G/SPS/GEN/1247  
 
7 June 2013  
(13-2960)  Page: 1/6  
Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures  Original: English  
 
REPORT OF THE INTERNAT IONAL PLANT PROTECTION 
CONVENTION SECRETARIAT (IPPC) 
COMMITTEE ON SANITARY AND PHYTOSANITARY MEASURES – 27-28 JUNE 2013 
Agenda Item 3(b) – Information from Relevant SPS Standard-Setting Bodies 
The following communication, received on 3 June 2013, is being circulated at the request of the 
International Plant Protection Convention secretariat (IPPC). 
 
_______________ 
  
1  INTRODUCTION 
1.1.  This report covers the period April – June 2013. 1.2.  The Eighth Session of the Commission on Phytosanitary Measures (CPM-8) took place on 8-
12 April 2013 and the highlights of the outcomes ar e presented in the current IPPC reports. The 
activities of the Capacity Development and Impl ementation Review and Support System (IRSS) 
are presented in separate documents. 
1.3.  The Committee is invited to note that as of May 2013, there are 178 contracting parties to 
the IPPC, with the most recent adherence of Zimbabwe. 
2  STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK AND ISSUE SPECIFIC STRATEGIES 2.1  Strategic framework 
2.1.  Implementation of the IPPC Strategic Fr amework began immediately following adoption at 
CPM-7 (2012). The establishment of the four strategic objectives has provided the basis for outreach to non-traditional contacts and enhanced and/or renewed relationships with traditional 
partners. Also, the adoption of the new communications strategy at CPM-8 (2013) is another step 
in bringing about change in the way of doing business for the IPPC. 
2.2.  An additional change to the IPPC's mode of  operations includes a call for proposed topics for 
the upcoming meeting of the Strategic Planning  Group (SPG). Formerly called the Strategic 
Planning and Technical Assistance (SPTA) group, with the creation of the Capacity Development 
and Financial Committees there was a general consensus that more emphasis needs to be placed on contracting party development of strategies for the future. As a result, the IPPC Secretariat is 
hoping for an influx of proposals for strategic topics from IPPC contracting parties which will then 
be reviewed by the Bureau with a goal of select ing those which represent the greatest opportunity 
for setting a sound strategic direction for the future of the IPPC. G/SPS/GEN/1247 
 
- 2 - 
 
  3  STANDARD SETTING WORK PROGRAMME 
3.1  Adopted International Standards for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPMs) 3.1.  CPM-8 (2013) adopted: 
 Annex 4 (Pest risk analysis for plants as quarantine pests) and core text-consequential 
changes to ISPM 11:2004 (2005-001), noting th at the title of ISPM 11 changed to Pest 
risk analysis for plants as quarantine pests and that the year of adoption of ISPM 11 
changed to 2013; 
 Annex 1 (Approved treatments associated with wood packaging material) to 
ISPM 15:2009 (Regulation of wood packaging material in international trade) (2006-011), and consequential revision of Annex 2 (The mark and its application) to ISPM 15:2009; and 
 The following ISPMs in the Russian language version: ISPMs 1 to 4, 6, 8 to 11, and 13 to 
34, including Diagnostic Protocol 1 and Phytosanitary Treatments 1 to 14. 
3.2.  The ISPMs adopted at CPM-8 (2013) have been posted under the IPP webpage under the 
Adopted Standards section: https://www.ippc.int/index.p hp?id=ispms&no_cache=1&L=0 . 
3.2  Ink amendments to adopted ISPMs 
3.3.  CPM-8 (2013) noted ink amendments and other minor modifications resulting from the 
review of ISPM 9:1998, ISPM 16:2002. ISPM 17:2002, ISPM 20:2004, ISPM 23:2005, 
ISPM 25:2006, ISPM 5 and Supplement 2 to ISPM 5 (see CPM-8 (2013) for details. The IPPC Secretariat has applied these ink amendments to the adopted standards and posted them on the International Phytosanitary Portal (IPP). 
3.3  New IPPC standard setting procedure 
3.4.  The CPM-8 (2013) noted the current status of the implementation of the standard setting 
process adopted at CPM-7 (2012) and agreed to extend the review date to CPM-11 (2016). 
3.4  Relationship between ISPMs and st andards created by other organizations 
3.5.  The relationship between ISPMs and standa rds created by other organizations was discussed. 
CPM-8 (2013) agreed that ISO standards are not ma ndatory for implementation of ISPMs and that 
in the phytosanitary area, ISPMs take precedence over ISO standards and encouraged contracting 
parties to take this into account. The Secretary of the IPPC has sent a letter from the Secretariat to ISO requesting their cooperation in ensuring that this message was communicated to stakeholders. 
3.5  Member consultation on draft ISPMs 
3.6.  The following draft ISPMs were approved for member consultation by the SC in May 2013: 
a. Draft ISPMs: 
 Management of phytosanitary risks in the international movement of wood (2006-029), 
Priority 1; 
 Preliminary draft: Minimizing pest movement by sea containers (2008-001), Priority 1; 
 Movement of growing media in association with plants for planting in international trade 
(2005-004), Priority 1; 
 Phytosanitary procedures for fruit fly (Tephritidae) management (2005-010), Priority 2; 
 Amendments to ISPM 5 (Glossary of phytosanitary terms) (1994-001). 
b. Draft diagnostic protocols: 
 Draft Annex to ISPM 27:2006 – Potato spindle tuber viroid  (2006-022), Priority 1; 
 Draft Annex to ISPM 27:2006 – Xanthomonas citri  subsp. citri (2004-011), Priority 1. G/SPS/GEN/1247 
 
