RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SPS/R/58 
11 June 2010 
 (10-3206) 
Committee on Sanitary a nd Phytosanitary Measures  
  
 
SUMMARY OF THE MEETING OF 17-18 MARCH 2010 
 
Note by the Secretariat
1 
 
Table of contents  
 
Page  
 
I. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA.............................................................................................3  
II. INFORMATION ON RELEVANT ACTIVITIES ................................................................3  
(a) Information from Members....................................................................................................... ..3 
(b) Information from Observer Organizations..................................................................................5  
III. SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS (G/SPS/GEN/204/REV.10) .............................................5  
(a) New Issues ..................................................................................................................... .............6  
(b) Issues Previous ly Raised....................................................................................................... ......8  
(c) Consideration of Specific Notifications Received ....................................................................11  
(d) Information on Resolution of Issues .........................................................................................12  
IV. OPERATION OF TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS........................................................12  
V. IMPLEMENTATION OF SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT ................13  
VI. EQUIVALENCE – ARTICLE 4............................................................................................13  
(a) Information from Members on their Experiences.....................................................................13  
(b) Information from Relevant  Observer Organizations ................................................................13  
VII. PEST- AND DISEASE-FREE AREAS – ARTICLE 6........................................................13  
(a) Information from Members on their Pest or Disease Status .....................................................13  
(b) Information from Members on their Experi ences in Recognition of Pest- or Disease-
free Areas..................................................................................................................... .............13  
(c) Information from Relevant  Observer Organizations ................................................................14  
VIII.  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND COOPERATION .......................................................14  
(a) Information from the Secretariat............................................................................................... 14 
(b) Information from Members....................................................................................................... 15 
(c) Information from Observers ..................................................................................................... 16 
                                                      
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/58 
Page 2  
 
  IX.
 REVIEW OF THE OPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SPS 
AGREEMENT ...................................................................................................................... ..17 
(a) Issues Arising from the Second Review ...................................................................................17  
(b) Third Review ................................................................................................................... .........19  
X. MONITORING ON THE USE OF  INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS...........................20  
(a) New Issues ..................................................................................................................... ...........20  
(b) Issues Previous ly Raised....................................................................................................... ....20  
XI. CONCERNS WITH PRIVATE AN D COMMERCIAL STANDARDS............................20  
(a) Report on Chairperson's Consultations.....................................................................................20  
XII. REQUESTS FOR OBSERVER STATUS ............................................................................22  
(a) Ad hoc observers ............................................................................................................... .......22  
(b) New requests................................................................................................................... ..........22  
(c) Outstanding requests........................................................................................................... ......22  
XIII.  ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON ........................................................................................23  
XIV.  OTHER BUSINESS................................................................................................................2 3 
XV. DATE AND AGENDA OF NEXT MEETING.....................................................................23  
  G/SPS/R/58 
 Page 3 
 
 
  I. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 
1. The Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (the "Committee") held its forty-
seventh regular meeting on 17-18 March 2010.  The proposed agenda for the meeting was adopted 
with amendments (WTO/AIR/3525). 
II. INFORMATION ON RELEVANT ACTIVITIES 
(a) Information from Members 
2. The representative of Indonesia reported that new requirements and plant quarantine actions 
for the importation of wood packaging materials, im plemented through the Minister of Agriculture 
decree No. 12/2009 (G/SPS/N/IDN/27/Add.1), entered into force.  This measure was followed by 
guidelines for plant quarantine inspectors res ponsible for conducting plant quarantine measures 
related to the importation of wood packaging materi als, according to the decree of the Director 
General of Indonesian Agricultural Quarantine Agency No. 295/2009.  Indonesia considered that both 
decrees were in accordance with the International Standard for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPM) 
No. 15 of 2002, and the revised ISPM No. 15 of 2009.  Further information on Indonesia's measures are in G/SPS/GEN/998. 
3. The representative of Indonesia also reported on the adoption of Regulation No. 21/2010 of 
the Minister of Agriculture lifting the import restri ctions on swine and swine products that related to 
Influenza A/H1N1.  The representatives of Mexico  and the European Union (EU) welcomed the 
changes in Indonesia's regi me on Influenza A/H1N1. 
4. The representative of Zambia presented a report on the SPS-related activities of its plant 
quarantine and phytosanitary service (G/SPS/ GEN/996).  These activities included a national 
workshop to strength the national SPS committee;  a regional SPS meeting for selected countries in 
the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa (COMESA) region as part of the project on the Participation of African Nations in Sanitary an d Phytosanitary Standards-setting Organizations (PAN-
SPSO);  an SPS workshop for farmers;  and surv ey programmes related to seed crop inspection and 
pest survey.  Zambia thanked COMESA, the A frican Union – Inter-African Bureau for Animal 
Resources (AU-IBAR), the Southern Africa Confed eration of Agricultural Unions (SACAU), and the 
EU for the continual support on SPS matters. 
5. The representative of Zambia also reported on the establishment of a Plant Protection 
Regulatory Authority (PPRA) which would administer the country's Plant Protection Act, now awaiting ratification.  The new PPRA was in line with the country's Business Licensing Reforms 
which are aimed at reducing the costs and time of  doing business while protecting the country from 
introduction of pests and promoting safe international trade. 
6. The representative of the Dominican Repub lic provided information regarding the 
improvement of the national system on the use and ap plication of pesticides, as well as the application 
of good agricultural practices and good manufacturing pr actices.  This entailed the registration of all 
agrochemicals sellers, records and reviews of all pesticides sales following the authorization by a 
phytosanitary expert,  creation of an Export Prog ramme for Oriental Vegetables and Fresh Fruits, 
revamp of laboratories on pesticides residues, and training of regional technical committees.  Further information and requirements related to food safety, animal health and plant protection, as well as the 
legislation and technical documents , were available on the website of the National Committee for the 
Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures at http://www.cnmsf.gob.do
. G/SPS/R/58 
Page 4  
 
  7. The representative of Australia provided information on the entry into force, on 
1 March 2010, of changes to its BSE and impor ted beef and beef products policy (BSE policy), 
notified in G/SPS/N/AUS/239.  The changes woul d require every supplying country to undergo 
assessment processes to ensure food safety and animal health.  Food safety risk assessments would be 
conducted by Food Standards Australia New Ze aland (FSANZ) following BSE risk mitigation 
strategies in line with those recommended by the Wo rld Organisation for Animal Health (OIE), and 
the BSE risk assessment method used  by the OIE.  Further documents on the policy change could be 
found at the FSANZ website.  Animal health assess ments would be conducted by the Department of 
Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry.  The import risk  analysis (IRA) was expected to take a maximum 
of 24 months to complete, and included the enga gement and consultation of an Eminent Experts 
Group.  Further details of how the IRA would be und ertaken would be provided shortly to interested 
trading partners.  Both the food safety and anim al health assessment processes could be undertaken in 
parallel.  The new policy would allow all countries, including those that have had one or more cases 
of BSE, to apply for risk assessment by the Au stralian authorities.  Countries with existing FSANZ 
food safety assessments, or whose access dated from before the introduction of the 2001 assessment 
process, were reminded that their process would c ontinue until 30 June 2011, when they would need 
to apply for a new risk assessment.  In case of any significant BSE related development in countries 
with existing access, the transitional access would be reviewed. 
8. The representatives of Canada, the European Union and the United States expressed 
disappointment with the changes in Australia's B SE policy, arguing that an independent examination 
would delay the process, and did not take into c onsideration OIE's exhaustive research on countries' 
BSE determinations. 
9. The representative of the OIE recalled that the OIE standards on BSE and the official country 
status recognition had been in place for more than 20 years, and updates were regularly made based 
on science and newly available information.  In a ddition, the standards-setting activities of the OIE 
involved all members and democratic decision-maki ng.  The OIE was neutral regarding the changes 
in Australia's BSE policy, but encouraged Austra lia to base its measures on the OIE system.  The 
representative of Australia clarified that the IRA sh ould take a maximum of 24 months, and that the 
OIE methodology would be used in the risk assessment. 
10. The representative of Madagascar reported that with the assistance of COMESA, and as part 
of the PAN-SPSO project, a national seminar had be en organized to decide on the establishment of a 
national SPS committee. 
11. The representative of Malawi reported on several  SPS-related developments in the country, 
including:  (i) SACAU projects on sensitization of smallholders regarding the implication of SPS 
standards and international trade;  (ii) the increase of exports by  the National Smallholder Farmers 
Association (NASFAM) resulting in an increase of fore ign exchanges inflows;  (iii) organization of an 
SPS workshop in 2008 to discuss issues such as the Phytosanitary Capacity Evaluation (PCE) tool;  
(iv) organization of a workshop funded by SACAU a ddressing the involvement of smallholders in the 
standards-setting process, held in October 2009;  (v) organization of a SACAU-funded workshop for 
the Farmers Union of Malawi (FUM) and NA SFAM on SPS matters;  (vi) improvement of 
NASFAM's compliance with SPS standards on several  agricultural products;  (vii) assistance by 
Commark Trust for the participation of a delegation in the WTO SPS Committee;  (viii) FAO assistance to update Malawi's SPS-related legislation, including the Plant Protection Act.  In addition, 
the Government of Malawi planned to increase the exports of high quality agricultural exports.  For 
this, however, the laboratories for the identification of pests and diseases in the country needed to be 
accredited and modernized, and the country needed assistance to improve, 
inter alia,  its human 
capacity and infrastructure.  G/SPS/R/58 
 Page 5 
 
