RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SPS/R/54 
28 April 2009 
 (09-2016) 
Committee on Sanitary a nd Phytosanitary Measures  
  
 
SUMMARY OF THE MEETING OF 25-26 FEBRUARY 2009 
 
Note by the Secretariat
1 
 
Table of contents 
 
Page  
I. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA.............................................................................................3  
II. ACTIVITIES OF MEMBERS.................................................................................................3  
III. SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS ...........................................................................................4  
(a) New Issues ..................................................................................................................... .............4  
(b) Issues previous ly raised ....................................................................................................... .......5  
(c) Consideration of Specific Notifications Received ......................................................................9  
(d) Information on Resolution of Issues in G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.9 ..............................................10  
IV. OPERATION OF TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS........................................................10  
V. IMPLEMENTATION OF SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT ................12  
(a) Chairman's Report on Informal Meeting ..................................................................................12  
(b) Review of the Operation of S&D Transp arency Procedure (G/SPS/W/224/Rev.2).................12  
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 Experiences.....................................................................15  
(c) Information from Relevant  Observer Organizations ................................................................15  
VIII.  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND COOPERATION .......................................................15  
(a) Information from the Secretariat............................................................................................... 15 
(b) Information from Members....................................................................................................... 17 
(c) Information from Observers ..................................................................................................... 18 
IX. REVIEW OF THE OPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SPS 
AGREEMENT ...................................................................................................................... ..19 
                                                      
 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/54 
Page 2  
 
  (a)
 Report of the Informal Meeting ................................................................................................1 9 
(b) Issues Arising from the Second Review ...................................................................................21  
(c) Third Review (G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1) ...................................................................................22  
X. MONITORING ON THE USE OF  INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS...........................23  
(a) New Issues ..................................................................................................................... ...........23  
(b) Issues Previous ly Raised....................................................................................................... ....23  
XI. CONCERNS WITH PRIVATE AN D COMMERCIAL STANDARDS............................25  
(a) Report on Chairman's Consultations.........................................................................................25  
XII. MATTERS OF INTEREST ARISING FROM THE WORK OF OBSERVER 
ORGANIZATIONS ................................................................................................................29  
XIII.  REQUESTS FOR OBSERVER STATUS ............................................................................31  
XIV.  ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON ........................................................................................31  
XV. OTHER BUSINESS................................................................................................................3 1 
XVI.  DATE AND AGENDA FOR NEXT MEETING..................................................................31  
  G/SPS/R/54 
 Page 3 
 
 
  I. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 
1. The Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (the "Committee") held its forty-
third regular meeting on 25-26 February 2009.  Th e proposed agenda for the meeting was adopted 
with amendments (WTO/AIR/3319). 
II. ACTIVITIES OF MEMBERS 
2. The representative of Australia provided informa tion on an independent review of Australia's 
quarantine and biosecurity arrangements.  A report of the review was released by the Australian 
Government on 18 December 2008.  The review had found that the Australian biosecurity system was 
sound and had made recommendations aimed at im proving the system to deal with increasing 
biosecurity risks.  The Government of Austra lia agreed in principle with the 84 recommended 
reforms.  The review was the first of its kind in over a decade and recommends the biggest reforms to 
Australia’s biosecurity system in more than a century.  Key recommendations included a new 
authority bringing together the ma jor functions of Biosecurity Australia, the Australian Quarantine 
and Inspection Service and parts of the Department  of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry;  a new 
biosecurity commission to assess the biosecurity risk s of imports, with greater emphasis on risks to 
human health and the environment;  new biosecurity legislation to replace the Quarantine Act of 
1908;  appointment of an Inspector-General of Bios ecurity with broad powers to audit and investigate 
the authority’s work;  a new council of experts to advise the Government;  and better coordination of 
states, territories, industry and the Commonwealth to  monitor biosecurity risks before and after goods 
enter the country.  The representa tive of Australia advised that th e independent panel undertaking the 
review had consulted widely, including meeting with the permanent representatives of a number of 
Members of the WTO and many of their relevant ag encies and ministries.  Australia thanked relevant 
WTO Members for time and expertise provided to th e panel and preparation of submissions to the 
review.  Implementing the proposed reforms would take some time and w ould be subject to budget 
considerations.  Existing systems would continue to  operate until the new arrangements were in place. 
3. The representative of the Europ ean Communities provided information on an agreement with 
Switzerland on trade in agricultural products.  Live  animals and animal products could now be freely 
circulated across 27 EC member States and Switzerla nd.  Swiss and EC legislation, although similar, 
remained different, but had been recognized as equi valent.  More informatio n and links to relevant 
legislation are contained in document G/SPS/GEN/896. 
4. The representative of Switzerland emphasized that this was an important step forward in an 
equivalence process that had started more than ten years ago.  Mutual trust had been gained, which 
allowed eliminating trade barriers by removing th e partial duplication of measures for imports 
entering Switzerland through the European Communiti es.  There were no changes for imports of the 
relevant products into Switzerland since the requirements had been previously adapted. 
5. The representative of the United States provided information on a US Food and Drug 
Administration (FDA) recall of peanut-containing pro ducts.  In December 2008, an investigation of a 
Salmonella Thyphimurium  outbreak in the United States found that peanut butter and peanut paste 
produced by the Peanut Corporation of America (P CA) at its Blakely, Georgia processing plant were 
sources of the outbreak.  The facility was not current ly operating.  PCA had initiated voluntary recalls 
of peanut butter and peanut paste.  PCA had di stributed potentially contaminated products to more 
than 300 consignee firms for use as an ingredient in  hundreds of different products such as cookies, 
crackers, cereal, candy and ice cream.  Many comp anies that had received products and ingredients 
manufactured by PCA had also conducted voluntary r ecalls.  FDA had created a searchable database 
for these products that could be found at http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scrip ts/peanutbutterrecall/index.cfm
.  FDA was conducting a criminal 
investigation and had been in contact with th e International Food Safety Authorities Network G/SPS/R/54 
Page 4  
 
  (INFOSAN) of the World Health Organization to aler t the international community of this outbreak.  
FDA had also alerted 52 countries and territories wh ere recalled products may have been shipped.  
The United States encouraged all trading partners to remain in close communication with FDA during 
this outbreak.  FDA was continuing to identify pro ducts that may contain recalled peanuts or peanut 
products to facilitate their removal from the marketplace. 
6. The representative of Brazil provided informati on on the expansion of  the National Residue 
Control Plan.  Brazil had notified Members of it s National Plan for the Control of Residues and 
Contaminants in products of plant origin, wh ich consolidated past programmes in the area 
(G/SPS/N/BRA/514).  The results would be published a nnually in Brazil's official gazette.  The plan's 
main objectives were to improve the safety and qualit y of plants, their products and by-products sold 
on both local and international markets;  to ve rify the recommended safe use of pesticides in 
accordance with good agricultural practices and related legislation;  to ensure the adoption of good 
practices in agricultural manufacturing, storage and transport of plants, produc ts and by-products;  to 
improve risk exposure assessment of residues harm ful to consumer health;  and to prevent the 
consumption and trade of non-compliant plant produc ts.  Brazil expected improvements in these areas 
to improve market access for its plants and plant products. 
7. The representative of Brazil also provided info rmation on the adoption of a regulation on 
research related to sanitary and phytosanitary meas ures.  The objective was to increase and update 
research actions related to agricultural control specifi cally in the areas of animal and plant health and 
quality and safety of plant and animal products.  This research aimed at improving scientific knowledge, technology and management of control systems.  The Secretariat of Animal and Plant 
Health and Inspection of the Ministry of Agricu lture and the Ministry of Science and Technology 
provided around US$55 million for f our development programmes:  development of a research 
framework, specific research projects, human res ource capacity developmen t and development of 
centres for agricultural protection.  Many of the approved projects were related to capacity building 
and scientific and technological cooperation with  Brazilian universities and research bodies.  These 
research activities were expected to improve SPS control systems in Brazil. 
III. SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS 
(a) New Issues 
(i) China's Hygienic Standard for  Distilled Spirits and Integrated Alcoholic Beverages 
(G/SPS/N/CHN/111) – Concerns of Mexico 
8. The representative of Mexico indicated that Ch ina's notified regulation classified alcoholic 
beverages in three categories:  distilled cereal spir its, distilled fruit spirits and other distilled spirits, 
establishing maximum levels of methanol of 0.6, 8.0 and 0.6 grams per litre, respectively.  Since 
tequila was made from agave, it was to be classified in the "other distilled spirits" category.  As such 
it would not have access to the Chinese market, sin ce according to the relevant Mexican standard, 
tequila contained up to 3 grams of alcohol per litre.  In 2001, in the context of China's WTO 
accession, Mexico and China had signed a Memora ndum of Understanding through which China had 
recognized that tequila was a product origina ting in Mexico, produced according to Mexican 
standards and regulations.  Mexico requested that China modify its draft measure, taking into account 
the special raw material from which tequila was made, and giving tequila the same treatment as distilled fruit spirits.  Mexico's tequila producers had sent comments to this effect to China's Enquiry 
Point, and the Mexican Government would shortly be submitting comments as well.  Mexico thanked 
China for a bilateral meeting on this subject a nd looked forward to finding a mutually acceptable 
solution.  G/SPS/R/54 
 Page 5 
 