- 3 - 
 
  c. Draft phytosanitary treatment: 
 Draft Annex to ISPM 28:2007:Irradiation for Dysmicoccus neobrevipes  BEARDSLEY, 
Planococcus lilacinus  (COCKERELL) and Planococcus minor  (MASKELL) (HEMIPTERA: 
PSEUDOCOCCIDAE) (2012-011), Priority 1. 
3.7.  The 2013 member consultation period last s 150 days. It begins on 1 July 2013 and ends on 
1 December 2013. Comments must be submitted through the IPPC contact point in the IPPC Online Comment System (OCS: http://ocs.ippc.int/# ). The draft ISPMs can be downloaded from 
the IPP ( https://www.ippc.int/index.php?id=207803 ) where background documents and power 
point presentations for the draft ISPMs are also posted. 
3.8.  Again this year, IPPC regional workshops are being organized to discuss phytosanitary issues 
as well as review draft ISPMs. The Secretariat will continue to use the OCS during the 2013 IPPC 
regional workshops for ease of collecting and sharing workshop comments among the participants. 
These comments will not be considered unless participants, after returning to their home countries, choose to submit these regional workshop comments as their own or use them as the 
basis for formulating their own comments. Workshop participants will be reminded to submit their 
comments via the OCS, even if they simply wish to  submit that they have no comments, as future 
provision of travel assistance to attend these regional workshops may be linked to their efforts to 
submit comments. 
3.6  Member consultation on draft specifications for ISPMs 3.9.  The following draft specifications have been submitted to member consultation: 
 Wood products and handicrafts made from raw wood (2008-008); 
 Revision of ISPM 4:1995 Requirements for the establishment of pest free areas (2009-
002); 
 Revision of ISPM 8:1998 Determination of pest status in an area (2009-005). 
3.10.  This consultation period lasts 60 days. It started on 1 June 2013 and ends on 31 July 2013. 
The draft specifications can be downloaded from the IPP (https://www.ippc.int/index.php?id=190935 ). All member comments must be submitted by the 
IPPC contact point through the IPPC OCS: http://ocs.ippc.int/ . 
3.7  Substantial concerns commenting period for draft ISPMs 
3.11.  Draft ISPMs that have been revised by the SC-7 and recommended to the Standards 
Committee (SC) are made available to IPPC members through the OCS for the substantial 
concerns commenting period (SCCP). 
3.12.  Thus, taking into account the comments that were received during the 2012 member 
consultation, the following draft ISPMs were reviewed by the Standards Committee Working Group 
(SC-7) in May 2013 and recommended to the SC (see May 2013 SC-7 report): 
 Appendix to ISPM 12 on Electronic certification, information on standard Extensible 
Markup Language (XML) schemes and exchange mechanisms (2006-003), Priority 1; 
 Establishment of fruit fly quarantine areas wi thin a pest free area in the event of an 
outbreak (for inclusion as Annex 1 of ISPM 26) (2009-007), Priority 3; 
 Determination of host status of fruits and vegetables to fruit fly (Tephritidae) infestation 
(2006-031), Priority 1. 
3.13.  The 2013 substantial concerns commenting period lasts 120 days. It started on 1 June 2013 
and ends on 30 September 2013. The draft ISPMs go ing for SCCP can be downloaded from the IPP 
(https://www.ippc.int/index.php?id=1111115 ). All substantial concerns must be submitted by the 
IPPC contact point through the IPPC OCS: http://ocs.ippc.int/ . 
3.8  Call for topics 
3.14.  The IPPC Secretariat has issued a call for ne w topics for IPPC standards. A call for topics is 
made every two years, the last call scheduled fo r 2011 was cancelled so the last call occurred in G/SPS/GEN/1247 
 