 
  (b) Information from Observer Organizations 
12. The representative of the International Plan t Protection Convention (IPPC) Secretariat 
presented a report covering the period of Novemb er 2009 to February 2010 (G/SPS/GEN/999).  The 
report included:  information about the Fifth S ession of the Commission on Phytosanitary Measures 
(CPM-5) and the standards proposed for adoption;  the general standard-setting work programme up 
to February 2010;  information exchange matters (covering information on countries' contact points to 
IPPC;  the international phytosanitary portal, and pests reporting);  the capacity building plan and 
activities;  the key proposed activities for 2010;  and a list with all the adopted International Standards 
for Phytosanitary Measures (ISPMs). 
13. The representative of the OIE announced that the report of the Code Commission, to be 
discussed and adopted during the 78th General Session of the World A ssembly of Delegates of the 
OIE, had been made available in the OIE delegate s' restricted website.  Furthermore, the list of 
country status recognition prepared by the Scien tific Commission for Anim al Diseases (SCAD) had 
been circulated to the OIE delegates.  This list woul d also be considered in the next General Session.  
Document G/SPS/GEN/1000 contained an up-to-date re port on the developments in OIE’s standard-
setting work on terrestrial animals and their produc ts;  an update on OIE's activities related to the 
support of the veterinary services of its member s, including through the application of the OIE 
Performance of Veterinary Services (PVS) Tool;  and assistance on veterinary education.  OIE's 
report also included a section on the work being done  on private standards.  The representative of 
Belize reported that the PVS GAP analysis would be  conducted in her country in April 2010.  Belize 
requested that once the report of its PVS GAP analys is was finalized it should be immediately shared 
so that the areas to be strengthened were identifie d and communicated to the relevant donor agencies. 
14. The representative of Codex indicated that a re port on the latest Codex activities would be 
circulated shortly (G/SPS/GEN/1010).  In additi on, in the week of 7 March 2010, the Codex 
Committee on Methods of Analysis and Sampling had finalized the "Guidelines on Criteria for Methods for Detection, Identification and Quan tification of Specific DNA Sequences and Specific 
Proteins" for food authentication and  identifica tion of allergens and pathogens.  These guidelines 
were based on the latest scientific information a nd would be proposed for adoption at the next session 
of the Codex Alimentarius Commission in July 2 010.  A methodology and methods of analysis for 
how to address measurement uncertainty were unde r revision.  Earlier in 2010, Codex had sought 
advice from an expert consultation group on the risk s and benefits of fish consumption, especially 
related to the maximum level of methylmercury.  
15. The representative of the Europ ean Union commended the reports provided by IPPC, OIE and 
Codex and recalled the usefulness and importance of  these reports.  This agenda item had been 
advanced as agreed during the conclusions of the October 2009 workshop on the relationship between 
the SPS  Committee and the International Standard -setting Organizations.  The European Union 
underlined the importance of the work being done in  these organizations, such as the PVS evaluations 
by the OIE and the guidelines on detection methods elaborated by Codex.  The representative of the 
European Union also drew attention to a repor t of the World Bank on competitiveness in the food 
industry and the impact of both public and private standards, and suggested that the World Bank be 
invited to present a summary of th is report to the SPS Committee. 
III. SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS 
16. The Secretariat presented the 10
th revision of the annual compilation of Specific Trade 
Concerns (STCs), document G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.10, i ssued in February 201 0.  From 1995 through 
2009, a total of 290 STCs have been raised in the SPS Committee.  Forty per cent of these concerns 
related primarily to animal health, 28 per cent to f ood safety, 26 to plant health, and the remaining six 
per cent to other issues (e.g., certification).  Duri ng 2009,  29 STCs were raised, including 13 issues 
raised for the first time, and 16 concerns that ha d been raised for the first time prior to 2009. G/SPS/R/58 
Page 6  
 
  17. Developing countries have actively used this mechanism for addressing trade problems, and 
have raised 146 STCs.  Least-developed countries (LDCs) raised three STCs from 1995 through 2009. 
18. Of the total 290 STCs raised, Members have repor ted to the Committee that  79 were resolved, 
and 18 were partially resolved.  No solution was reported for the remaining 193 STCs.  Some of these 
concerns may have in fact been resolved but the resolution was not reported to the Committee.  
Information concerning the STCs are available from the SPS Information Management System 
(http://spsims.wto.org
). 
(a) New Issues 
(i) Chinese Taipei's BSE Measures – Concerns of Canada 
19. The representative of Canada expressed concer ns over Chinese Taipei's BSE measures.  In 
May 2007, the OIE recognized Canada as a "controlle d BSE risk" country, and in July 2007 Chinese 
Taipei resumed partial trade with Canada by  allowing access for boneless beef from animals under 
30 months of age.  However, despite numerous t echnical discussions, an inspection visit to Canada, 
the completion of a risk assessment, and a formal  arrangement on conditions for bone-in beef from 
animals under 30 months, no further market access had been granted by Chinese Taipei.  In 
January 2010, Chinese Taipei appr oved an amendment to its food sanitation act banning the import of 
offal and certain other bovine products from countries affected by BSE.  Canada was concerned about 
the recent amendments to Chinese Taipei's legislati on, and requested that all necessary steps be taken 
to ensure that the import conditions by Chinese Taip ei were consistent with the recommendations and 
guidelines provided by the OIE. 
20. The representative of Chinese Taipei explained that the recent 16th and 17th cases of BSE in 
Canada necessitated a new risk assessment of bon e-in beef.  Pending completion of the new risk 
assessment, the current regulations on imports of bone -in beef from Canada would remain in force.  
Chinese Taipei maintained that its BSE regula tion was consistent with the SPS Agreement. 
(ii) US Prohibition of Ornamental Plants Larg er than 18 inches – Concerns of Costa Rica 
21. The representative of Costa Rica referred to the US restrictions on the importation of 
ornamental plants larger than 18 inches, based on th e US Code of Federal Regulation, section 37, part 
319, title 7 (7 CFR § 319.37).  Costa Rica reported that in early 2000 it had conducted a risk assessment to support its request for the United States to lift its restrictions.  Based on a US request, 
Costa Rica had established and operated a Clean St ock Program, aimed at reducing the number of 
interceptions of exports of ornamental plants to  the United States.  The Clean Stock Program for 
Dracaena marginata  started to operate in 2005, and it i nvolved authorities from Costa Rica and the 
United States.  The Program concluded its work in  December 2008.  However, more than one year 
after the conclusion of the Program, the United St ates had not yet initiated a process to modify its 
regulation restricting the importation of ornamental pl ants larger than 18 inch es.  A working plan had 
been elaborated by the regulatory agencies of bot h countries, nevertheless, Costa Rica was concerned 
that despite the agreement on the t echnical issues of the Plan, the United States was taking too long to 
revise its restrictions. 
22. The representative of the United States reported th at the authorities of both countries had been 
working cooperatively on issues related to th e importation of tropical foliage, particularly dracaena 
spp..  The ongoing work addressed the development of greater surveillance and inspection protocols 
to reduce the high number of interceptions.  The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) 
was working with Costa Rica on a work plan and a pr oposed rule to allow the safe entry of oversized 
dracaena spp.  To complete the science-based review pr ocess, the USDA was awaiting a response on 
the draft work plan by Costa Rica, so as to expand the current Clean Stock Program.  G/SPS/R/58 
 Page 7 
 