 
  9. The representative of China encouraged Mexi co to submit comments to China's Enquiry 
Point.  Comments received during the comment period would be taken into account.  China was 
allowed to take measures necessary to protect health. 
(b) Issues previously raised 
10. The Secretariat introduced Revision 9 of document G/SPS/GEN/204, highlighting that 
277 specific trade concerns had been raised since 1995.  Of these, 76 had been reported as resolved 
and 19 as partially resolved, while no resolution had been reported for the remaining 182.  In 2008, a 
total of 29 specific trade concerns had been brou ght to the attention of the Committee, of which 
16 had been new concerns.  All information on speci fic trade concerns could also be searched in the 
SPS Information Management System (SPS IMS). 
(i) General Import Restrictions due to BSE (STC  193) – Concerns of the European Communities 
11. The representative of the European  Communities drew attention to the OIE standard for BSE, 
which did not recommend trade restrictions on de-bon ed beef from animals aged less than 30 months.  
The European Communities met this standard, but its  exports were still facing trade restrictions.  
National restrictions maintained despite the OIE Code  undermined this standard that had been adopted 
after long negotiations, thus damaging the credibility of  the OIE.  The OIE was planning to update the 
Code, because there was compelli ng evidence that the age require ment was not necessary, but the 
European Communities questioned whether this w as worthwhile if Members did not apply the 
standard in any case.  Trade in beef was importa nt, and BSE issues were among the concerns most 
frequently raised in the SPS Committee.  The Eur opean Communities appealed to Members to make 
greater efforts to base their measures on the releva nt OIE standards.  Jordan was now accepting the 
OIE Code, as did the European Communities, and others should follow this example. 
12. The representative of the OIE explained that the BSE standards had been democratically 
adopted by OIE members, and were in fact very conservative.  The OIE was considering removing the 
age requirement, and relaxing the restrictions on ge latine.  There was still a wide margin of safety 
built into the standards, and it was worrying that  there was a lack of willingness on the part of 
Members to apply them. 
(ii) Korea's Livestock Epidemic Prevention Ac t (LEPA) (STC 274) – Concerns of Canada 
13. The representative of Canada again expressed concerns regarding recent amendments to 
Korea's Livestock Epidemic Prevention Act, incl uding its consistency with  the SPS Agreement and 
with the OIE Code.  However, this represented only one of a series of barriers Canada was facing in its efforts to resume trade in beef with Korea.  While matters had appeared to progress following the 
October 2008 meeting of the SPS Committee, there had been no significant progress after an on-site 
visit by Korean officials in November 2008.  Since May 2007 the OIE recognized Canada as a 
controlled-risk country for BSE, which according to the OIE Code allowed for safe trade in all beef 
and cattle under conditions which Ca nada can meet.  Canada regrette d that the issue could not be 
resolved at a technical level on a strictly scientif ic basis and was considering all options, including 
recourse to formal WTO dispute settlement procedures .  Canada remained hopeful that this would not 
be necessary, but could not allow the issue to c ontinue unresolved;  five years was long enough. 
14. The representative of Korea indi cated that LEPA was consistent with the SPS Agreement.  
The Act required a risk analysis for beef imports  in all cases.  The risk analysis for Canada was 
underway;  Canada's BSE measures were under review .  More detailed consu ltations were required 
after the on-site inspection of November 2008, incl uding information on Canada's fifteenth BSE case. G/SPS/R/54 
Page 6  
 
  (iii) US Import Restrictions on Cooked Poultry Products (STC 257) – Concerns of China 
15. The representative of China reiterated concerns a bout the US Agricultural Appropriations Bill  
for fiscal year 2008, which had seriously affected China's exports of cooked poultry products.  Although all technical problems had been resolved  after numerous bilate ral consultations, the 
United States still maintained an import ban becau se the Bill's section 733 indicated that no funds 
made available in the Bill be used to establish or  implement a rule allowing poultry products to be 
imported to the United States from China.  China w as seriously concerned about this discriminatory 
legislation, which was in obvious violation of US  international obligations.  China hoped to resolve 
this problem in a science-based and pragmatic ma nner and asked the United States for an update. 
16. The representative of the United States indicat ed that the US authorities placed great  
importance on ensuring that measures were based on science.  China's concerns would be brought to 
the attention of the appropriate authorities in Wash ington with the aim of resolving the issue as soon 
as possible. 
(iv) India's Restrictions Due to Avian Influenza  (STC 185) – Concerns of the United States 
17. The representative of the United States expressed disappointment that India continued to 
maintain its emergency measures prohibiting a wide  range of products because of avian influenza 
without scientific evidence or a risk assessment.  Appropriate measu res for avian influenza did not 
include trade restrictions on swine or swine pr oducts, trade measures related to notifiable avian 
influenza in wild birds, or prohibitions on heat -treated products.  In addition, Members should 
distinguish between highly pathogenic and low pat hogenic avian influenza.  The US representative 
reminded the Committee that India had proposed a mee ting at a technical level to discuss the issue at 
the October 2008 Committee meeting and that th e United States welcomed their suggestion.  
However, the United States on a numerous occasions  had asked for a copy of India's scientific 
justification as a basis for such technical discussions , but had not received the documents to date.  The 
United States again urged India to present its risk assessment so that a technical discussion could be scheduled. 
18. The representative of the European Communiti es welcomed the recent lifting by India of 
some avian influenza-related restrictions, but supported the US concerns that the remaining 
restrictions were unjustified and went against the OIE Code, in particular the lack of distinction 
between outbreaks of highly pathogenic and low pathogenic avian influenza. 
19. The representative of India explained that sin ce many countries reported avian influenza, and 
because of the human health implications, it was na tural that Members were extremely cautious to 
safeguard animal and human health.  This was particularly true in I ndia, since its poultry industry was 
largely family-run.  Many Members had adopted av ian influenza measures, including import bans.  
India had banned imports of poultry and swine products from countries reporting both low and highly 
pathogenic avian influenza, since one strain of th e virus could mutate into the other.  An FAO 
publication acknowledged that mutation to virulen ce had been demonstrated, and the USDA website 
also admitted this.  At the OIE General Session, Indi a had voted against the resolution stating that low 
pathogenic avian influenza was not a trade concern.  India believed that trade interests should not take 
precedence over human health concerns, but accepted that science was evolving and had provisions for reviewing its avian influenza measures.  As a result, trade restrictions on certain products from 
avian influenza-positive countries had been lifted.  I ndia had recently reviewed the restrictions on pig 
meat and found there was minimal risk, especially when processed.  India had thus decided to lift 
restrictions on pig products and on processed poultr y products.  The reviews would continue.  The 
representative of India had taken note of the US con cerns, had had bilateral meetings with the United 
States and the European Communities, and would convey their concerns to his authorities.  G/SPS/R/54 
 Page 7 
 
 
  20. The representative of the OIE indicated that av ian influenza was a major challenge for trade 
in poultry products.  The relevant standards we re in place and the OIE did not receive many 
comments from OIE members; the standard seeme d to be well accepted.  Currently the OIE was 
looking at conditions for trade in pet food and vari ous by-products such as feather meal.  Members 
should  review the avian influenza standards and rai se any concerns at the OIE.  The representative of 
the OIE clarified that there were a number of publi cations on avian influenza, some by the OIE, some 
by FAO, some joint.  For international trade, the relevant standard was that in the OIE Terrestrial 
Animal Health Code. 
(v) Mexico's Restrictions on Imports of Sw ine Meat (STC 271) – Concerns of Brazil 
21. The representative of Brazil recalled that the st ate of Santa Catarina had been recognized as 
FMD free in 2007.  In 2008, Brazil had requested the establishment of a working plan for recognition 
of this disease-free area, taking into account the Committee's Decision on Article 6 (G/SPS/48).  
Brazil had made important investments to achieve  freedom from FMD without vaccination.  Mexican 
authorities had promised a response, but none had b een received, and no progress had been made.  
Brazil had proposed a new approach:  Brazil had i nvited Mexico to use the good offices mechanism of 
Article 12.2 of the SPS Agreement and paragraph 6 of the Committee's working procedures, with the 
presence of a specialist from the OIE.  Brazil was waiting for Mexico's response to this proposal and 
looked forward to the friendly and timely resolution of this issue based on OIE standards. 
22. The representative of Mexico indicated that fo r pig meat, the information Brazil had provided 
to the Mexican authorities was being studied.  Me xico had asked for information on Brazil's toxic 
residue control plan, which had been received in August 2008.  In October 2008, Mexico had 
requested additional information about this toxic r esidue control plan, and again in February 2009, 
without receiving a response.  Mexico's consideration of  this issue would be able to continue when the 
information was received.  The suggestion to u se the Good Offices mechanism had only recently been 
received and forwarded to the capital. 
23. The representative of Brazil indicated that in hi s view,  Mexico's request for information was 
related to a different trade concern regarding heat-tr eated meat (see below).  Brazil's residue plan was 
available on a website.  All information on FMD fr eedom was available to Mexico, and in addition, 
the OIE had studied the information and there had been several bilateral meetings.  There was no 
missing information at this stage, but if necessar y, the information would be provided again. 
(vi) Mexico's Import Restrictions on Cooked and Fr ozen Meat (STC 263) – Concerns of Brazil 
24. The representative of Brazil recalled that Mexico was also restricting access of cooked and 
frozen meat from FMD-free areas.  Brazil considered  that Mexico's restrictions were not based on 
scientific evidence since OIE standards were clear that  heat treatment could be used to inactivate the 
FMD virus.  Bilateral meetings at technical and ev en ministerial level had been held, but with no 
reaction from Mexican authorities.  Brazil and Me xico had signed a memora ndum of understanding in 
2007 which established a technical group to discu ss SPS matters.  Despite Brazilian proposals to 
arrange a first group meeting, including requests at mi nisterial level, the meeting had not taken place.  
Brazil was disappointed at the lack of response, but hoped for friendly and ex peditious consultations 
on the matter. 
25. The representative of Mexico indicated that th ere had been some progress at a meeting on 
19 September 2008.  He reiterated that Mexico ha d received information on th e toxic residue control 
plan, but on two occasions Mexico had asked fo r additional information, and this additional 
information had not been provided.  Once this in formation was received and had been analyzed, the 
next step would be the analysis of the establishments interested in exporting to Mexico. G/SPS/R/54 
Page 8  
 