- 4 - 
 
  2009. IPPC members are encouraged to foll ow the guidance provided on the IPP 
https://www.ippc.int/index.php?id=1111210  and submit their proposals prior to the close date, 
which is 31 August 2013. 
3.9  Expert consultation on  Draft Diagnostic Protocols 
3.15.  The IPPC Secretariat has set up an Expert Consultation on Draft Diagnostic Protocols and is 
seeking experts' inputs on various draft diagnostic  protocols (DPs) at early stage of development. 
Technical experts are invited to review diagnostic protocols and provide their input directly to the 
DP drafting groups through the IPP. More in formation on this is available on the IPP 
(https://www.ippc.int/index.php?id=1111204 ). 
3.10  Expert working groups 
3.16.  An expert working group (EWG) meeting on Sea Containers was held in Finland from 
27 May to 31 May 2013. The EWG developed a draft ISPM on International movement of used 
vehicles, machinery and equipment  (2006-004) which will be submitted to the SC for their review. 
3.11  Standard setting work plan for the remainder of 2013 
3.17.  The work plan for standard setting for the remainder of 2013 includes, in addition to the 
November meeting of the Standards Committee, meetings of the Technical Panel on Diagnostic Protocols and Technical Panel on Phytosanitary Treatments in June and July 2013, respectively. An 
EWG on the International movement of seed  (2009-003) is planned to take place at the beginning 
of July 2013. In addition, the IPPC secretariat continues to use web based technology to hold 
virtual meetings. 
4  INFORMATION EXCHANGE 
4.1  Contact points 
4.1.  A significant number of IPPC contact points have updated their information in the last three 
months. This means that contracting parties communicating with other IPPC contact points should 
visit the IPP frequently to ensure they have the latest contact information. In addition, the 
secretariat continues to work with a small number of countries that need to nominate their IPPC contact points officially. 
4.2  International Phytosanitary Portal (IPP) https://www.ippc.int  
4.2.  There continues to be a lot of information being made available by countries through the 
IPPC website and the IPPC Secretariat. Countries ar e encouraged to periodically visit the site for 
updates. In addition, the website now provides Russian navigation and partial navigation in 
Chinese - this is being continuously improved. In addition, changes are being made to the IPP to 
increase its efficiency and improve the appearan ce and responsiveness. While this has caused 
some issues while the system is being transitioned, the ultimate result will be a much more 
responsive and informative IPPC webpage. 
4.3.  Usage of the webpage continues to increase but it is clear that this can be improved in 
certain regions and in certain countries. Countries that are reporting certain IPPC obligatory 
information to the WTO are encouraged to provide this information (minimal modification is 
necessary) through the IPP to ensure they meet their IPPC reporting obligations. 
4.4.  The information available through the IPP has substantially increased the number of 
information resources available to support standa rd implementation, capacity development and the 
Implementation Review and Support System (IRSS). This information is being increased 
continually and is available through: 
i. Resources in Support of IPPC Implementation: http://www.phytosanitary.info  
ii. IRSS: https://www.ippc.int/index.php ?id=1111059&L=0#irssactivities  
iii. IRSS Help Desk: https://www.ippc.int/index.php?id=1111059&L=0#helpdesk  G/SPS/GEN/1247 
 