 
  (iii) France - Risks Arising from Carambola Fruit Fly in French Guyana – Concerns of Brazil 
23. The representative of Brazil expressed concerns regarding delays in eradicating the carambola 
fruit fly from the area close to the common border between French Guyana and Brazil.  The carambola fruit fly posed a real ri sk of spreading in the country and could negatively affect many 
producers.  A protocol of cooperation in the cont rol and eradication of the carambola fruit fly was 
signed between Brazil and France in 2002.  However,  France had suspended the protocol in 2005 
without providing a sufficient justification.  A meeting of experts from both parties with an 
independent expert was yet to be scheduled.  Br azil was mainly concerned that the delay in the 
resolution of this problem might result in severe loses to its fruit producers. 
24. The representative of the European Union reporte d that the French authorities were awaiting a 
reply by Brazil to a letter dated of 10 November  2009, so the situation could be dealt with 
accordingly. 
(iv) Malaysian Import Restriction on Plant and Plant Products – Concerns of Brazil 
25. The representative of Brazil expressed concerns re lated to Malaysia's import restrictions on  
plants and plants products due to a regulation on South American leaf blight disease.  Brazil 
considered that the regulation did not have a scientif ic justification.  Malaysia's import restrictions 
were apparently based on a provision in the cons titutive of the Asia and Pacific Plant Protection 
Commission (APPPC) on South American leaf blight disease.  However, other parties to the APPPC did not apply this provision to Brazil.  A represen tative of FAO conducted a pest risk analysis to 
verify whether the South American leaf blight disease  represented a risk to Malaysia, but no risks had 
been identified.  Therefore, Brazil requested that Malaysia allow the importation of plants and plants 
products from Brazil. 
26. The representative of Japan observed that the trad e restriction was also a concern for Japan.  
Japan recognized the efforts of the APPPC to amend its  regulation so as to be consistent with the SPS 
Agreement. 
27. The representative of Malaysia indicated that he had not receive any information from Brazil 
in advance of the meeting and, thus , could not consult with his techni cal officials.  Malaysia invited 
Brazil to send its concern in writing so a response could be provided. 
(v) EU Artificial Colour Warning Labels – Concerns of the United States 
28. The representative of the United States raised concerns about EU Regulation (EC) 1333/2008 
on food additives.  Article 24 of the Regulation re quired warning statements on food products that 
contained one or more of six colour additiv es: Sunset Yellow (E110), Quinoline Yellow (E104), 
Carmoisine (E122), Allura Red (E129), Tartrazine  (E102), and Ponceau 4R (E124).  The United 
States was particularly concerned with the scientif ic basis of the regulation, its potential negative 
impact on international trade, and the transparency of  its adoption.  Most of these six colour additives 
were widely used by the food industry in products  such as confectionaries and beverages.  When the 
regulation was notified to the WTO Secretariat (G /SPS/N/EEC/291), it did not contain the provision 
on warning statements, and the United States was not aware of an addendum to the original 
notification.  Statistics from the University of S outhhampton and the European Food Safety Authority 
(EFSA) did not substantiate a link between the indi vidual colours and possible behavioural effects in 
infants.  The United States was also concerned th at the European Union planned to implement the 
measure in July 2010. 
29. The representatives of New Zealand and Mexico supported the concerns raised by the United 
States, noting that the measure did not seem to be based on scientific evidence. G/SPS/R/58 
Page 8  
 
  30. The representative of the European Union stressed  that the issue of colorants was complex 
and delicate matter, especially in confectionary and beverages consumed by children and infants.  The 
identified additives raised concerns related to hea lth problems in children, such as hyperactivity, 
attention loss, and deficit-disorder.  The study by the University of Southhampton raised concerns and 
media interest, which led shops and retailers to phase out the sale of products containing those food 
additives.  The new EU regulatory regime on additi ves and colorants was not an import ban but only 
introduced certain specific labelling provisions.  An  opinion from EFSA conc luded that although the 
changes noticed in children behaviour were small, th ey were statistically significant.  The European 
Union also clarified that an addendum to the or iginal notification had been submitted to the WTO 
Secretariat (G/SPS/N/EEC/291/Add.1).  The new measure allowed for an 18-month transitional 
period before entering into force.  The measure was not discriminatory, since it is applied equally to 
European producers and imports from third countries.  
(b) Issues Previously Raised 
(i) Japan's Pesticide Maximum Residue Level (M RL) Enforcement System (STC 267) – Concerns 
of China 
31. The representative of China reiterated the concerns regarding Japan's MRLs and its 
enforcement system, which should be based on scie ntific evidence and applied in a least-trade 
restrictive manner.  According to China, out of approximately 50 thousand MR Ls in Japan, more than 
40 thousand were "temporary" standards, which we re neither based on scientific evidence nor risk 
assessments as required by the SPS Agreement.  Less than 50 per cent of the "temporary" standards 
had been reviewed by the end of 2009, although they had been applied for almost five years, creating 
serious obstacles to China's food e xports to Japan.  More over, Japan's "uniform standard" of 0.01 ppm 
MRL for several products was not based on scientific evidence.  MRLs should be set according to the 
different levels of exposure through different f ood products, toxicology evaluations and acceptable 
daily intake (ADI) levels consiste ntly with international practice.  In addition, Japan's enforcement 
system of MRLs was neither reasonable nor transp arent, as sometimes Japan inspected 100 per cent of 
China's food exports, known as "order inspections".  By way of examples, Japan set a 2 ppm MRL for 
pyrimethanil in scallion, while for sh allots Japan applied the "uniform standard" of 0.01 ppm.  Japan 
also applied the 0.01 ppm "uniform standard" for ch lorpyrifos in matsutake, while the Codex standard 
for chlorpyrifos in edible fungi was 0.05 ppm .  China also asserted that Japan applied a less 
favourable treatment to imported food  products than to Japanese products. 
32. The representative of Japan responded that the "u niform limits" had been established after 
holding consultations and receiving opinions from h ealth experts based on:  (i) acceptable exposure 
levels determined by the eval uations conducted by the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food 
Additives (JECFA), and evaluations on indirect additives by the United States Department of 
Agriculture (USDA);  (ii) acceptable dairy intake for pesticides and veterinary drugs evaluated by 
JECFA;  and (iii) the default level of 0.01 ppm estab lished by the European Un ion.  According to the 
Japanese system, the Ministry of Health, Labour  and Welfare conducted an evaluation before 
allowing pesticide residues in food products.  Th is evaluation was based on individual pesticide 
residue data for each commodity.  Any exporter coul d apply to the Ministry of Health, Labour, and 
Welfare to request the evaluation of specific data on MRLs. 
(ii) US Import Restrictions on Cooked Poultry Pr oducts from China (STC 257) – Concerns of 
China 
33. The representative of China reiterated that S ection 743 of the US Agriculture Appropriations 
Act (AAA) of 2010 set discriminatory requirements on China's processed poultry products.  China had raised similar concerns a bout Sections 733 and 727 of the US appropriations acts of 2008 and 
2009, respectively.  Section 743 was discriminatory in nature, and required a significantly increased  G/SPS/R/58 
 Page 9 
 
 
  level of port of entry re-inspection, the creation of an information-sharing programme with other 
countries, audits of inspection systems and on-site  reviews of slaughtering and processing facilities.  
These Chinese-specific requirements were not in co nformity with Articles 2.2 and 2.3 of the SPS 
Agreement.  Although the United States asserted th at Section 743 only established commitments on 
the Secretary of Agriculture by the US Congress,  the new requirements would create substantial 
obligations for China when exporting poultry products to the United States.  At the end of 2007, the 
USDA had concluded the equivalence recognition process for Chinese poultry inspection and control 
systems.  However, the only remaining task, which was the finalization of the US legislation process, 
had never been concluded.  China was dismayed  by recent US comments that the equivalence 
recognition process for Chinese poultry would need to be restarted. 
34. The representative of the United States responde d that the Agriculture, Rural Development, 
Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agenci es Appropriations Act 2010 permitted the USDA 
to use funds to establish and implement equiva lence rules for Chinese poultry.  The USDA Food 
Safety Inspection Service (FSIS) was moving forw ard with the equivalence process for China and had 
requested information regarding China's new food sa fety law on poultry inspection systems, as well as 
any other changes to China's laws and regulations re lated to these systems.  This type of request was 
made to any country that had significantly chan ged its food safety system during an equivalence 
determination process. 
(iii) Import Restrictions due to BSE (STC 19 3) – Concerns of the European Union  
35. The representative of the European Union reported that certain WTO Members still 
maintained unjustified import restrictions arguabl y to protect against Transmissible Spongiform 
Encephalopathies (TSE).  The European Unio n urged Members to lift any unnecessary, 
disproportionate, or discriminatory restrictions which negatively affected EU exports.  The OIE 
recommendations on BSE, which were reviewed in Ma y 2009, included the possibility to import meat 
or even live animals from countries having a "negligible", "controlled", or "undetermined" BSE risk status, as long as the OIE rules on surveillance and c ontrol were followed.  In addition, for certain 
products under specific conditions, such as de-boned skeletal muscle meat, milk and milk products, 
semen and embryos there should be no BSE import requirements regardless of the BSE risk or the age of the cattle population of the exportin g country, zone or compartment. 
36. The representative of Switzerland  supported the concerns raised by the European Union, 
stating that WTO Members should base their meas ures on the OIE recommendations and available 
data on BSE. 
(iv) India's Restrictions Due to Avian Influenza  (STC 185) – Concerns of the United States 
37. The representative of the United States stated that India was alone among the world's leading 
trading partners in imposing severe import requirements related to avia n influenza (AI), that were not 
in line with those established by the OIE.  I ndia continued to mainta in emergency measures 
prohibiting a wide range of pig and avian products .  Furthermore, India has not provided timely 
emergency notifications to the WTO Secretariat, as it had extended its AI emergency measures on 
28 August 2009, but not yet notified it.  The United States had for several years repeatedly requested a copy of India's risk assessment for AI, but this was never provided. 
38. The representative of the European Union suppor ted the US concerns regarding India's ban on 
import of a number of products and live animals that, according to the OIE, should not be restricted.  The European Union highlighted the importance of th e use of the SPS notification system by India.  
The European Union also repeatedly requested Indi a's risk assessment for its AI measure, but had not 
obtained it.  Moreover, India did not recognize th e regionalization principle, as applied in the 
European Union whenever an  outbreak of AI occurred. G/SPS/R/58 
Page 10  
 