  26. The representative of Brazil requested a bilate ral meeting on the margins of the current 
meeting to clarify what information had been sent and what might be missing. 
(vii) US Import Restrictions on EC Dairy Produc ts (STC 268) – Concerns of the European 
Communities 
27. The representative of the Europ ean Communities indicated that there had been some progress 
with the US-EC equivalence exer cise on dairy products, but that there were still obstacles, in 
particular in relation to the US definition of Gr ade A dairy products.  The definition was on a case-by-
case basis, but apparently there were discussions about a more precise definition.  The European 
Communities was concerned that if this definition were too tightly drawn, it could exclude certain 
products.  The European Communities hoped for an explanation. 
28. The representative of the United States explaine d that the United States was unaware of any 
pending legislation in Congress affecting the definiti on of Grade A dairy products.  The US National 
Conference of Interstate Milk Shippers was holding it s biennial meeting in April.  Two proposals had 
been submitted for consideration at the meeting which sought to define "milk products" for purposes 
of the Pasteurized Milk Ordinance.  Neither of those proposals would expand the scope of products 
currently included in the Grade A programme.  The representative also explained that the US Food 
and Drug Administration (FDA) had sent a letter to DG SANCO and was willing to resume discussions about Grade A dairy product equivalen ce.  FDA anticipated moving forward with the 
bilateral efforts in this area soon. 
(viii) US Restrictions on Apples (STC 269) – Concerns of China 
29. The representative of China indicated that a lthough there had been technical discussions on 
this subject, there had been no progress.  China rema ined concerned about undue delays in the pest 
risk assessment process.  China was free of fire blight and fruit flies in the apple-growing regions.  In addition, fruit bagging was used, so there w as no quarantine risk.  Chinese apples had similar 
production areas, diseases, pest occu rrences and regulations as pears in China.  The United States had 
allowed importation of pears based on a risk assessme nt, so there should be no quarantine problem for 
apples.  China indicated that according to Article 5.7 a risk assessment should be carried out within a 
reasonable period of time and asked the United States  to complete its assessment as soon as possible. 
30. The representative of the United States indicated  a willingness to continue working with 
China to address the scientific issues related to th e market access request for Chinese apples.  The 
United States had identified an extensive list of qua rantine pests associated with apples from China, 
which made the risk assessment a challenging task.  In addition, the United States was reviewing the 
information provided on the pests of concern to de termine whether it provided a clear and complete 
scientific understanding of the pest situation, and was awaiting additional information from China.  
For example, China would have to provide scientific  evidence to support its claims that some pests 
did not occur in the apple producing areas.  The Un ited States would review this information, once 
received, along with all other submissions, and conti nue to work with China to address the scientific 
issues associated with the risk assessment. 
(ix) Greece's Inspection and Testing Procedures fo r Imported Cereals (STC 206) – Concerns of 
Canada 
31. The representative of Canada recalled that this  concern was mainly related to the excessive 
inspection and testing requirements for GMOs in im ported cereals.  Not only were these requirements 
onerous, but consignments could be held for up  to seven working days, which unnecessarily imposed 
additional costs and delays.  This was done despite  repeated assurances from Canada that GM wheat 
was not approved for commercial production in Cana da or, to the best of Canada's knowledge,  G/SPS/R/54 
 Page 9 
 
 
  anywhere in the world.  This measure was cl early discouraging imports of cereals from non-EC 
countries and was having an adverse effect on trad e.  Canada considered these measures to be 
contrary to Greece's obligations under the SPS Agreemen t.  Greece had not given any indication of its 
willingness to make further progress in resolving th is issue although Canada had raised the issue 
bilaterally several times with Greece and with the European Communities.  In September 2008, 
Canada's Ambassador to Greece had requested a mee ting with the former Greek Minister of Rural 
Development and Food, but had received no response.  An early meeting with the new Minister of Rural Development and Food has been requested with  the hope of resolving this longstanding issue, 
given that this remains a serious concern for the Government of Canada. 
32. The representative of the European Commun ities recalled that this issue fell under the 
competence of the European Co mmunities.  The European Communities understood Canada's 
impatience and frustration.  Each EC member State implemented the harmonized system, but sometimes there were differences in the implemen tation.  The European Co mmunities had intervened 
on a number of occasions to avoid trade disruptions, but even the threat of disruptions could in and of 
itself be disruptive.  The European Communities had highlighted to the Greek authorities that a 
number of matters had to be resolved, and would try to find a satisfactory solution. 
(x) Japan's Pesticide Maximum Residue Level (M RL) Enforcement System (STC 267) – Concerns 
of the United States 
33. The representative of the United States indicat ed that Japan's MRL enforcement policy 
imposed on US specialty products continued to be of great concern.  This policy imposed industry 
wide testing for pesticides after one MRL violation by a single party.  If a second violation involving 
the same pesticide and commodity occurred within one year, a 100 per cent test-and-hold policy of all 
exports from that country was enforced. 
34. The representative of Japan indi cated that the MRLs had been developed based on scientific 
assessments, taking into account Codex standards, and that they were applied both to domestic and 
imported products.  When there were instances of non-compliance, inspections were strengthened, 
taking into account various factors, on a case-by- case basis.  Japan had confirmed that the US 
regulation on pesticide residues was equivalent to Jap an's.  Where US MRLs were equal to or stricter 
than Japan's, the enhanced inspecti ons were limited to the specific exporter.  In cases where the US 
MRL was higher than Japan's, Japan needed to ensu re that US exporters as a whole complied with 
Japan's MRL.  Such evidence should be provided by th e US Government itself, or in some other way.  
In fact, Japan's inspection records showed that multip le violations had been detected by the enhanced 
inspections after an initial violation.  This suggest ed that responsibility of the exporter alone did not 
always ensure compliance with Japan's MRLs.  Japan  needed a mechanism to ensure that exporters 
complied with Japan's MRLs, e.g. a compliance prog ramme established by industry or information on 
their compliance history.  If the United States provi ded such information, it would enable Japan to 
consider limiting the enhanced inspection to the sp ecific exporter.  Japan hoped to continue technical 
discussions with the United States. 
35. The Chairman reminded the Committee that he was available to provide Good Offices, if so 
desired. 
(c) Consideration of Specific Notifications Received 
36. No Member raised any issues under this agenda item. G/SPS/R/54 
Page 10  
 
  (d) Information on Resolution of Issues in G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.9 
(i) Panama's Inspection Regime for Food Processing Establishments (STC 214) – Concerns of 
the United States 
37. The representative of the United States thanked Pa nama for the resolution of this concern.  
The United States and Panama had worked together re gularly to address their respective concerns.  As 
a result, Panama no longer requires inspection of individual establishments, but allows the US Food 
Safety and Inspection Service to certify them for export. 
IV. OPERATION OF TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS 
38. The Chairman noted that the most recent list of National Notification Authorities was 
contained in G/SPS/NNA/14 and the most recent list of National Enquiry points in G/SPS/ENQ/24.  
These lists were now updated only once every year, bu t the most recent information could be accessed 
through the SPS Information Management System .  Members should provide updated contact 
information to the Secretariat so that  it could be reflected in the IMS. 
39. The Chairman noted further that notifications received since the last meeting of the SPS 
Committee were summarized on a monthly basis, in G/SPS/GEN/888, G/SPS/GEN/892, 
G/SPS/GEN/895 and G/SPS/GEN/903.  A list of all doc uments and notifications issued in 2008 had 
been circulated as G/SPS/GEN/897. 
40. The Secretariat reported that Members had sm oothly made the transition to using the new 
notification formats as of 1 December 2008.  The S ecretariat encouraged Members to make more use 
of the option to include hyperlinks to texts of dr aft regulations on the notification formats, or to 
submit these draft regulations to the Secretariat in PDF format so that they could be placed on a server 
and a hyperlink included.  Also, few Members were providing information on informal translations of 
notified draft SPS regulations by submitting a suppl ement to a notification, although some Members 
were submitting supplements to a large number of TBT notifications. 
41. The Secretariat also drew Members' attention to  the ongoing negotiations on trade facilitation.  
Members were identifying areas for further work, a nd there was a lot of overlap with SPS issues.  
Members should ensure coordination at the national level with colleagues following trade facilitation. 
42. The representative of Chile noted that on the emergency notification format Members seldom 
provided information on how long emergency measures would remain in force.  Some regular 
measures might be notified as emergency measures.  This was an area the Committee should discuss, 
possibly as one of the subjects to be taken up in the course of the Review. 
43. The Secretariat provided an update on the mentor ing mechanism.  This mechanism, described 
in document G/SPS/W/217 had been launched in 2008, based on a proposal by New Zealand that had 
received strong support from the SPS Committee duri ng the Workshop on Transparency held in 
October 2007.  The objective of this mechanism was to assist developing country Members in 
implementing and benefiting from the transparency pr ovisions of the SPS Agreement.  It involved the 
development of an informal, ad hoc supportive re lationship between indivi duals who had similar 
responsibilities as Enquiry Points or Notification Authorities.  It did not imply any commitment to 
provide financial or other types of assistance, nor was it meant to replace other forms of technical assistance. 
44. The Secretariat had been mandated to provide  an annual update to the SPS Committee on the 
functioning of the mentoring mechanism, based on mentoring requests and offers received, and on 
responses to a questionnaire by Members participating in the procedure.   In response to its first call  G/SPS/R/54 
 Page 11 
 
