observer status;  (ii) the role of the Three 
Sisters;  and (iii) outstanding requests. 
138. Following the report on the informal meeting, the Chairperson noted that outstanding requests 
for observer status had not been considered at the informal session held on 9 July due to time 
constraints.  She invited Members to consider th ese requests according to the categorization proposed 
in document G/SPS/GEN/1157. 
139. The Committee agreed  to grant observer status, on an ad hoc, meeting-by-meeting basis, to 
the African Union (AU), the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA), the 
Economic Community of Central African Stat es (ECCAS/CEEAC), and the Gulf Co-operation 
Council Standardization Organization (GSO). 
140. No consensus was reached regarding the requ ests of other organizations, and the Committee 
agreed to revert to these at its October meeting. 
XIV.  OTHER BUSINESS 
141. Ecuador, on behalf also of Cameroon, Colo mbia, Ghana, Mexico, Nicaragua and Peru, 
recalled the previously raised concern about  the EU decision to amend Regulation (EC) 
No. 1881/2006 to modify the maximum acceptabl e levels of cadmium in cacao and chocolate 
products (G/SPS/GEN/1173/Rev.1).  The co-authors  requested the European Union to clearly 
demonstrate the relative contribution of chocolat e to dietary cadmium exposure and its adverse 
effects.  In light of the significant differences in  the JECFA and EFSA recommendations for tolerable 
weekly intake (TWI) and tolerable monthly inta ke (TMI) levels for cadmium, they urged the 
European Union to convene a join t EFSA-JECFA meeting with a view  to reaching an agreement on 
the methodology used to establish such limits, and th e outcomes.  They stressed that the European 
Union should ensure that any limit it applied was in accordance with the SPS Agreement, and should 
take into account new data to re view and harmonize methodologies to determine the cadmium content 
in relevant chocolate products.  They also requ ested that, if the new measure were adopted, the 
European Union allow a transition period of at least five years, to permit producers to adapt to the 
measures.  Cameroon, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba,  Dominican Republic, Ghana, Guatemala, 
Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Venezuela and Peru echoed this concern. 
142. The European Union noted that this was not a ne w concern, and that they were prepared to 
respond despite this being raised without any warnin g under "Other Business".  The EU clarified that 
any amendment to Regulation 1881/2006 was intended  to focus primarily on foodstuffs for which no 
maximum levels for cadmium currently existed. Maximum levels for other foodstuffs - such as 
vegetables and cereals which also contributed cadmi um to the daily diet - already existed and 
therefore would not be treated in the proposal cu rrently under discussion.  The new proposal would 
instead focus on those foodstuffs such as chocol ate/cocoa products and baby foods, for which no 
maximum levels were established. The European co mpetent authorities were currently evaluating the  
data provided by cocoa producers in the past months and EU member States would discuss the  G/SPS/R/67 
 Page 27 
 
 
  maximum residue limits (MRLs) for cadmium in cocoa products this autumn. Differing consumption 
patterns of different chocolate produc ts would be taken into consider ation in the establishment of the 
MRLs, and a reasonable transition period provided.   The European Union took this issue very 
seriously and looked forward to continui ng dialogue with interested Members. 
143. Codex stated that the issue of MRLs for cadmium in cocoa products was currently under 
discussion, and relevant data provided by members would be evaluated by JECFA.  The issue would 
be addressed at the next session of Executive Co mmittee of the Codex Alimentarius Commission in 
June 2013. 
XV. DATE AND AGENDA OF NEXT MEETING 
144. The next regular meeting of the Committee is tentatively scheduled for 18 - 19 October 2012 . 
A hands-on workshop on transparency, and in part icular on the use of the SPS document database 
(SPS IMS) and the online submission of SPS notifi cations (SPS NSS), would be held on 15 October 
and continue in the morning of 16 October 2012.  Informal meetings on ad hoc consultations, private 
standards and observers would be scheduled for th e afternoon of 16 October and on 17 October. The 
informal meetings regarding the use of ad hoc c onsultations and on private standards were open for 
participation by observer organizations, but the in formal meeting on observers would be a closed 
meeting.  
145. The Committee agreed to the following tent ative agenda for its next meeting: 
1. Adoption of the agenda 
2. Information on relevant activities 
(a) Information from Members 
(b) Information from the relevant SPS standard-setting bodies 
3. Specific trade concerns 
(a) New issues 
(b) Issues previously raised 
(c) Consideration of specific notifications received] 
(d) Information on resolution of issues in G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.12 
4. Operation of transparency provisions 
(a) Report on workshop 
 
5. Implementation of special and differential treatment 
6. Equivalence – Article 4 
(a) Information from Members on their experiences 
(b) Information from relevant  Observer organizations 
7. Pest- and Disease-free areas – Article 6 
(a) Information from Members on their pest or disease status 
(b) Information from Members on their experiences in recognition of pest- or 
disease-free areas 
(c) Information from relevant  observer organizations G/SPS/R/67 
Page 28  
 
  8. Technical assistance and cooperation 
(a) Information from the Secretariat 
(i) WTO SPS activities (ii) STDF 
(b) Information from Members 
(c) Information from Observers 
9. Review of the Operation and Implementation of the SPS Agreement 
(a) Issues arising from the Second Review 
(i) Use of ad hoc consultations – Report on informal meeting 
10. Monitoring of the use of international standards 
(a) New issues 
(b) Issues previously raised 
 
11. Concerns with private and commercial standards 
(a) Report on informal meeting 
12. Observers 
(a) Report on informal meeting 
(b) Information from Observer organizations 
(c) Request for observer status 
(i) Ad hoc Observers 
(ii) New requests 
(iii) Outstanding requests 
13. Chairperson's annual report to the Council for Trade in Goods  
14. Other business 
15. Date and agenda of next meeting 
146. Members were asked to take note of the following deadlines: 
 Any comments on the proposed agenda for th e October transparency workshop must 
be submitted to the Secretariat by Friday , 17 August .  This was also the deadline for 
the Secretariat to circulate the revised proposal regarding ad hoc consultations, 
G/SPS/W/259/Rev.4. 
 Members' comments on G/SPS/W/259/Rev.4, as well as with regard to the 
background document on the role of observers (G/SPS/GEN/1157), should be 
provided to the Secretariat no later than Monday, 17 September . 
 For identifying new issues for consideration under the monitoring procedure, and for 
requesting that items be put on the agenda:  Thursday, 4 October.   
 
For the distribution of the Airgram:  Friday, 5 October.  
  
__________