  39. The representative of the OIE encouraged WT O Members to implement the OIE standards on 
AI, since they were based on science and had been  democratically approved.  The OIE standards on 
AI had not been changed recently. 
40. The representative of India reported that as notified, it imposed an import ban on live pigs, 
poultry and other poultry products from countries reporting either the H5 or H7 strains of AI.  There 
was no import ban on live pigs, poultry or poultry produc ts from countries reporting AI in wild birds, 
other than poultry.  The ban was imposed on count ries with both Low Pathogenic AI (LPAI) and High 
Pathogenic AI (HPAI), as the LPAI virus might mutate  into HPAI virus.  India conducted a detailed 
risk analysis for the importation of animal and animal products, by a committee of experts, based on the existing global situation of AI, available sci entific literature and the OIE standards.  The 
justification for imposing the ban on live pigs was due to the fact that pigs were known to act as 
mixing vessels for human, animal and other influen za viruses.  The ban on pigs would be reviewed 
after the completion of some technical studies. 
(v) Venezuela's Suspension of Inspection and of Emi ssion of Phyto- and Zoo-sanitary Certificates 
(G/SPS/GEN/983) (STC 290) – Concerns of Colombia 
41. The representative of Colombia presented  G/SPS/GEN/983 addressing the suspension of 
inspections and of the delivery of plant and animal  health certificates for Colombian products into the 
Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela.  Colombia cons idered that the measure s adopted by Venezuela 
were in flagrant violation of the basic provisions of the SPS Agreement, in particular to Article 2, 
Annex C, and Article 13 (Implementation), and would cause severe economic losses to Colombia. 
42. The representative of Venezuela responded that  the information presented in G/SPS/GEN/983 
was not based on official documents or an actual ce rtification refusal, but rather on information from 
the press.  The request for approval related to len dormin should not be considered an SPS matter, but 
as an import licensing issue outside the scope of th e SPS Agreement.  Venezuela suggested that the 
issues raised by Colombia be discussed bilaterally. 
43. The representatives of Ecuador, Bolivia and Cuba  encouraged both countries to try to solve 
their differences bilaterally. 
(vi) US Rule on Importation of Wooden Handicrafts  (G/SPS/N/USA/1921 - STC 284) – Concerns 
of China 
44. The representative of China reiterated con cerns regarding US restrictions on wooden 
handicrafts from China (G/SPS/N/USA/1921).  The notified draft regulation would apply to all wooden handicrafts from China although the risks which had triggered the import ban were only 
associated with wooden handicrafts with a diameter  over one centimetre.  China hoped that the United 
States would limit the scope of the measure to produc ts presenting real risks.  According to the draft 
regulation, all wooden handicrafts from China would be subject to fumigation or heat treatment and 
require plant quarantine certificates, which would unnecessarily raise costs for the Chinese handicraft 
industry and plant quarantine authorities.  China ha d made these points in its written comments on the 
US notification and invited the United States to ta ke the comments into account when finalizing the 
regulation.  To date, China had received no repl y from the United States.  China was willing to 
continue cooperating and hoped that the United Stat es would take concrete steps to address China's 
concern. 
45. The representative of the United States explaine d that a proposed rule to reauthorize the 
importation of wooden handicrafts fo rm China subject to specific re quirements had been published in 
April 2009 and notified as G/SPS/N/USA/1921.  The pr oposal would allow trade in a broad range of 
handicrafts to resume while continuing to protect the United States against the introduction of plant  G/SPS/R/58 
 Page 11 
 
 
  pests such as wood boring beetles.  The comment period on this notification had closed on 8 June 
2009, and the United States had received eight comments, including comments from China.  The USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Servi ce would promulgate an additional proposed rule 
that would address China's concerns, and subseque ntly a final rule, after evaluation of public 
comments. 
(c) Consideration of Specific Notifications Received 
(i) Ukraine Import Measures on Animals and An imal Products (G/SPS/N/UKR/3/Rev.2 and 
Add.1 - STC 288 ) – Concerns of the European Union 
46. The representative of the European Union hi ghlighted the importance of the notification 
circulated on 7 January 2010, that Ukraine was withdrawing earlier notified measures on animals and 
animal products due to BSE and other prion in fections.  The European Union welcomed the 
withdrawal of the measure, which would have implied the sudden imposition of an inspection 
requirement for all export establishments.  The draf t measure had covered a wide range of animals 
and animal products and would have caused unnecessar y trade disruptions.  Along with other trading 
partners, the European Union had expressed c oncerns on these draft measures in the SPS Committee 
and had also held bilateral discussions with Ukrain e.  The European Union considered this a good 
example of the importance of the transparency obligations and the SPS notification system.  The European Union was willing to continue working clo sely with Ukraine on further developments of its 
import system, which should continue operating in a tr ansparent manner with a view to avoiding trade 
disruptions. 
47. The representatives of Canada and Norway also  appreciated the decision to withdraw the 
notified measure and thanked the Ukraine for its r esponsiveness.  Canada had also raised concerns 
about this matter and submitted de tailed written comments.  This was a good example of an effective 
use of the WTO notification process to avoid trade problems.   
48. The representative of Ukraine explained that in spections were part of normal procedures.  
Ukraine had taken into account the concerns expr essed at the previous SPS Committee meeting and 
bilaterally.  It was important to ensure that measures were based on science and on OIE standards.  
Ukraine would continue to coopera te with its trading partners. 
(ii) Canada's Proposed MRL for 1-Methylcycloprope ne in Bananas (G/SPS/N/CAN/413 and 
Corr.1) – Concerns of Ecuador 
49. The representative of Ecuador expressed c oncerns with Canada's notification of 
22 December 2009 regarding 1-methylcyclopropene in or on bananas.  This product was used to 
prevent premature ripening of fruit due to ethylene exposure.  This product was not registered with 
Ecuador's agricultural quality assurance agency AGROCALIDAD and Codex had not established an 
MRL for it.  Consultations with the private sector  had shown that exporting companies affiliated with 
the banana exporters' association of Ecuador did not use this pro duct.  Nevertheless, Ecuador was 
concerned about the notified regulation, which pr oposed an extremely low MRL and could thus 
become a trade barrier.  Therefore, Ecuador request ed an explanation of the scientific basis for the 
proposed MRL. 
50. The representatives of Colombia and Costa Ri ca shared Ecuador's concern, while the 
representative of Venezuela expressed a systemic interest in the issue. 
51. The representative of Canada acknowledged Ec uador's concern and noted that Canada 
followed the transparency obligations to avoid un necessary barriers to trade.  The comment period on 
the notification had ended on 2 March 2010, and Canada  had not received any comments, nor any 
requests for an extension of the deadline for comments.  If Canada received a request for such an 
extension from Ecuador, the deadline would be extended. G/SPS/R/58 
Page 12  
 
  (d) Information on Resolution of Issues 
(i) EU Measures Related to Wood Packaging Ma terial (STC 81) – Information from Canada 
52. The representative of Canada announced the resolution of its concerns regarding EU 
phytosanitary requirements for non-manufactured  solid wood packaging, first raised in 
November 2000.  At the time, Canada and others ha d been working on an international standard for 
wood packaging material.  In 2002, the IPPC had adopted ISPM 15 for the regulation of wood 
packaging material in international trade.  Canada  supported the IPPC standard, and now agreed that 
there was no substantial difference between ISPM 15 and the EU phytosanitary requirement for wood 
packaging.  Canada had no objection to the EU le gislation for solid wood packaging and wished to 
close this trade concern. 
53. The representative of the European Union recalled that this issue had b een raised by several 
Members, who had requested a delay in the entry in to force of the measure.  The European Union 
considered that the resolution of this issue was also  been a success in terms of the provision of special 
and differential treatment. 
(ii) Mexico's Restrictions on Importation of Ri ce (STC 270) – Information from Mexico 
54. The representative of Mexico indicated that on 21 January 2010 Mexico had removed the 
absolute restrictions on rice imports due to the Khapra  beetle and replaced it with partial restrictions.  
This had been notified as G/SPS/N/MEX/184/Add.1.  Pakistan and other countries that complied with 
the new phytosanitary requirements shoul d be able to export rice to Mexico. 
55. The representative of Pakistan was grateful to Mexico for r esolving the issue and hoped that 
this would lead to an increase in economic c ooperation and trade between the two countries. 
IV. OPERATION OF TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS 
56. The Chairperson noted that the most recent list of National Notification Authorities was 
contained in SPS/NNA/15; the most recent list of National Enquiry Points in SPS/ENQ/25.  The 
Chairperson reminded the Committee that the pa per copies of these lists were updated only once 
every year, but that the electronic lists were c onstantly updated and available through the SPS 
Information Management System (IMS).  The Chairp erson asked Members to provide the most recent 
contact information to the Secretariat so that it could be included in the IMS.   
57. The Chairperson indicated that notifications received since the last meeting of the SPS 
Committee were summarized on a monthly basis in G/SPS/GEN/977, G/SPS/GEN/986, G/SPS/GEN/990, G/SPS/GEN/993 and G/SPS/GEN/1005.  A list of all SPS documents issued in 2009 by Members, Observers and the Secretariat was contained in G/SPS/GEN/991.  The Secretariat 
had also updated the list of Members that had not yet identified an SPS National Notification 
Authority and/or Enquiry Point in G/SPS/GEN/27/Rev.20. 
58. The Secretariat reminded the Committee that it w as organizing a workshop on transparency to 
be held on Monday, 18 October 2010, immediatel y preceding the SPS Committee meetings scheduled 
for that week.  All Members, Observers and obser ver organizations were welcome to attend this 
workshop.  The WTO would be able to fund the participation of about 50 officials from Enquiry 
Points or National Notification Authorities from de veloping countries and LDCs.  Further details on 
eligibility, funding and the application forms c ould be found in document G/SPS/GEN/997.  This 
Secretariat document provided detailed informatio n on all WTO SPS technical assistance activities 
scheduled for 2010.  The deadline for applications  for funding to participate in the workshop on 
transparency was 9 July 2010.  G/SPS/R/58 
 Page 13 
 