 
  for interested Members in the first half of 2008,  the Secretariat had received eleven mentoring 
requests and six mentoring offers.  The requests typically included assistance in submitting notifications, managing and following-up on incomi ng notifications, and raising awareness at the 
national level.  During the course of July and Augus t 2008, the Secretariat had contacted all interested 
Members and had matched the eleven requesting Me mbers with six mentors, taking into account the 
information provided in the mentoring application forms.  A number of mentors had accepted to take 
on more than one mentoree as the Secretariat received more requests than offers.  The Secretariat thanked those Members which had volunteered to  share their experiences by acting as mentors. 
45. In accordance with its reporting mandate, in early 2009 the Secretariat had circulated a 
questionnaire to those already participating in the mechanism to get their feedback on the functioning 
of their mentoring arrangements.  The Secretariat ha d received seven replies.  Some main points that 
emerged were the following: 
• All respondents believed in the positive role that mentoring could play, although the 
actual success of the mechanism depended on th e proactive participation of both sides 
in the exercise. 
• The mentor-mentoree pairs had had differing experiences with respect to modes and 
intensity of communication.  Some had met face-to-face in the margins of the SPS 
Committee or through on-site visits.  Others  had maintained regular communications 
through email.  For some others, the process had not yet really started. 
• Email was a good basis for communication, however, there seemed to have been 
technical problems for some pairs in receiving each others' messages. 
46. In November 2008, the Secretariat had launche d a second call for Members interested in the 
mentoring mechanism to register with the Secretaria t, with a deadline of 30 January 2009.  As of the 
meeting, the Secretariat had received six mentoring requests and one offer.  In light of this gap in 
numbers, the Secretariat called on interested Member s to come forward as mentors.  Mentoring did 
not necessarily involve financial commitments but rath er the development of a supportive relationship 
among officials with similar responsibilities.  The Se cretariat also informed those Members which had 
expressed an interest in receiving mentoring assistance  that they would be informed of developments. 
47. The representative of New Zealand noted that it was ironic that for New Zealand, which had 
first suggested this mechanism, the process was not  yet underway.  New Zealand had tried several 
times to contact the three countries with whom it had been paired, but emails did not seem to be getting through.  He highlighted the importance of  maintaining up to date contact information for 
Enquiry Points and National Notification Authorities. 
48. The Secretariat also provided information on the Procedural Step-by-Step Manual for SPS 
National Notification Authorities and SPS National Enquiry Points, reminding Members that New 
Zealand had taken the initiative to prepare it.  Sa lly Jennings from the Enquiry Point of New Zealand 
had now completed this practical Manual, with the assistance of officials from Australia and the WTO 
Secretariat.  The English version of this document was available for Members. 
49. The procedural manual contained practical in formation regarding the operation of Enquiry 
Points and Notification Authorities.  For exam ple, on resources required;  how to prepare a 
notification;  how to manage incoming notifications ;  how to alert stakeholders;  and how to draft 
some standard letters.  The Secretariat hoped that this Manual would be a us eful tool in addressing 
some of the commonly-posed questions about operating an effective Enquiry Point.  A PDF version of 
the same document could also be downloaded fro m the SPS gateway of the WTO website (under the 
"transparency toolkit" section).  The French and Sp anish versions of the Ma nual should be available 
for the next meeting of the Committee in June.  The Secretariat thanked the New Zealand authorities G/SPS/R/54 
Page 12  
 
  for their valuable contributions towards capac ity building in the implementation of the SPS 
Agreement. 
50. The representative of New Zealand was pleased that  New Zealand had taken part in preparing 
the Manual and hoped that it would be useful.  New Zealand was looking forward to improved 
communication in the SPS area among Members. 
V. IMPLEMENTATION OF SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT 
(a) Chairman's Report on Informal Meeting 
51. The Chairman reported that during the informal meeting of the SPS Committee on special and 
differential treatment on 24 February, the main fo cus had been on the proposed revision of the 
procedure to enhance transparency of special a nd differential treatment in favour of developing 
country Members contained in G/SPS/33.  The SPS Committee had adopted the procedure contained 
in G/SPS/33 in October 2004, and had agreed to revi ew the implementation of this procedure after 
one year of its adoption.  In February 2006, the Committee had agreed to extend the procedure 
without modification, but to review it again in 2008.  However, the Committee had not reached a 
consensus on the review of G/SPS/33 in  2008 and this review continued. 
52. In this regard, the informal meeting had consid ered the proposed revisions to the procedure, 
reflected and incorporated in G/SPS/W/224/Rev.2.  During the informal meeting, the representative of 
Egypt had suggested several changes to the sec ond revision document, with a view to making the 
procedure more operational and effective for devel oping and developed countr y Members.  Egypt had 
suggested that G/SPS/33 should include general prov isions for consideration by the SPS Committee 
regarding the need to assist developing country Members enhance their capacity to screen incoming 
notifications and to be able to react to them.  The representative of Egypt had also made specific 
suggestions in the document, in order to refl ect the language and recommendations adopted in 
previous Ministerial and SPS Committee decisions.  Finally, the representative of Egypt had proposed the elimination of the counter-notification format, as not necessary nor helpful for developing country Members receiving special and differential treatment. 
53. Some Members had agreed with Egypt that the counter-notification format in Annex 2 of the 
second revision document was not necessary.  Members had also requested to see Egypt's suggestions 
in writing to permit a better analysis.  The Secretar iat had prepared a text which included the changes 
suggested by Egypt, for cons ideration by the Committee. 
54. The Members continued discussions of possible changes to the Procedure to Enhance 
Transparency of Special and Differential Treat ment in Favour of Developing Country Members 
(G/SPS/33), as contained in G/SPS/W/224 and revisions .  The representatives of Egypt, Cuba, Costa 
Rica, Japan, and the United States had suggested some further modifications, to be reflected in the 
next revision of the working document.  Several Memb ers had also indicated that they needed time to 
consider the latest proposed changes, and asked to revert to this at the next Committee meeting in 
June. 
55. No other matters related to special and differen tial treatment had been raised at the informal 
meeting. 
(b) Review of the Operation of S&D Transparency Procedure (G/SPS/W/224/Rev.2) 
56. The representative of Japan proposed specific changes to G/SPS/W/224/Rev.2 in order to 
reflect the language of the SPS Agreement and th e Ministerial Decision on Implementation-Related 
Issues and Concerns (WT/MIN(01)/17).  G/SPS/R/54 
 Page 13 
 
 
  57. The Secretariat clarified that the various propo sed changes would be reflected in the next 
revision document to be circulated as document G/SPS/W/224/Rev.3. 
58. The Committee agreed to revert to this propo sal at the next Committee meeting in June. 
VI. EQUIVALENCE – ARTICLE 4 
(a) Information from Members on their Experiences 
(i) Brazil – Memorandum of Understanding between Brazil and Norway on Technical, Hygienic 
and Sanitary Requirements for the Recognition of Equivalence of Inspection and Quality 
Control Related to Fish and Aquaculture Products 
59. The representative of Brazil reported that this MOU had been signed in October 2003, taking 
into account the SPS and TBT Agreement as well as Codex standards.  Trade and technical 
communication with Norway had been facilitated. 
60. The representative of Norway expressed satisfacti on with the entry into force of this MOU, 
which was Norway's first agreement with a South American country.  Norway  was looking forward to 
continuing good relations between the two countries. 
(b) Information from Relevant  Observer Organizations 
61. No observer organization provided in formation under this agenda item. 
VII. PEST- AND DISEASE-FREE AREAS – ARTICLE 6 
(a) Information from Members on their Pest or Disease Status 
(i) Freedom from Equine Influenza in Australia 
62. The representative of Australia reported that si nce December 2008, Australia was officially 
free from equine influenza.  Australia's statemen t of freedom was based on the control programme 
and comprehensive surveillance which met OIE require ments.  A surveillance programme had been in 
place for twelve months after the last recorded case of equine influenza on 25 December 2007.  All 
remaining equine influenza control measures ha d been removed within Australia.  Australia 
considered this to be a significant animal health  achievement, as Australia is one of only a small 
number of countries that has eradi cated this disease.  The signif icance of this achievement was 
recognised by the President of the OIE at the Ma y 2008 General Session of the OIE.  The successful 
eradication of equine influenza illustrated the im portance Australia placed on its quarantine system 
and the effectiveness of its well-developed disease control capability and regulatory processes. 
(ii) Eradication of Citrus Canker in Australia 
63. The representative of Australia reported that sin ce January 2009, Australia was officially free 
of citrus canker, following a successful four and a half year eradication programme.  In accordance 
with ISPM No. 4, Requirements for the establishment of Pest-Free Areas, Australia had, via 
implementation of a national Response Plan, destro yed all high-risk host plants within the pest 
quarantine area, destroyed low risk native citrus within buffer zones around commercial orchards and 
surveyed remnant native citrus outside buffer zones, replanted commercial citrus orchards in the pest 
quarantine area with inspected pl anting material, and undertaken su rveillance at 90-day intervals 
within the pest quarantine area.  In addition, ex tensive surveillance undertak en throughout Australia 
since 2004 did not detect citrus canker.  The success of the programme was due to excellent G/SPS/R/54 
Page 14  
 
  cooperation between the jurisdictions and coordinatio n by the Australian Government.  Citrus canker 
had rarely been successfully eradi cated before on such a scale.  The successful eradication of citrus 
canker illustrated the importance to Australia of its  quarantine in supporting its favourable pest and 
disease status and provided another excellent example of the effectiveness of Australia's pest control 
capability and regulatory processes. 
(iii) Areas free of Black Sigatoka in Brazil 
64. The representative of Brazil reported that two mo re areas had been recognized as free of black 
sigatoka since the last Committee meeting.  Brazil now had more than 1,005, 000 square kilometres 
throughout twelve states free from this disease.  Th e aim was to extend these pest-free areas following 
IPPC recommendations. 
(iv) Pest-free Areas for Mango Pulp a nd Seed Weevils in the Philippines 
65. The representative of the Philippi nes provided information on a USDA-Philippines Bureau of 
Plant Industry Mango Programme.  A survey had b een carried out on the main islands of Luzon, 
Visayas and Mindanao and was scheduled to be comp leted in August 2009.  So far, not a single 
mango pulp or seed weevil had been found.  Furthe rmore, an AusAID Public Sector Linkages 
Program (PSLP) had funded a detection survey for mango seed and pulp weevils that had not found 
any evidence of presence of the weevils in Dava o del Sur.  Davao del Sur was placed under 
quarantine after the survey, and the Philippines now expected official recognition of this area from 
trading partners including Australia.  A final detec tion survey had also been carried out in Sarangani 
Province and Samal Island, funded by AusAID.  It had found no evidence of the weevils in the area, 
which had been placed under quarantine;  a low monito ring survey continued.  An official declaration 
of this mango pulp and seed weevil free area would be  issued by the Philippines within the year.  
More information is contained in document G/SPS/GEN/906. 
(v) Freedom from Classical Swine Fever in Mexico 
66. The representative of Mexico indicated that on 30 January 2009, Mexico had declared its 
entire territory to be free from classical swine feve r (CSF).  The efforts dated back to 1973, with 
control and eradication measures in the north-west ern states, subsequently extending to the entire 
territory with the launching of the National Campai gn Against Hog Cholera.  Mexico was planning to 
submit the relevant information to the OIE shortly in  support of its self-declaration.  In view of its 
status, Mexico asked all of its trading partners to remove any current CSF-related restrictions on 
imports of swine, swine genetic material, and swin e meat and meat products.  More information is 
contained in document G/SPS/GEN/908. 
(vi) Newcastle Disease in Belize 
67. The representative of Belize provided informa tion on an outbreak of virulent Newcastle 
Disease in commercial poultry in the Cayo District that had been reported to the OIE in November 
2008.  Depopulation and decontaminat ion measures, along with movement controls, had succeeded in 
controlling the disease in the commercial poultry sector,  however, it had spread to backyard poultry in 
the Cayo, Belize, Stann Creek and Toledo Districts.  The disease had not been reported in the northern 
districts of Corozal and Orange Walk.  Given th e large number of infected communities in the 
affected districts, the disease was considered ende mic.  Although the disease had zoonotic potential, 
only rare cases of mild conjunctivitis had occurred in people directly involved with a large number of 
infected poultry.  The source of the virus had not been determined, but it wa s believed that extensive 
floods in the Cayo and Belize Districts might be a ca usal factor.  The Ministry of Agriculture, along 
with the Belize Agricultural Health Authority, was conducting a countrywide  vaccination campaign in 
backyard poultry.  The plan was to control the di sease through repeat vaccinations every three months  G/SPS/R/54 
 Page 15 
 