- 5 - 
 
  iv. IPPC Projects Database: http://projects.phytosanitary.info  
v. eLearning: http://elearning.phytosanitary.info  
4.3  Pest reporting 
4.5.  National pest reporting continues to improve but there is still potential for further 
improvement. The Secretariat is working on this information to allow users to access this 
information in a more constructive and analytical manner. 
4.4  Communications 
4.6.  The IPPC Communications Strategy was ad opted by CPM-8 (2013). The Secretariat is now 
engaged in an effort to develop and implement a communications workplan. An initial activity taking place soon will be the conduct of a comm unications needs assessment. This will provide the 
IPPC a clearer understanding of who the audien ces are and the messages that are needed for 
them. It is intended that the needs assessment will allow the Secretariat to have a greater focus in 
its communications activities into the future. 
4.7.  The following social media pages for the IPPC are available: 
i. Facebook: " http://www.facebook.com/pages/Int ernational-Plant-Protection-
Convention-IPPC/113230338690380?ref=tn_tnmn " 
ii. Twitter: https://twitter.com/#!/ippcnews  
iii. LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/gro ups?gid=3175642&trk=hb_side_g  
iv. Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/groups/internat ional_plant_protection_convention/  
v. YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/IPPCnews  
5  DISPUTE SETTLEMENT 
5.1.  The IPPC Secretariat, as was noted during the March 2013 meeting of the SPS Committee, 
provided support for a meeting between South Africa and the European Union to discuss their phytosanitary trade dispute. The meeting was faci litated by Mr Ralf Lopian of Finland and was 
conducted under the terms of the IPPC dispute settlement mechanism. 
5.2.  Even while the IPPC is in the process of  reviewing the IPPC Dispute Settlement system, the 
Secretariat offers the IPPC dispute settlement mechanism as a reasonable approach for the 
resolution of phytosanitary disputes. 
6  RESOURCE MOBILIZATION 6.1.  The Secretariat would like to thank all those contracting parties and other donors who 
contributed to the 2012 budget and activities of th e IPPC. The IPPC encourages them to consider 
future, sustainable contributions. It will be greatl y appreciated if donors are able to express their 
intention for further contributions in order to facilitate planning for the coming year. These d o n a t i o n s  w i l l  h e l p  t o  e n s u r e  t h e  c o r e  w o r k  p r o g r a m m e  w i l l  b e  d e l i v e r e d .  A  f u l l  l i s t  o f  i n - k i n d  
support is made available to CPM each year – 
"https://www.ippc.int/index.php?id=1110798&from page=13330&tx_publication_pi1[showUid]=21
83770&type=publication&L=0 ". 
6.2.  The sustainability of the IPPC Secretaria t, and hence the work programme of the IPPC, is 
being addressed as a matter of urgency on an ongoing basis. The current resource allocation (financial and human resources) measured against projected tasks is simply not sustainable, although 2013 will be manageable. The Secretary continues to give this his highest priority. The 
Secretary and staff have engaged in discussions with the governing body as well as traditional and 
non-traditional partners in ongoing efforts to improve the situation. 
6.3.  It cannot be stressed enough that it is essential the IPPC receive regular and predictable 
contributions to allow appropriate planning and deli very of the core IPPC work programme, i.e. to 
provide sustainability to the programme. It should also be noted that FAO, the organization G/SPS/GEN/1247 
 
- 6 - 
 
  hosting the IPPC Secretariat, continues to faces severe financial challenges and is seeking cost 
reduction efforts in most areas; the resources available to the IPPC activities will likely be affected as well. 
6.4.  The Secretariat is always open to any discussion with members or partner organizations that 
could provide solutions to the current challenges, particularly in the medium to long term. 
7  ELECTRONIC CERTIFICATIO N IN THE IPPC (EPHYTO) 
7.1.  EPhyto is a high priority for CPM and the revised Appendix 1 ( Electronic certification, 
information on standard XML schemes and exchange mechanisms  (2006-003)) to ISPM 12:2011 is 
out for member consultation (see above, sectio n III.C.). The IPPC Secretariat has created an 
ePhyto webpage (http://ephyto.ippc.int/) on the IPP containing information on codes and schema to be used in ePhytos. 
7.2.  As reported to the SPS Committee previously, the potential development of a common global 
system for electronic certification (central "hub") was highlighted during the April 2012 SC and June 2012 Bureau meetings. A feasibility study is being currently being contracted by the 
Secretariat with hopes to have the study begin as soon as possible. The IPPC believes this 
represents a potential opportunity for future collaboration with OIE and Codex. 
7.3.  General information on ePhyto can be found on the IPPC Website at: 
http://www.ippc.int/index.php?id=1111140  or obtained from the IPPC Secretariat ( ippc@fao.org ). 
8  COOPERATION WITH THE WTO STANDARD SETTING ORGANIZATIONS 
8.1.  The IPPC Secretariat would like to draw atte ntion to the following current on-going activities 
with Codex and OIE: 
i. Codex and the IPPC continue to explore ways of addressing their IT needs in a more 
sustainable manner and share tools and skills when appropriate, especially in view of forthcoming organizational changes within FAO; 
ii. Codex is currently using a Codex specific version of the Online Comment System. 
This is an important collaborative milestone that is worthy of broader recognition and allows both organization to cost share the continued maintenance of the system. OIE 
is also examining the OCS more closely and may also consider using this system in 
the future; 
iii. Codex, OIE and the IPPC continue to engage in consultations on Standard Trade and 
Development Facility (STDF) activities to understand each other's positions and 
coordinate activities and responses; 
iv. There is ongoing cooperation between the "three sisters" on SPS-related capacity 
development projects, if and when appropriate; 
v. The Secretariat has initiated coordination meetings between the "three sisters" to 
improve coordination and collaboration in SPS Committee meetings; 
vi. Ad-hoc consultations are undertaken as and when subjects arise that are of mutual 
interest; and 
vii. The Secretariat looks forward to establishing a broader consultation meeting 
between the "three sisters" and the SPS Committee Secretariat in the near future. 
 
__________