 
  59. The Secretariat would circulate a draft programme for the workshop for consideration by the 
Committee at its June meeting.  The programme w as likely to include introductory sessions on (i) the 
transparency provisions of the SPS Agreement, (ii) statistics and analysis on the level of implementation of transparency obligations, and (iii ) useful tools which were readily available for 
implementing the transparency provisions and for benefiting from them.  The workshop would also 
feature some practical demonstration sessions on the SPS Information Management System, which 
was important in light of the large number of document s and notifications in circulation.  In addition, 
break-out sessions would focus on specific themes or questions.  The Secretariat welcomed suggestions and inputs for the workshop programme from Members.  The Secr etariat would circulate 
a questionnaire to participants in the mentor ing mechanism for Enquiry Points and National 
Notification Authorities.  The experiences with mentoring could also be considered at the 
transparency workshop. 
V. IMPLEMENTATION OF SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT 
60. The Chairperson recalled that at the last me eting, the Committee had adopted the revised 
procedure for responding to requests for special and differential treatment on an ad referendum basis.  
Since no objections had been raised by the agreed deadline, this decision was confirmed and had been 
circulated as G/SPS/33/Rev.1. 
VI. EQUIVALENCE – ARTICLE 4 
(a) Information from Members on their Experiences 
61. No Member provided any information under this agenda item. 
(b) Information from Relevant  Observer Organizations 
62. No observer organizations provided any information. 
VII. PEST- AND DISEASE-FREE AREAS – ARTICLE 6 
(a) Information from Members on their Pest or Disease Status 
63. The representative of Argentina drew atten tion to document G/SPS/GEN/994, which provided 
information on measures taken since November 2009 in  response to the detection of fruit flies in one 
locality of Patagonia.  The control measures had included additional trapping, bait insecticides and 
massive liberation of sterile insects.  In additio n, movement of host fruits had been suspended, 
accompanied by communication and dissemination activities.  These measures were taken in 
accordance with the emergency plan for fruit fl y-free areas approved by SENASA in 2006.  As a 
result of the measures, the area regained its fruit fly-free status in November 2009.  
64. The representative of Madagasca r informed the Committee that Madagascar had notified an 
outbreak of the bee disease varroasis to the OIE.  Th e disease had been observed and identified in one 
of the regions of the high plateau and measures had been taken.  In addition, surveillance in other 
honey-producing areas had been strengthened. 
(b) Information from Members on their Experiences in Recognition of Pest- or Disease-free 
Areas 
65. No Members provided any information under this agenda item. G/SPS/R/58 
Page 14  
 
  (c) Information from Relevant  Observer Organizations 
66. The representative of the IPPC reminded the Committee of changes to the phytosanitary 
portal, which now contained a link for providing updates about pest-free areas that had been declared 
or recognized.  Authorized users, i.e. IPPC cont act points and IPP editors, can access the link in their 
country dashboard after logging in.  The link is f ound under optional reporting.  General users of the 
IPPC site can perform an advanced search and select , in the "Type of information" dialogue box, the 
pest-free areas link under optional reporting to view  the pest-free areas reported by contracting 
parties. 
67. The representative of the OIE indicated that  the scientific commission of the OIE had 
elaborated its annual lists of countries free of th e four diseases for which the OIE granted official 
recognition.  Currently the lists were in the cons ultation phase; they would be presented for adoption 
at the OIE General Session in May.  There was a f ast-track procedure for co untries to recover disease-
free status after an outbreak:  Swaziland had recove red  its FMD-free status without vaccination right 
after the meeting of the scientific commission.  In formation on this fast-track procedure and updated 
country disease status was available on the OIE website. 
VIII.  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND COOPERATION 
(a) Information from the Secretariat 
(i) WTO SPS Activities 
68. The Secretariat introduced two documents, the first on upcoming technical assistance 
activities and the second summarizing technical assistance provided from 1994 to 2009.  Document G/SPS/GEN/997 provided an overview of technical assi stance activities planned for 2010, reflecting a 
new systematic approach aimed at facilitating the planning and organization of such activities.  The 
document provided detailed information on (i) e-Trai ning courses on the SPS Agreement, (ii) how to 
request national SPS seminars, (iii) the transparency  workshop to be held in October immediately 
preceding the SPS Committee meeting, (iv) regional work shops to be held for the regions of Asia and 
Pacific; Latin America; and Central and Eastern Eu rope, Central Asia and the Caucasus, and (v) an 
advanced course on the SPS Agreement (previously called the "specialized" course).  The document 
contained a chronological table and fact files for ea ch activity with the relevant dates, venues, pre-
requisites and eligibility criteria.  The deadline fo r applications for the transparency workshop, the 
regional workshops and the advanced course was 9 July 2010; for regional workshops and the 
advanced course the successful completion of an e-Training course was a pre-requisite.  A flyer summarized this information so delegates could easily transmit it to colleagues in their capitals. 
69. Document G/SPS/GEN/521/Rev.5 provided an overview of SPS technical assistance 
activities from 1994 to 2009.  In 2009, the Secretariat had organized or participated in 21 technical 
assistance activities, including 13 national seminars , five sub-regional workshops, one specialized 
course, and two PAN-SPSO conferences. 
70. In addition, the Secretariat indicated that it was updating the inter-active CD-ROM, designed 
to help officials in developing countries become familiar with the SPS Agreement.  The Secretariat 
welcomed suggestions from delegations on issues to cover in this update and training materials to be 
included.  The Secretariat also announced that it would circulate a document it had received from the 
Agency for International Trade, Information and Cooperation (AITIC), an organization that assisted 
less advantaged countries to more effectively participate in the WTO (G/SPS/GEN/1009).  G/SPS/R/58 
 Page 15 
 