 
  to obtain disease-free recognition with vaccination.   Belize had received valuable support from 
USDA, OIRSA, IICA and the Canadian Food and Inspection Agency. 
(b) Information from Members on their Experiences 
68. No Member provided any information under this agenda item. 
(c) Information from Relevant  Observer Organizations 
69. The representative of the OIE recalled the OIE's official processes for recognition of disease-
free areas on foot and mouth disease (FMD), rinde rpest, contagious bovine pleuropneumonia and 
bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE).  The d ecisions for recognition of  disease-free areas were 
democratically adopted by all the OIE members a nd annually reviewed.  The OIE had also developed 
guidelines for Members to self-declare their free status  on other animal diseases.  The OIE stressed 
that its members have the obligation to report to the OIE secretariat any outbreaks of animal diseases 
in their territories.  The OIE continued to wo rk on the development of guidelines on disease-free 
compartments, and in May it would consider pro cedures to recognize compartments free of FMD.  
These guidelines were likely to have a positive impact on international trade.  In addition, the OIE 
was conducting technical work on compartment freed om for avian influenza, in close cooperation 
with Brazil and Thailand. 
VIII.  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND COOPERATION 
(a) Information from the Secretariat 
(i) WTO SPS Activities 
70. The Secretariat introduced the document entitle d "SPS Technical Assistance and Training 
Activities" (G/SPS/GEN/521/Rev.4).  This docum ent reported on all the SPS-specific technical 
assistance activities undertaken by the WTO Secretariat from 1 September 1994 to 
31 December 2008.  The WTO Secretariat had par ticipated and organized a total of 177 activities 
during the period covered by the report.  In 2008, the WTO Secretariat delivered 12 national seminars, 
two regional workshops, participated in four activities organized by other organizations, and 
organized one specialized course on SPS. 
71. The report also included a broad array of inform ation, including the regions covered by the 
SPS technical assistance activities, the language used , and the participation of the international 
standards-setting organizations. 
72. The Secretariat further reported on the technical  assistance activities delivered since the last 
SPS Committee meeting, which included a regional SPS workshop for Middle East countries, held in 
Qatar;  a regional workshop for Pacific countries, he ld in Fiji;  and national seminars in Mozambique, 
Mongolia, India, China, and Fiji. 
73. The Secretariat announced that the WTO would organize the 5th Specialized Course on SPS 
from 12 to 31 October 2009, in Geneva.  This speci alized course comprises in-depth lectures on SPS 
issues, and "hands-on" activities.  This year the specialized course would be delivered in Spanish. 
74. The Secretariat recalled that the WTO regularly offer e-training courses on the SPS 
Agreement in English, French and Spanish.  I nvitations to the e-training courses were sent to 
Members' missions to the WTO. G/SPS/R/54 
Page 16  
 
  (ii) Standards and Trade Development Fa cility (STDF) (G/SPS/GEN/902) 
75. The STDF secretariat introduced document G/SPS/GEN/902 regarding STDF activities, as 
well as document G/SPS/GEN/899 containing the final STDF evaluation report issued in November 2008.  The evaluator had judged the over all performance of the STDF to be good, and in 
many important areas very good.  Furthermore, the performance of the secretariat was highly rated by 
virtually all stakeholders and by the evaluator.  The recommendations of the evaluation had been 
discussed by the STDF Policy Committee in Dece mber 2008 and incorporated in the STDF 
Operational Rules and Operating Plan for 2009. 
76. Attention was drawn to the workshop on Good Practice in SPS-Related Technical 
Cooperation held in October 2008.  Document G/SPS/R/52 contained the summary report of the 
workshop and the STDF secretariat had also prepared a two-page briefing note  on the conclusions of 
the good practice workshop for general distribution.  A ttention was also drawn to the latest edition of 
the STDF Newsletter and the development of a shor t film on the importance of SPS capacity building 
for international trade and economic development.  The intention was to show the film at the next 
Committee meeting in June. 
77. In November 2008, the STDF presented a d esk study on SPS needs and the assistance 
provided to eight least developed countries (LDCs) at the LDC Ministerial Conference on Aid for Trade in Cambodia.  The study identified areas wh ere future SPS technical cooperation activities with 
a positive trade effect might be focused (G/SPS/GEN/900).  Similar SPS briefings were envisaged for other countries. 
78. The STDF also prepared a background paper for the "Open-Ended Working Group for the 
Development of an IPPC Capacity Buildi ng Strategy" held in Rome in December 2008 
(G/SPS/GEN/898).  The objective of the report w as to identify current flows of phytosanitary 
technical cooperation, examine how phytosanitary needs were evaluated and discuss how these could 
be mainstreamed into national development plans. 
79. Two global events were planne d for 2009, one on cost-benefit analysis, and the other on 
climate change. 
80. The workshop on cost-benefit analysis was planned for June 2009.  The date was 
subsequently changed to 30 October 2009.  The obj ective was to show how greater use of economic 
analysis could help to increase awareness about th e potential benefits of investing in SPS capacity as a 
means to prevent SPS-related problems, and the like ly returns on different types of investments.  
Findings of selected studies would be presented at  the workshop, including recent studies by the OIE 
and OECD.  These studies analyze the economics of diffe rent types of investments in the area of SPS, 
considering for instance: the costs of outbreaks of animal diseases compared with  the costs of control; 
the expected benefits and costs of alternative contro l strategies;  and the most appropriate response in 
the case of an outbreak.  The workshop will also address the work done for an STDF project which 
considered the expected rate of return on invest ments in SPS capacity building, primarily on the basis 
of export performance.  Another objective of the workshop is to identify future challenges in 
expanding the use of economic analysis  to inform SPS investment decisions. 
81. STDF revised work programme for 2009 incl uded possible research on development of 
impact indicators, as well as exploring the linkag es between SPS and trade facilitation and possible 
development of a work programme in this area.  The STDF secretariat also highlighted STDF's increasing involvement as a technical and strategic partner in the SPS-related initiatives of partners 
and donors.  G/SPS/R/54 
 Page 17 
 
 
  82. The STDF secretariat solicited the identification of consultants qualified to carry out 
evaluations of STDF projects.  All STDF doc uments are available on the STDF website: 
http://www.standardsfacility.org . 
(b) Information from Members 
(i) China – Information on a National Seminar held in Hangzhou 
83. The representative of China reported on tw o national seminars on the SPS Agreement 
organized in collaboration with the WTO Secretaria t.  These seminars were held in Hangzhou and 
Beijing, and over 100 participants attended each semi nar.  The representative of China thanked the 
WTO for its participation, as well as e xperts from the United States and Canada. 
(ii) Brazil's Experience in Providing Technica l Cooperation to the Food Quality Control 
Programme of Angola 
84. The representative of Brazil reported on an FAO project for strengthening Angola's Codex 
national committee and its food control system.  Brazil's assistance involved the implementation of the project through:  (i) assessment of Angola's food control organizations and its technical assistance 
needs;  (ii) evaluation of Angola's Codex focal poi nt and its interaction w ith the relevant national 
institutions;  (iii) recommendations to improve  the food control system in Angola and the 
development of an action plan;  and (iv) prepar ation of a study addressing the areas where Angola 
needed further training. 
(iii) Indonesia – Information on the Technical Cooperation Provided by the IPPC 
85. The representative of Indonesia thanked IPPC and FAO for conducting a technical 
cooperation programme for strengthening Indonesia's quarantine agency and control system on alien 
species.  The ultimate objective of this programme is to preserve Indonesia's biodiversity through the 
implementation of a strong strategy.  Indonesia also  thanked the STDF secretariat and the FAO for the 
seminars held in the country.  Lastly, the repres entative reported on Indonesia's plan to organize an 
international symposium on the SPS Agreement, a nd requested assistance from the WTO, OIE, IPPC 
and Codex. 
(iv) Belize – Technical Assistance to Enhance National SPS Capacity 
86. The representative of Belize reported that the European Communities had responded 
positively to a request for technical assistance to  enhance national SPS capacity, involving training on 
SPS and Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) issues, the EC legal framework on SPS, biosafety matters, 
and the modernization and upgrading of laboratories. 
87. The representative of the European Commun ities underlined the good lessons learned from 
Belize's well formulated and demand-driven re quest for technical assistance, whereby Belize 
identified their own needs and contacted potential d onors.  The EC representative also reported that 
additional resources were available for technical a ssistance, and suggested that other developing 
countries follow Belize encouraging example. 
88. The Secretariat clarified that developing c ountries are entitled to request up to two national 
seminars per year on any of the topics covere d by the WTO, while least-developed countries are 
entitled to request up to three national seminars pe r year.  These requests  must be submitted by the 
Member's mission to the WTO to th e Director of the Institute for Training and Technical Cooperation 
(ITTC), Mr Hakim Ben Hammouda.  The requests ar e then transmitted to the relevant Divisions 
within the WTO Secretariat to deliver the semina rs.  The Secretariat also reminded that countries G/SPS/R/54 
Page 18  
 
  interested in technical assistance projects in the area of SPS might consider applying for a Project 
Preparation Grant (PPG) through the STDF.  The PPGs are aimed at transforming good ideas on SPS technical assistance into projects, by helping Member s articulate particular needs before approaching 
potential donors to support or implement the projects. 
(c) Information from Observers 
89. The representative of the IPPC reported that  the Commission on Phytosanitary Measures 
(CPM) held an open-ended working group on the elaboration of a comprehensive strategy on 
phytosanitary capacity.  Three outputs had resulted from the working group:  (i) a concept paper on phytosanitary capacity;  (ii) a draft comprehensive st rategy;  and (iii) an operational plan to implement 
the strategy.  In addition, IPPC Members suggested  that a mentoring process could be included into 
the strategy, as well as the elaboration of a paper considering the adoption of the Paris Principles on 
technical assistance for phyto sanitary capacity building. 
90. The representative of the IPPC also reported th at the Phytosanitary Capacity Evaluation Tool 
had been updated and it was now being reviewed be fore final consideration by the CPM in the last 
week of March.  In addition, IPPC had particip ated in workshops funded by Japan in Indonesia and 
Malaysia.  Future workshops were planned for Bang ladesh, Pakistan, and Thailand.  IPPC was also 
planning a meeting for the Commonwealth of Indepe ndent States (CIS) to consider their regulatory 
systems and implementation of ISPMs.  Furthermor e, IPPC was participating in the Project for 
Participation of African Nations in Sanitary an d Phytosanitary Standards-setting Organizations (PAN-
SPSO), funded by the European Communities and c oordinated by the African Union - Interafrican 
Bureau for Animal Resources (AU-IBAR).  This project aims at fostering and strengthening the 
participation of African countries and the Regiona l Economic Communities (RECs) in the elaboration 
and review of international SPS standards.  Las tly, IPPC reported on the organization of seven 
regional workshops on draft ISPMs. 
91. The representative of Kenya thanked IPPC for its  supervising role in an STDF project on the 
development of a centre of phytosanitary excellence in  East Africa.  This project also benefited from 
the participation of other partners, such as the Ne therlands Plant Protection Service and the National 
Plant Protection Organization of Zambia.   
92. The representative of the OIE introduced document G/SPS/GEN/905, which contains 
information on several capacity building activities carried  out by the OIE.  These include a number of 
workshops and events covering: the Laboratory Tw ining Programme to establish and support direct 
sustainable links between the OIE Reference Labor atories or Collaborating Centres and candidate 
establishments in developing countries or count ries with economies in transition;  the OIE 
Performance of Veterinary Services (PVS) evaluati ons;  the GAP Analysis for identification of 
countries' priority needs on animal health issu es;  and activities for strengthening veterinary 
legislation. 
93. The representative of the Codex reported that  a compendium of all relevant technical 
assistance activities would be submitted to the Committ ee before the June meeting.  Codex technical 
assistance activities comprised a trust fund to sponsor  the participation of developing countries in 
Codex meetings, as well as workshops and courses to strengthen the capacity of developing country 
officials on food safety matters.  Codex has launched a distance learning course on risk analysis, which is available on FAO's website and through a CD-Rom. 
94. The representative of IICA noted that document G/SPS/GEN/904 had information on their 
technical assistance activities.  These include the im plementation of STDF project 108, to assist Latin 
American countries set a national agenda on SPS involving the public and private sectors, and 
possibly the establishment of a national SPS committ ee.  IICA has also developed a programme for  G/SPS/R/54 
 Page 19 
 
 
  assisting countries in the Americas region to improve  dialogue with the private sector in order to 
better participate in the elaboration and review  of international SPS standards, guidelines and 
recommendations.  IICA thanked the Codex, OIE an d the Comité de Sanidad Vegetal del Cono Sur 
(COSAVE) for their assistance in these projects, and the United States for funding the project.  IICA 
would organize seminars on assessment of microbiological  and chemical risks in food.  In addition, 
IICA was elaborating manuals on good practices for countries participation in the committees of the 
WTO, OIE, Codex, and IPPC. 
95. The representative of UNCTAD reported on SPS even ts conducted in the past year, including: 
one activity on organic agriculture aimed at achie ving greater harmonization on standards, jointly 
organized with the FAO;  and the First Regional C onference in Asia on organic agriculture, organized 
together with the ITC, and targeting a better harmonization and equivale nce in Asia on organic 
agriculture.  UNCTAD was participating in the Tr ade Standards Practitioners Network, an initiative 
led by the World Bank to improve analytical and technical capacity in  the area of voluntarily 
sustainable standards. 
IX. REVIEW OF THE OPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE SPS 
AGREEMENT 
(a) Report of the Informal Meeting 
96. The Chairman reported that at the informal meeting of the SPS Committee on the Review of 
the SPS Agreement, held on 24 February, two issu es had been discussed:  (i) proposals on enhancing 
the use of Good Offices and ad hoc consultations;  and (ii) new issues identified for consideration 
during the Third Review of the Operation and Implementation of the SPS Agreement. 
97. With respect to the proposals to enhance the use of Good Offices, the Chairman had observed 
that in the 2005 Review, Members were encourag ed to make use of the possibility for ad hoc 
consultations, including through the Good Offices of the Chairperson of the SPS Committee, to 
facilitate the resolution of specific trade concerns. 
98. The Chairman had recalled that the Committee ha d, for its consideration, two proposals to 
enhance the use of ad hoc consultations, one fro m Argentina (G/SPS/W/219) and one from the United 
States (G/SPS/W/227).  The United States and Arge ntina had now submitted a joint proposal on 
Article 2.2 (G/SPS/W/233). 
99. Many Members had welcomed the joint proposal and the fact that it focused on addressing the 
technical issues.  Some Member had found useful  that the proposed procedure would allow the 
involvement of Codex, IPPC or OIE as appropriate .  More information had been requested regarding 
the possibility for third parties to join the consulta tions, and whether the Chair would be able to make 
recommendations.  Members had also sought clarification on the stage at which the process would start, and on how much transparency would be available during or after the process. 
100. Several Members had raised concerns with re gards to avoiding any duplication or conflict 
with the horizontal mechanism under discussion in the Non Agricultural Ma rket Access (NAMA) 
negotiations for the fast-track resolution of non-tariff barriers.  India had considered the joint proposal 
as amounting to a carve-out for SPS issues and suggested that all NTBs had to be dealt with consistently.  Switzerland and the European Comm unities had also expressed a preference for the 
across-the-board approach being developed in NAMA. 
101. Argentina and the United States had noted that Article 12.2 provisions for ad hoc 
consultations and the horizontal process under NAMA could co exist.  While it was not clear when 
and in what form the NAMA proposal might eventu ally be adopted, the joint proposal on ad hoc G/SPS/R/54 
Page 20  
 
  consultations was in line with proposals in NAMA.   The United States had noted that it had first 
proposed the development of a procedure within the SPS Committee in 1998, and this issue had been 
under consideration in the context of the Second Revi ew of the SPS Agreement.  As for third party 
participation, this could be envisaged, as well as recommendations by the Chair, as the joint proposal 
was meant to be flexible according to terms agreed by the parties involved. 
102. Members were invited to submit their comments on the joint proposal by Argentina and the 
United States by mid- April.  It had been agr eed that on the basis of the discussions and of any 
subsequent comments by Members, a revision of th e proposal would be circulated for consideration 
by the Committee at its June meeting.  The Chai rman had reminded Members that in any case, the 
Good Offices were always available and could cer tainly benefit from more use and experience. 
103. In terms of the new issues identified for consid eration during the Third Review, the Chairman 
recalled that at its October 2008 meeting, the Co mmittee had adopted a procedure and timetable for 
undertaking the Third Review of the SPS Agre ement.  This was contained in document 
G/SPS/W/228. 
104. Members were invited to identify issues for discussion as part of the Third Review and any 
other issues they wished to have considered during the Review, by 28 November 2008.  Members 
were also invited to submit papers on the issues pr oposed for consideration and to identify any further 
issues for consideration during the Review, by 9 February 2009. 
105. In accordance with the agreed tim etable, the informal meeting had held an initial discussion 
on the issues identified.  China had submitted an issue for consideration on Article 8 and Annex C 
(G/SPS/W/234).  China had recalled the importance of Article 8 and Annex C, noting that many 
specific trade concerns related to control, insp ection and approval.  However, Annex C was seldom 
used to justify requirements, perhaps b ecause some of its clauses were ambiguous.   
106. Several Members had noted that Codex, OIE and IPPC played important roles in that area.  
For example, the Codex Committee on Food Import a nd Export Inspection and Certification Systems 
(CCFICS) had elaborated standards along with  principles and guidelines.  These Members had 
suggested that perhaps the proposal from China could be addressed by the three Sisters.  
107. Codex had noted that it was active in devel oping guidance on the conduct of audits and 
inspection, and also that new work was being undertaken on guidance for national food control 
systems.  The OIE had recalled that there were exis ting standards on certificates, inspections, etc., and 
that it was also looking generally at infrastructure needs.  However the OIE did not give guidance on 
what was reasonable or necessary as this could vary from situation to situat ion and be specific to 
diseases.  The IPPC had noted that it had two ge neral standards on inspec tion procedures and on 
phytosanitary treatments, and had welcomed any specific suggestions to further its process on the 
issue.  The Chairman had asked th e three Sisters to provide informa tion on their work in this area for 
the June meeting. 
108. The informal meeting had also discussed a s uggestion by Australia on how to address the 
review of the issue of consistency in a practical manner.  Australia had noted that the December 2008 
deadline for the review of the operation of the gui delines to further the practical implementation of 
Article 5.5 had expired, and that  no Member had provided inform ation on their experiences with 
regard to Article 5.5 since June 2005.  In that context, Australia had suggested that Members be 
invited to submit any issue of concern they might  have on the Article 5.5 Guidelines (G/SPS/15) by 
the June 2009 meeting of the Committee.  Should no  specific issue be raised by June, it was proposed 
that the Committee agree to consider the current  guidelines on consistency as having been reviewed 
and maintain the guidelines as such.    G/SPS/R/54 
 Page 21 
 