 
  (ii) Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) 
71. The Secretariat provided an update of the opera tion of the Standards and Trade Development 
Facility (G/SPS/GEN/1002).  As part of its coordi nation and information dissemination activities, the 
STDF had organized a workshop on the use of economi c analysis in SPS decision making.  This type 
of analysis had so far found only limited application due to a lack of data and knowledge, but could be 
useful as a tool to support decision-making pro cesses, enhance transparency and help to convince 
policy and decision-makers of the need to inv est in SPS capacity building by demonstrating the 
financial benefits and cost-savings.  More info rmation about the event, including presentations, 
podcasts, a two-page briefing note on the conclusi ons of the workshop, as well as a background report 
entitled "Guidelines on the Use of Economic Anal ysis", were available on the STDF website 
(http://www.standardsfacility.org ).  Briefing notes were also available on SPS risks and climate 
change, and on fruit fly control in West Africa, as well as a new STDF newsletter.  In June 2009, the 
SPS Committee had seen the STDF film, which had been widely distributed and used in training activities.  The film could be downloaded from the STDF website and from YouTube; hard copies 
could be requested from the Secretariat.  In add ition, an eight-minute version of the film and an 
institutional clip were also available to be dow nloaded, plus links to other films and videos. 
72. In December 2009, the STDF Working Group and Policy Committee had adopted a new 
Operating Plan for 2010 and 2011, available on the STDF website.  Two thematic events were 
planned in 2010.  A technical working meeting on SPS indicators, organized in cooperation with the 
OECD, would be held on 1 July immediately preceding the meeting of the Working Group on 2 July.  Delegates with expertise in this area who were intere sted in participating were invited to contact the 
STDF secretariat before 30 April.  The second even t, a workshop on public-private partnerships in 
SPS capacity building, was planned for later in the y ear.  In the second half of 2010, an STDF pilot 
project would test various approaches towards economic analysis in at least two developing countries.  
The STDF was planning to continue its collaboratio n and coordination with Aid for Trade and with 
the Enhanced Integrated Framework, and to par ticipate in further activities and initiatives at global 
and regional levels.  The STDF woul d continue its work with partne rs in Africa and a scoping study 
on national SPS coordination mechanisms was curre ntly underway.  In December 2009, the STDF 
Working Group had approved one project preparation grant and four projects. The next deadline for funding applications was 9 April 2010. 
73. The representative of Paraguay thanked the STDF for the transfer of the rights to the SPS 
portal created by STDF project 19.  Now the project had finally been concluded. 
(b) Information from Members 
74. The representative of the Philippines provided information on the second phase of a trade-
related technical assistance project being implemen ted in the agriculture and fisheries sectors over 
four years, with a cost of 7.5 million euros, jointl y funded by the European Union and the Philippines.  
More details were available in document G/SPS/GEN/995. 
75. The representative of the European Union indicated  that the project was very successful.  It 
had contributed to resolving and avoiding trade disruptions in important export sectors in the 
Philippines. 
76. The representative of Canada announced that a document with information on technical 
assistance provided in 2007 would be circulated shortly (G/SPS/GEN/1008).  Canada had supported 
29 projects representing over 48 million Canadian dollars, including the supply of information, 
training and soft infrastructure to over 24 countries.  One contribution of interest consisted of 
CAN$11 million to the Global Programme for Highly Pathenogenic Avian Influenza (HPAI) Control 
and Eradication.  Canada planned to provide an update on technical assistance provided in 2009 at the 
next meeting of the Committee. G/SPS/R/58 
Page 16  
 
  77. The representative of Saudi Arabia thanked Ne w Zealand and all othe rs who had provided 
assistance with the new National Notificati on Authority and Enquiry Point system. 
78. The representative of Malawi expressed appreci ation for the assistance received from donors.  
He enquired about Canada's plans for the future ;  Malawi still required assistance because of the 
emergence of pests and diseases of concern.  The representative of Canada pr omised to provide the 
relevant information directly to  the representative of Malawi. 
79. The representative of Kenya reported on capacity  development initiatives in Kenya, thanking 
donors that were active in the horticulture sector .  A project funded by the Netherlands under the 
World Summit for Sustainable Development (WSSD) partnership on market access had improved the 
effectiveness of phytosanitary checks,  as a result of problems related to exports of cut flowers.  It had 
contributed by developing capacity for quick pest de tection, and by designing systems for consistency 
in export certification.  The project had led to th e development of early warning systems, had led 
private sector players to share information on sc outing, and made it necessary for the authorities to 
strengthen surveillance and build pest databases.  A project funded by the European Union to develop 
hard and soft infrastructure in food safety had involve d building capacity for chemical analysis to help 
monitor compliance with MRLs and maximum levels of  toxins and contaminants,  quick detection of 
economically important pests, human resource cap acity and institutional development, revision of 
systems for good laboratory practices, surveillance systems for pests and certain food contaminants, 
and residue monitoring plans.  These projects ha d contributed to enhancing importing country 
confidence in Kenya's systems.  Kenya planned to  use these resources to continue supplying high 
quality horticultural products, partic ularly to the European Union. 
(c) Information from Observers 
80. The representative of Codex announced that  a comprehensive document on technical 
assistance would be available for the next meeting of the Committee.  She highlighted a few activities 
that had taken place since the last meeting, includi ng a regional workshop for the Near East funded by 
the Codex trust fund.  Subregional workshops had been  held in Tajikistan in February together with 
WHO Europe, in Montenegro in May also with WHO Europe, and in Moldova organized by FAO 
Europe.  A workshop on risk assessment would be he ld in conjunction with the next meeting of the 
Contaminants Committee in Turkey. 
81. The representative of the IPPC recalled that he had already reported on three STDF projects 
earlier in the meeting.  IPPC was working with  a group of Russian-speaking experts to become 
facilitators for technical assistance in the region,  including for application of the phytosanitary 
capacity evaluation tool.  A new strategic framework  for building phytosanitary capacity covered the 
strategic areas of:  national phytosanitary planning and management, participation in standard setting 
and implementation, communication and coordination, pest inform ation, resource mobilization, 
advocacy, and monitoring and evaluation.  It co mprised a concept of what phytosanitary capacity 
building was about; logical frameworks, including indicators; and a work plan covering six years, 
detailing activities in the strategic areas where partne rs could contribute to capacity building.  This 
document was available on the IPPC website (https://www.ippc.int/index.php?id=11 10702&tx_publicati on_pi1[showUid]=217665
). 
82. The representative of the OIE indicated that ther e had been an expert meeting to revise the 
Tool for the Evaluation of Performance of Veterinary  Services (PVS), which would be provided to the 
Committee after endorsement by the OIE General Sessi on in May.  Seminars had been held for new 
delegates and for focal points, with the support of the European Union and others.  More information 
was available from regional and subregional OIE representatives.  G/SPS/R/58 
 Page 17 
 
 
  83. The representative of the ITC reported that th e Bangladesh quality s upport programme had 
been completed in December 2009.  This programme had trained local trainers who customized ITC's 
standard SPS training materials.  The ITC had co mpleted STDF project 69 to improve capacity for 
ensuring the quality and safety of Yemeni seafood pr oducts.  ITC was also engaged in a multiagency 
project on non-tariff measures, in cooperation with UNCTAD, to collect data on these measures.  
Another project on trade for sustainable developm ent was building a web-based tool on voluntary 
sustainability standards.  More information on these and other projects is contained in document 
G/SPS/GEN/1006. 
84. The representative of OIRSA indicated that  OIRSA would develop new phytosanitary 
programmes in support of certain agricultural pr oduction chains.  Information on other specific 
projects and technical assistance activities was provided in document G/SPS/GEN/1007. 
85. The representative of IICA provided informati on on three SPS-related technical assistance 
activities, described in more detail in document G/SPS/GEN/1003.  STDF project 108 devised a methodology for developing phytosanitary hazard pr ofiles at the border post level.  A second project, 
in cooperation with USDA, had focused on effective participation in certain Codex Committees.  It 
had established a competitive fund, which had financed  13 countries' participati on in Codex meetings.  
In addition, IICA had elaborated manuals of good practices for partic ipation in WTO, Codex, OIE and 
IPPC.  These manuals were available on the IIC A website and would be provided to the WTO 
Secretariat for inclusion on the training CD-Rom. 
86. The representative of the World Bank explained that many World Bank activities dealt with 
SPS issues in an ancillary manner.  The World Bank had been involved in the STDF programme on 
fruit fly control in West Africa.  Regarding animal  health, in the context of the HPAI pandemic the 
World Bank had made available US$500 million to impr ove veterinary services, laboratory capacities, 
and human public service infrastructure.  Following  the influenza A/H1N1 outbreak in Mexico, the 
World Bank had made funds availabl e to help Mexico manage this outbreak.  Following the influenza 
A/H1N1 pandemic, a joint OIE, FAO and World Bank project had developed a biosecurity document 
which would soon be available for Members' use.  On food safety, there were agricultural projects in 
Central Asia which had an important safety com ponent.  One of the biggest agribusiness projects in 
China also had an important food safety component.  Following the food crisis, at the last G8 meeting donors had pledged US$20 billion for food security.  No w a global agriculture and food security trust 
fund was being set up at the World Bank to address food security issues.  He encouraged developing 
countries to monitor this fund and use its resources.   
IX. REVIEW OF THE OPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SPS 
AGREEMENT 
(a) Issues Arising from the Second Review 
(i) Use of Ad Hoc Consultations 
87. The Secretariat recalled that as part of th e Second Review of the operation of the SPS 
Agreement, the Committee had encouraged Member s to "make use of the possibility for ad hoc 
consultations".  Argentina and the United States ha d submitted proposals in 2008, and a joint proposal 
in early 2009.  This joint proposal had been the b asis for the first version of the Secretariat document 
G/SPS/W/243, circulated in September 2009.  The current revision took on board comments received 
at the October 2009 meeting and subsequently  (G/SPS/W/243/Rev.1).  Some Members were 
concerned about how this proposed procedure was li nked to a similar procedure to resolve concerns 
related to non-tariff measures, sometimes called th e horizontal mechanism, being discussed in the 
NAMA negotiations.  In the NAMA context, a new proposal (TN/MA/W/106/Rev.1) and comments provided by the United States (Job/MA/4) had been discussed in early February 2010.  A number of G/SPS/R/58 
Page 18  
 