 
  109. The issue of the lack of information on the implementation of the other guidelines adopted by 
the Committee had also been flagged, and India ha d asked that the issue of the consideration of 
Article 10.2 - being currently discussed in the Co mmittee on Trade and Development Special Session 
- be kept in mind during the Third Review of the Agreement. 
110. During the formal meeting, the representative of India expressed support for China's proposal 
for further clarification on the control, inspection and approval procedures, as enshrined in Article 8 
and Annex C of the SPS Agreement.  India suggest ed that guidelines on those procedures would assist 
Members and avoid problems among trading partners. 
(b) Issues Arising from the Second Review 
(i) Use of Ad Hoc Consultations (G/SPS/W/233) 
111. Following the discussions held during the inform al meeting, the Chairman invited Members 
to analyze the joint proposal presented by Argent ina and the United States (G/SPS/W/233) and submit 
written comments in advance of the next Committee meeting in June. 
(ii) Relationship between the SPS Committee and C odex, IPPC, and OIE – Proposed Agenda for 
the Workshop 
112. The Secretariat presented a proposed draft progr amme for the workshop on the relationship 
between the SPS Committee and the international st andard-setting organizations (G/SPS/W/235), an 
outstanding issue from the last review of the SPS Agreement. 
113. The proposed programme followed recommendati ons submitted by Japan (G/SPS/W/226) and 
New Zealand (G/SPS/W/206), and had been discussed with the OIE, Codex and IPPC.  It includes 
two main parts:  (i) presentations by the interna tional standard-setting orga nizations on the procedures 
and issues they face in the development, adoption an d monitoring of the use of international standards 
of relevance to the SPS Committee;  and (ii) discu ssions on concrete actions to improve coordination 
between the Committee and OIE, Codex, and IPPC, to  increase the use of international standards and 
avoid duplication of efforts. 
114. The Secretariat requested Members to send th eir comments on the draft programme before 
24 April, to permit circulation of the final programme  before the June meeting of the Committee.  The 
Secretariat further announced that there will be  funds available from the Global Trust Fund to 
facilitate the participation of developing country officials. 
115. The representative of Japan agreed with the dr aft programme proposed by the Secretariat and 
the expected outcomes from the work shop.  Japan suggested the inclusion of presentations on how to 
enhance the coordination between the Committee and the OIE, Codex, and IPPC, in order to avoid 
duplication of work;  presentations on the experi ence of coordination at the national level;  and 
presentations on the existing coordination mechanis ms among the international standard-setting 
organizations themselves, and with the Committee. 
116. The representative of Chile suggested the in clusion of a presentation on how the three 
international standard-setting orga nizations could contribute to the monitoring of the implementation 
of international standards, in collaboration with  the Committee, and in acco rdance with Articles 3.5 
and 12.4 of the SPS Agreement. G/SPS/R/54 
Page 22  
 
  (c) Third Review (G/SPS/GEN/887/Rev.1) 
117. The Secretariat recalled that in the Oc tober 2008 meeting the Committee agreed on a 
procedure and timetable for undertaking the Thir d Review of the SPS Agreement (G/SPS/W/228).  
On 3 November 2008, the Secretariat circulated  a background document for the review of the 
operation and implementation of the SPS Agreement (G/SPS/GEN/887).  
118. The background document for the Third Review  provided an overview of the Committee 
discussions and major developments in implementati on and operation issues rela ted to:  consistency; 
equivalence;  transparency;  monitoring of the use of international standards; technical assistance;  
special and differential treatment;  regionalization;  sp ecific trade concerns;  private standards;  use of 
ad hoc consultations;  cooperation with the international standard-se tting organizations and on dispute 
settlement.  This document furt her included three appendices c overing a summary of Committee 
activities; information about SPS-related dispute settlement activities;  and a list of documents 
submitted by Members relevant to the various  issues raised in the background document. 
119. Following the receipt of written comments on the background document, the Secretariat 
circulated an updated background document (G/SPS/GE N/887/Rev. 1), on 6 February.  In this regard, 
the Secretariat drew the Committee's attention to  the deadline of 27 March for submission of 
comments, before it circulated the first draft report on the Third Review on 24 April. 
120. The Chairman recalled the suggestion by Australia that Members be asked to submit any 
issue of concern they might have on Article 5.5 by  the June 2009 meeting of the Committee, and if no 
specific issue were raised, the Committee should agree to consider the current guidelines on 
consistency as having been review ed and maintain the guidelines as such.  No Member objected to 
Australia's suggestion. 
121. The Chairman also recalled the concerns of so me Members on the lack of information about 
the implementation and use of other guidelines which had been adopted by th e Committee.  In this 
regard, the Chairman suggested that the Committee might want to assess how best to follow up on 
Members' experiences and issues of concern in the use of guidelines.  
122. The representative of Chile stressed that ve ry little information has been provided by 
Members regarding their recogniti on of equivalence and recognition of pest- and disease-free areas.  
Chile noted that it would be desirable to receive more information regarding the implementation of 
the Committee's decisions and guidelines and the importance of Members notifying these agreements 
using the appropriate mechanism established by the Committee. 
123. The Secretariat recalled the usefulness of the SPS Information Management System 
(http://spsims.wto.org/
) where all the information submitted to the Committee can be retrieved.  The 
Secretariat noted that a questionnaire could be prep ared for Members to provide information on their 
use of the Committee's decisions, guidelines and recommendations.  The representative of Canada 
stated that given the excellent search facilities av ailable, a questionnaire would not be necessary. 
124. Lastly, the Chairman drew the Committee's atte ntion to the agreed d eadlines for the Review:  
• 27 March:  deadline for Members submission, in writing, of any further papers on issues 
proposed for consideration; 
• 24 April:   circulation by the Secretariat of the first draft report on the Third Review, 
based on GEN/887/Rev. 1 and discussions at the informal and formal meetings. 
  G/SPS/R/54 
 Page 23 
 
 
  X. MONITORING ON THE USE OF INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS 
(a) New Issues 
(i) Agreement Establishing the Asia Pacific Plant Protection Commission:  Restrictions on 
Imports of Havea Plants from Outside the Region – Concern of Brazil 
125. The representative of Brazil raised concerns re garding some provisions of the Constitutive 
Agreement of the Asia Pacific Plant Protection Commission (APPPC), which includes a clause in its 
Article 4 and Appendix B on South American Leaf Blight (SALB).  The provisions request APPPC 
contracting parties to prohibit by law the importation of havea plants from countries outside the region.  Brazil considered that this measure wh ich affected many countries in South and Central 
America, lacked scientific justification and was not based on risk analysis.  In 1999, the 117
th Council 
of FAO recommended that the APPPC revise its cons titutive agreement in line with the IPPC and SPS 
Agreement principles and provisions.  Brazil expect ed a timely revision of the APPPC constitutive 
agreement. 
126. The representative of Japan supported Brazil's c oncern.  Although Japan was located in the 
area covered by the Asia Pacific Plant Protection Convention, it was not a member of APPPC due to 
the provisions referred by Brazil against SALB .  APPPC had conducted a risk assessment for a 
regional standard on SALB, and Japan hoped that A PPPC would consider this risk assessment and 
adopt a regional standard at its September 2009 meeting. 
127. The representative of IPPC clarified the rela tionship between IPPC and the regional plant 
protection organizations.  Article 4 of the IPPC pr escribes that regional plant protection organizations 
shall cooperate with the secretariat of IPPC in or der to achieve the objectives of the Convention and to 
develop relevant standards.  Article 10 of the Convention states that regional standards shall be 
consistent with the principles of the Convention.  IPPC affirmed that they also were seeking revision 
of APPPC's constitutive agreement to be  consistent with IPPC principles. 
(b) Issues Previously Raised 
(i) Draft NAPPO Regional Standard: Guidelines for Regulating the Movement of Ships and 
Cargoes Aboard those Ships from Areas Infested with the Asian Gypsy Moth (RSPM N. 33) – 
Concerns of China 
128. The representative of China reported that after raising its concern at the Committee meeting 
in October 2008 on the draft regional standard  developed by North America Plant Protection 
Organization (NAPPO) on Asian Gypsy Moth (AGM ), it had maintained good communications with 
officials from NAPPO countries.  The draft standa rd had been revised and was undergoing a second 
comment soliciting process.  Technical expert groups  from NAPPO had been sent to China, Japan and 
Korea for exchange of information, including on ri sk assessment.  China welcomed the open and 
transparent working procedure of the NAPPO count ries.  China requested NAPPO countries not to 
adopt the standard until comments and concerns were  taken into account.  In addition, China recalled 
the provision in Article 2.2 of the SPS Agreement determining the need of scientific evidence for 
every SPS measure.  China also reported that the occurrence of AGM has been significantly reduced 
in its territory, and joint surveillance with the Un ited States in some Chinese ports showed that no 
AGM was detected.  China further recalled the SPS Ag reement provision for the least trade-restrictive 
measure to be applied.  China acknowledged th e legitimate objective pursued by NAPPO, but any 
SPS measure must comply with the relevant provisions of the SPS Agreement. 
129. The representative of Japan supported the statemen t by China, and also appreciated NAPPO's 
transparent and open procedures.  Japan underlined th at the proposed standard could result in a huge G/SPS/R/54 
Page 24  
 