  open issues remained, including the question wh ether SPS measures would be covered by the 
proposed NAMA mechanism.  NAMA meetings were taking place during the same week as the SPS Committee meeting, including discussi ons on the proposed mechanism. 
88. Regarding the revised document (G/SPS/W/243/Rev. 1), the Secretariat explained that Brazil 
(G/SPS/W/248) and Mexico (G/SPS/GEN/989) had provided documents commenting on the 
Secretariat draft; in addition Mexico had provided comments on Brazil's document 
(G/SPS/GEN/988).  Six Members had provided comments  in writing.  Some included suggestions to 
improve the drafting, others suggested more fundame ntal changes.  In some instances comments went 
in opposite directions, so that it had been impossible to reflect them all. 
89. The representative of Brazil highlighted some of the comments contained in document 
G/SPS/W/248.  Brazil believed that it was important that a first meeting be held among the parties to 
the ad hoc consultations.  Consultations should not be  the first option to resolve a trade concern, but 
used to help advance difficult i ssues.  Brazil had suggested a 180 da y timeframe for the conclusion of 
the consultations.  Brazil had also suggested that the request for consultations and the response should 
be circulated to the SPS Committee.  These changes ha d not been reflected in the revised Secretariat 
document and Brazil suggested including all suggestions in square brackets. 
90. The representative of India stressed the need for a meaningful procedure to resolve trade 
concerns, such as the horizontal mechanism being ne gotiated in the NAMA context, which would also 
be relevant for SPS measures.  This proposed mech anism had the support of more than 100 Members, 
and was at a mature stage of negotiations.  The mechanism would strengthen the relevant committees, 
including the SPS Committee, and in India's view it  would not be appropriate to develop a parallel 
procedure in the SPS Committee.  The value additio n of the proposed committee-first approach was 
unclear; one meeting of the SPS Committee was unlikel y to lead to a solution.  In addition the 
proposed NAMA mechanism included other aspects such as third party rights. 
91. The representative of Argentina ag reed with India about the need for an efficient flexible way 
to resolve trade concerns, whether in the NAMA or in the SPS context.  Argentina was one of the co-
sponsors of the horizontal mechanism in the NAM A negotiations, which had been discussed for a 
long time and was outside the reach of the SPS Committee.  It was not for the SPS Committee to decide whether the horizontal mechanism should a pply to SPS measures or to agricultural products.  
On the other hand, Article 12 was part of the SPS Agreement, so the SPS Committee had a mandate in 
this regard and Argentina did not understand the reluctance of some Members to discuss the 
Secretariat document.  While Argentina was ready to  adopt the draft document at the present meeting, 
it was also willing to consider improvements if I ndia and others provided sp ecific suggestions.  It 
seemed all Members shared the same objective, so they should work constructively on improvements. 
92. The representative of Pakistan shared the concer ns raised by Brazil and India.  Even if the 
horizontal mechanism took a long time, any mechan ism adopted needed to be effective.  This 
involved ensuring mandatory steps and timeframes.   After a certain period of time, unresolved 
concerns should be moved from the SPS Committee ag enda to a different mechanism for resolution. 
93. The representative of the European Union suppor ted the views expressed by India.  While the 
Secretariat text was a good draft, many Members preferred to focus on the horizontal mechanism. 
94. The representative of the Philippines noted th at both proposals had the same objective.  
However; the SPS Committee should not pre-empt a decision in the NAMA context, where the horizontal mechanism already had the support of mo re than 100 Members.  The SPS Committee could 
revisit the proposal once it had a clear pictur e of the NAMA outcome, to ensure coherence.  G/SPS/R/58 
 Page 19 
 
 
  95. The representative of Chile recalled that the discussions in the SPS Committee had started 
before the NAMA discussions on the horizontal mech anism; on the basis of Article 12.2 of the SPS 
Agreement.  Any guidelines adopted by the SPS Co mmittee could be revised to ensure coherence 
with a NAMA mechanism once that was adopted. 
96. The representative of Hong Kong, China, indicat ed that the Secretariat proposal could help 
ensure a more effective and efficient application of the SPS Agreement.  At the NAMA meeting that 
morning, the views on whether SPS measures should be included in the NAMA mechanism remained sharply divided.  The horizontal mechanism propo sal had 100 co-sponsors, but some thought it should 
not cover SPS measures because of their technicality.  It was not certain that the NAMA negotiations 
would be able to resolve the divide among Me mbers on the scope.  Sin ce the SPS Committee had 
spent years on this issue, he invited Members to  contribute more constructively, and give more 
favourable consideration to the current proposal.  The Committee could improve the proposal and 
adopt it without waiting for NAMA, as positions on th e horizontal mechanism remained very divided. 
97. The representative of the United States noted that since more than 190 specific trade concerns 
had been raised in the SPS Committee.  Members should focus on the way forward on how to resolve 
these trade concerns.  As with comments from Argentin a that there needed to be some flexibility in 
this mechanism, the United States noted that the guidelines contained in G/SPS/W/243 were drafted to 
provide sufficient flexibility to allow consulting Me mbers to shape their consultations to meet their 
specific needs.  The United Stat es was willing to work with Brazil to find a way forward.  Some 
Members seemed to be reluctant to resolve these trad e concerns on the basis of science, as required in 
this forum, preferring a different forum with less focus on science. 
98. The representative of Japan agreed that Artic le 12.2 was for the SPS Committee to address, 
and the SPS Committee should complete this issue which had come up during the second review.   
99. The Chairperson reminded the Committee that her good offices were available, even to 
resolve this matter related to good offices.  Members would be duplicating efforts in vain if the matter 
were neither resolved in the SPS Committee nor in NAMA.  The Co mmittee had been working on this 
issue since the Second Review had concluded in 2005.  Now in 2010 there was still no result for 
something that had been extensively discussed, although there was a proposal on the table that 
reflected Members' comments.  Regarding the timing issue, she understood that Members were 
willing to find a conclusion.  If a solution were found,  this would justify the Committee's efforts.  She 
invited Members who had different opinions to work together to try to resolv e the issue and asked the 
Secretariat to reflect Members' comments in the draft document.  The Committee would hold informal 
consultations on this issue before the next regular  meeting with the aim of finding a consensus. 
(b) Third Review 
(i) Report on the Informal Meeting 
100. The Chairperson reported that at the inform al meeting of the SPS Committee on the Review 
of the Operation and Implementation of the SPS Ag reement, held on 16 March 2010, Members had 
discussed the revised draft report of the Third Review, G/SPS/W/237/Rev.2, and the 
recommendations contained therein. 
101. 
The Chairperson had recalled that, according to  the agreed timetable for the Review, the 
Committee was supposed to have completed the Thir d Review in 2009.  Unfortunately, that had not 
happened at the October 2009 meeting of the Committ ee.  The Chairperson had hence noted that her 
intention was to consider the revised draft report of the Third Review at the informal meeting, with a 
view to its adoption at the regular meeting.   G/SPS/R/58 
Page 20  
 
  102. The Chairperson reported that, during the discu ssions at the 16 March informal meeting on 
the Review, Members had raised no objections to most of the recommendations suggested in the 
revised draft report.  Where Members had suggest ed revisions on which there seemed to be a 
consensus, the Secretariat had offered to prep are a Room Document which showed all of the 
suggested changes to G/SPS/W/237/Rev.2.  The Ch airperson had concluded the informal discussions 
by noting that she would propose that the Committee adopt the revised draft report contained in 
document G/SPS/W/237/Rev.2, subject to the changes re flected in the Room Document, at the regular 
meeting of the Committee. 
(ii) Adoption of the Report  
103. The Secretariat drew attention to a Room Document which presented the proposed changes to 
the draft report on the Review (G/SPS/W/237/Rev.2), as discussed during the informal meeting of 
16 March.  The discussion on the revised draft report of the Review focussed on the recommendations 
contained under each section of the report.  Members had no specific objections to most of the recommendations suggested in the revised draft report,  or to most of the proposed changes which had 
been reflected in the Room Document.  
104. The Committee's discussions focused  mainly on SPS-related private voluntary standards and 
on some proposed changes to the text of the re lated recommendations.  Following the discussions, a 
tentative agreement was reached on a number of fina l modifications to the report.  The report on the 
Third Review of the Operation and Implementa tion of the SPS Agreement was adopted on an ad 
referendum  basis, with the deadline for objections set for 15 April 2010.  No objections to the 
adoption of the report as agreed at the Marc h 2010 meeting were received by that date.   
105. The final adopted text of the Report on the Re view of the Operation and Implementation of 
the SPS Agreement is contained in document G/SPS/53.  
X. MONITORING ON THE USE OF INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS 
(a) New Issues 
106. No new issues were raised under this item. 
(b) Issues Previously Raised  
(i) Draft NAPPO Regional Standard: Guidelines for Regulating the Movement of Ships and 
Cargoes Aboard those Ships fr om Areas Infested with the Asian Gypsy Moth (RSPM N 33) 
107. The representative of Korea stated that Cana da, Korea, and the United States had held 
technical consultations on this issue in Korea in  February 2010.  He hoped that NAPPO countries 
would continue to have discussions with the con cerned countries with a view to minimizing the 
negative trade impact of this regional standard. 
XI. CONCERNS WITH PRIVATE AND COMMERCIAL STANDARDS 
(a) Report on Chairperson's Consultations 
108. The Chairperson informed the Committee that the ad hoc working group on private standards 
had held a fruitful meeting on Tuesday, 16 March.  At the beginning of the meeting, she had recalled 
the conclusions from the last meeting of the working group in October 2009 and provided some 
follow-up information.  First, the working group had d ecided to continue to pursue its work on private 
standards and had, hence, held its fifth meeti ng.  Second, nine Members and one observer had  G/SPS/R/58 
 Page 21 
 
 
  submitted written comments on document G/SPS/W/ 247, entitled Possible Actions for the SPS 
Committee Regarding Private Standards, by the dead line of 16 December 2010.  Third, the Secretariat 
had circulated a revised version of this documen t as G/SPS/W/247/Rev.1 on  5 March 2010.  Fourth, 
the Secretariat had, as requested, revised the titles of  what had been called the "descriptive report" and 
the "analytical report."  On 10 December 2009, the Secretariat had issued an updated and revised 
version of G/SPS/GEN/932 entitled "Effects of SPS- Related Private Standards – Compilation of 
Replies" based on comments from Members.   
109. The Secretariat had explained that some of the 12 recommendations in the Possible Actions 
document had been modified in light of Members'  comments and also regrouped, with those which 
had received most support presented first in the documen t.  In addition, some factual updates had been 
introduced, for example, on the work of th e Codex, the OIE, and the TBT Committee. 
110. The representative of Argentina had introd uced the MERCOSUR document issued in 
December 2009 (G/SPS/W/249), indicating that th e two priority areas for action should be a 
mechanism for considering specific trade concerns  arising from SPS-related private standards and 
guidelines on Article 13 of the SPS Agreement. 
111. Working group members had had a very constructive discussion on the recommendations and 
their accompanying texts and neared consensus on some of the recommendations while divergent 
views had remained on others. 
112. It had been agreed that the Secretariat woul d issue a revised version of G/SPS/W/247/Rev.1 
after further consultations with the working group,  in time for the next meeting of the SPS Committee 
in June.  The Chair expected that the working gr oup would be able to propose some recommendations 
for consideration by the Comm ittee during its June meeting. 
113. At the end of the working group meeting, the Secretariat had also made reference to a 
document received from the Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) circulated as G/SPS/GEN/1004 and 
informed the working group of the GFSI annual m eeting which had taken place in Washington, D.C. 
in February 2010.  The Secretariat had noted th at Members could access a comparison of a number of 
private standards with Codex standards through the GFSI website. 
114. The representative of El Salvador, on behalf of GRULAC members, had expressed their 
concerns with the effects of private standards on th e exports of developing countries. Article 2 of the 
SPS Agreement established the right to implement measures for the protection of human, animal, 
plant life or health but such measures needed to  be based on science and not on commercial reasons.  
As stipulated in Article 13, Members needed to formulate and implement positive measures and 
mechanisms in support of the observance of th e provisions of the SPS Agreement by other than 
central government bodies and take reasonable me asures to ensure that non-governmental entities 
within their territories complied with the relevant provisions of the SPS Agreement.  Private standards 
were deviating from international standards set by th e international standard-setting bodies referenced 
in the SPS Agreement.  The Committe e needed to do more work to id entify priority actions to reduce 
the negative effects of private standards and GRUL AC was ready to pursue the discussions using as a 
basis the Secretariat document in G/SPS/W/247/Rev.1.   
115. The representative of Kenya, referring to pa ragraph 8 of the submission by MERCOSUR, 
suggested that the Committee work on clarifying Article 13 of the SPS Agreement.  The process of 
certification for private standards was making it difficult for government agencies to carry out inspections.  Some developing countries, which were  already having difficulties meeting international 
standards, were now having even more difficulties in light of private standards.  G/SPS/R/58 
Page 22  
 
  XII. REQUESTS FOR OBSERVER STATUS 
(a) Ad hoc observers 
116. The Committee agreed to invite all of the ad  hoc observers to participate in the next 
Committee meeting, including the informal meeting on ad hoc consultations. 
(b) New requests 
117. The Chairperson noted that new requests for observer status had been received from the 
Community of Sahel-Saharan States (CEN-SAD),  the Economic Community for West African States 
(ECOWAS), and  the Southern African Development Community (SADC).  Background information 
on these three organizations could be found in doc uments G/SPS/GEN/121/Add. 5, Add. 4, and 
Add.6, respectively. 
118. The Secretariat explained that these requests were submitted in the context of the PAN-SPSO 
technical assistance project to e nhance the participation of Afri can countries in the SPS Committee, 
through the active engagement of the regional secretariats.  The SPS Committee could consider 
granting these organizations ad hoc observer stat us, as had been done for IICA and OIRSA. 
119. The representative of Kenya stated that th e regional economic communities in Africa had 
increased activities in the SPS area, requiring them  to follow closely developments in the SPS 
Committee.  Therefore, Kenya supported a favor able consideration of their requests.  The 
representative of Zambia also supported granting them observer status. 
120. The representative of Namibia informed the Co mmittee that Namibia had recently established 
a national SPS committee and supported the granting of observer status to SADC, which would 
reinforce effective cooperation in the region. 
121. The representative of Malawi said that there was a sizable amount of trade between SADC 
members and that some SPS issues could be adequately addressed first at SADC and then at the SPS Committee. 
122. The representative of Zimbabwe supported the applications of ECOWAS and SADC, which 
was working towards the harmonization of SPS meas ures at the regional level and could reflect 
developments in the Committee in the region. 
123. The representatives of Madagascar and Sout h Africa also supported SADC's request. 
124. The representative of the European Union said th at the European Union had been involved in 
the PAN-SPSO project and was supportive of granting observer status to these organizations in light 
of their own experience of how regional integration fostered trade.  The European Union was working 
actively with regional economic communities to promote intra-regional trade on the basis of 
international standards. 
125. The Committee agreed to grant ad hoc observe r status to CEN-SAD, ECOWAS, and SADC 
and invited them to participate in the next meeting of the Committee. 
(c) Outstanding requests 
126. There was no change in the position of Members with respect to the pending requests for 
observer status from the Asian and Pacific Coconut Community (APCC), Convention on Biological 
Diversity (CBD), International Vine and Wi ne Office (OIV) and the Gulf Customs Council 
Standardization Organization (GSO).  The Committee  decided to revert to these outstanding requests 
at the next regular meeting.  G/SPS/R/58 
 Page 23 
 
 
  XIII.  ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON 
127. The Chairperson explained that the Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods had been 
carrying out informal consultations on a slate of  names for appointment as 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 (containe d in document WT/L/31).  However, these 
consultations had not been concluded.  Therefore,  the Committee agreed to postpone the election of 
its Chairperson to the next Committee meeting in June.  
XIV.  OTHER BUSINESS 
128. No issues were raised under "other business". 
XV. DATE AND AGENDA OF NEXT MEETING 
129. The Chairperson recalled that the next meeti ng of the Committee was tentatively scheduled 
for  29-30 June .  An informal meeting on ad hoc consultations would be scheduled for 28 June .   
130. The Secretariat added that there would be an STDF technical working group meeting on SPS 
indicators on 1 July and the STDF meeting on 2 July .  The Codex Alimentarius Commission would be 
meeting in Geneva the following week.  
131. The Committee agreed on the following tent ative agenda for its next meeting: 
1. Adoption of the agenda 
2. Election of Chairperson 
3. Information on relevant activities 
(a) Information from Members 
(b) Information from Observer organizations 
4. 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.10 
5. Operation of transparency provisions 
6. Implementation of special and differential treatment 
7. Equivalence – Article 4 
(a) Information from Members on their experiences 
(b) Information from relevant  observer organizations 
8. Pest- and Disease-free areas – Article 6 
(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/58 
Page 24  
 
  9. Technical assistance and cooperation 
(a) Information from the Secretariat 
(b) Information from Members 
(c) Information from observers 
10. 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 
11. Monitoring of the use of international standards 
(a) New issues 
(b) Issues previously raised 
(c) Adoption of annual report 
12. Concerns with private and commercial standards 
(a) Report on Chair's consultations 
13. Observers – Request for observer status 
14. Other business 
15. Date and agenda of next meeting 
132. Members were asked to take note of the following deadlines: 
(i) For submitting any objections to the ad re ferendum decision to adopt The Report of 
the Third Review of the Operation and Implementation of the SPS Agreement: Thursday, 15 April
; 
(ii)  For submitting comments on the proposed recommended procedure for ad 
consultations: Thursday, 15 April ; 
(iii) For submitting suggestions on the transparency workshop: Thursday, 15 April ; 
(iv) For identifying new issues for considerati on under the monitoring procedure AND for 
requesting that items be put on the agenda: Thursday, 17 June ;  and 
(v) For the distribution of the airgram and th e circulation of documents for discussion 
during the June meeting:  Friday, 18 June . 
__________