  impact on the trade between Japan and NAPPO count ries.  Japan was undertaking consultations with 
its relevant stakeholders before  submitting its comments to NAPPO, and requested the draft standard 
on AGM not to be adopted until its comments were duly considered. 
130. The representative of Indonesia reported that it had similar concerns on the draft NAPPO 
standard on AGM, which was a pest listed in its  regulation for quarantine measures.  Indonesia 
supported the objectives of RSPM 33, but further studi es were needed on the po ssibility of the insects 
to survive long distance journeys from Indonesia to North America by cargoes.  Lastly, Indonesia 
stated that it followed the recommendations and treatme nts provided in ISPM 15 in all of its shipping 
from Indonesia to North American countries. 
131. The representative of Korea shared the concer ns raised by China and Japan, and expressed 
regret that the draft standard on AGM did not consid er the low prevalence of this pest in Korea.  
Korea argued that the draft standard might pose an ex cessive restriction on trade, and did not consider 
other less-restrictive treatments available.  Korea highlighted its concern on the need for scientific 
justification, which it had recently conveyed to NAPPO. 
132. The representative of Canada underlined that the NAPPO measure on AGM aimed at 
controlling a real risk to North American forests, which had been affected by AGM in the past and 
resulted in a multi-million US dollar process for erad ication.  NAPPO members were aware of the 
trade impact and the costs associated with control measures, and it was in NAPPO members' interest 
to keep shipping costs low for both imports and exports.  The draft regional standard had been 
developed to be no more trade restrictive than necessary to effectively addr ess the risks associated 
with AGM.  Regular meetings with trading partne rs had been held, including visits from NAPPO 
members' experts to China, Japan and Korea.  The results from these consultations would be taken 
into account in the elaboration of the regional standard. 
133. The representative of the United States affirmed  that AGM was a highly invasive pest, not 
present in North America, and which had been found on a number of occasions in port areas in North America.  The NAPPO Pest Risk Assessment Pane l had conducted a risk assessment which concluded 
that NAPPO members should adopt specific phytosan itary measures to prevent the introduction of 
AGM in North America.  This risk assessment w as available upon request, and was the basis for the 
draft NAPPO standard for AGM.  The draft standa rd had not been adopted by the NAPPO Executive 
Committee at its October 2008 annual meeting, due to the number of public comments which were 
still being reviewed.  In February 2009, a NAPPO delegation had held a constructive meeting with 
Chinese regulatory officials to discuss the draft st andard.  Similar cooperative initiatives were being 
undertaken with Japan and Korea.  The United Stat es assured its trading partners that the applied 
phytosanitary measures would be consiste nt with the WTO rights and obligations. 
134. The representative of Mexico corroborated the st atements by the Untied States and Canada, 
and indicated that Mexico attached high importance to the topic.  Mexico looked forward to continuing to work with concerned trading partners to mitigate any po tential risk of introduction of 
AGM into North America. 
135. The representative of Chile inquired whether phyt osanitary standards developed by regional 
organizations were considered international sta ndards or regional standards according to the SPS 
Agreement.  The Secretariat clarified that the SPS Agreement makes clear refe rence to international 
standards for plant health as being the ones develo ped under the auspices of the secretariat of the 
IPPC in cooperation with regiona l organizations operating within the framework of the IPPC.  
Therefore, standards developed by regional organiza tions alone were not likely to be considered by 
the SPS Agreement as an international standard.  If WTO Members applied or incorporated those 
regional standards into their domestic legislati on however, then the SPS Agreement would apply.  G/SPS/R/54 
 Page 25 
 
 
  XI. CONCERNS WITH PRIVATE AND COMMERCIAL STANDARDS 
(a) Report on Chairman's Consultations 
136. The Chairman recalled that following the October 2008 meeting of the Committee, he had 
circulated to all Members a questionnaire on Me mbers' experiences with SPS-related private 
standards.  That questionnaire was contained in G/SPS/W/232.  Fourteen Members had submitted 
responses to the questionnaire, and he had held in formal consultations with a number of Members 
regarding those responses and their experiences with the questionnaire.  The consultations were also 
attended by the representatives of Codex and the OIE. 
137. The Chairman reported that the ad hoc working group had held a very useful and concrete 
discussion on private standards.  He also noted that  the replies to the questionnaire constituted the first 
phase of a three-phase endeavor.  The replies woul d assist the Secretariat and the ad hoc group to 
proceed with the second phase of preparing a descrip tive report.  The third phase would involve the 
preparation of an analytical report, which was exp ected to propose concrete action for consideration 
by the Committee. 
138. The replies to the questionnaire from producers a nd companies were indicative that, for them, 
private standards were simply "the" market acces s condition with which they had to comply.  For 
most of them, there was no understanding of a dis tinction between national a nd international versus 
private standards.  Those producers and companies which managed to meet private standards were 
able to gain or maintain market share, although that did not necessarily provide a price premium.  
Still, for those supplying a number of markets or buyers, that meant complying with a multitude of standards and paying separately for their certification.  Therefore, harmonization among existing 
private standards could indeed be a good starting point. 
139. In addition, the Chairman noted that from the responses received, smaller producers were 
particularly affected by private standards due to their limited capacity to undertake the investment 
necessary to meet the detailed requirements and pay for the certification.  Some which could meet national food safety requirements in their export ma rkets found themselves unable to keep up with the 
"safety" requirements of private standards.  In some instances, technical assistance could assist 
farmers to meet the requirements of private standards. 
140. Looking more closely at specific examples from the replies, in the area of food safety, a 
common problem related to certain private standa rds which set maximum residue limits (MRLs) for 
pesticides which were significantly lower than nati onal requirements, which we re themselves at times 
more restrictive than MRLs set by Codex for th e same products.  While it was easier to identify 
deviations from Codex standards when these constituted numerical values, it was harder to make an 
assessment in the case of process-based internationa l standards.  Those contained rather general 
guidelines which were supposed to be given operational effect at the national level. 
141. In the area of animal health, it had been noted that certain private standards imposed 
unjustified requirements which went beyond th e guidelines of the OIE, as well as national 
requirements.  One example was a requirement for certification of absence of listeria in raw meat 
while the national requirement in the relevant mark et was for absence of listeria in ready-to-eat or 
semi-processed meats only.  Anot her example was a requirement for de-boning of beef from BSE-free 
countries, although this was not required under OI E guidelines.  No private standards had been 
identified in the area of plant health. 
142. There had been a lot of interest in the work ings of ChileGAP, which was an initiative of the 
exporters' association in Chile to facilitate meeting GlobalGAP and ot her private requirements in their G/SPS/R/54 
Page 26  
 
  export markets.  Costs of certification was anothe r concern which had come up repeatedly in the 
discussions. 
143. It had been pointed out by one Member that private standards and their certification 
requirements served an important function in providing assurances to buyers and responded to 
consumer demands in the area of food quality as well as in other areas such as labor and 
environmental requirements.  Governments needed to make sure that products coming into their 
market were "safe".  Interfering in further initiatives of private entities could be inappropriate, except 
in instances of deceptive practices and distortions  of competition.  At the same time, some 
sensitization of entities involved with private standard s was occurring, they were alerted to concerns 
related to lack of transparency and adverse effect s on developing countries.  Still, it was unrealistic for 
all producers to expect to be able to par ticipate competitively in international trade. 
144. An underlying preoccupation of a number of participants in the group had been the 
importance of preserving the principles and relevan ce of the SPS Agreement in international trade 
matters related to sanitary  and phytosanitary issues, and in not undermining the value of international 
standards. 
145. The Chairman stated that during the ad hoc  group meeting, he had also reported on his 
intervention at the Global Food Safety Initiative's International Food Safety Conference held in 
Barcelona earlier in February.  As the Chair of  the SPS Committee, he had underlined the concerns 
raised by developing country Members in the WTO re garding private standards.  The need for further 
harmonization among private standards and the high co sts of certification were also among the main 
themes raised during that conference. 
146. The Chairman indicated that in response to  requests from delegations, the deadline for 
Members to respond to the questionnaire contained in G/SPS/W/232  had been extended to 24 April 2009.  He encouraged all Members which had not yet done so to contribute to that useful exercise.  Members which had already provided a response could also provide complementary 
information.  If Members were submitting a second reply, the Chairman asked that they clarify 
whether their reply replaced their earlier one or was a supplement to it. 
147. Based on the replies received, the Secretariat would circulate to all Members a descriptive 
report for consideration at the June meeting of the Committee.  Based on the discussions during that 
meeting, the ad hoc working group would begin wo rking on the analytical report, which would be 
circulated for consideration during the October Committee meeting. 
148. The representative of Ecuador, speaking on beha lf of GRULAC, thanked the Chair for his 
consultations, and the Secretariat for the work it was undertaking to help assess the effects of private 
standards on small developing countries' access to markets.  Ecuador noted that many Members had 
flagged their serious concerns about the effects of  private standards on their exports, and that during 
the ad hoc consultations, several concerns had been raised about the possibility of  protectionist 
measures being implemented without justification.  According to Article 2 of the SPS Agreement, 
Members had the right to take SPS measures, based on scientific principles.  Ecuador stressed that, 
however, nothing in the Agreement provided for Members to impose SPS measures for commercial purposes, as private standards did.  Ecuador also re ferred to Article 13 of the SPS Agreement and the 
need for Members to abide by the provisions deta iled therein regarding entities other than central 
government bodies and their compliance with the relevant provisions of the SPS Agreement. 
149. The representative of Ecuador noted that tho se imposing private standards did not recognize 
the role of international standard-setting bodi es as the organizations most suited to establish SPS 
standards.  Ecuador proposed that in addition to th e initial steps undertaken so far by the Committee, a 
permanent monitoring mechanism of SPS-related privat e standards be put in place, in order to identify  G/SPS/R/54 
 Page 27 
 
 
  if such measures constituted restrictions to trade di sguised as replies to the on-going economic crisis.  
Ecuador, as other developing countri es,  urged developed countries to take into account the concerns 
of the many WTO Members who, as evidenced, saw additional costs linked to private standards, 
placing a  heavy burden on their agricultural produc tion and exports.  Ecuador expressed the hope that 
the Committee would define ways to strengthen the S PS Agreement in the face of the threat posed by 
SPS-related private standards. 
150. The representative of Brazil stated that Brazil att ached great importance to the work of the ad-
hoc group on private standards.  Brazil noted that  private standards represented higher costs for trade, 
a divergence from international standards, and confusion for exporters.  Furthermore, private 
standards did not only cover food safety issues, but also a range of other horizontal issues in 
international trade.  Brazil looked forward to the r esults which would come out of the work of the ad 
hoc group and the analytical report which would represent an important contribution to the work of the Committee. 
151. Belize stated its support for the ongoing work by  the ad hoc group and the Chairman towards 
recommendations in the area of private and commerci al standards.  Belize wished to sensitize the 
Committee that in the case of many small and vul nerable economies, which in some cases depended 
on the export of one product, market access was not  determined by compliance with international 
standards, but by producers' ability to comply with  private standards.  Hence, the fact that those 
private standards were being consta ntly changed affected market access, and put at risk the economies 
of those small and vulnerable countries.  Belize hope d that Members would work collectively in the 
Committee towards defining measures which could a ddress the negative impact of private standards 
on the ability of developing countries to gain and maintain market access. 
152. The representative of Uruguay  noted his support for the statement made by Ecuador on behalf 
of GRULAC, and for the establishment of a perman ent monitoring mechanis m by the Committee of 
private standards.  Uruguay also noted its satisf action with the progress made, with the help of the 
Secretariat, in a process which had started a few years ago, and which had now seen specific examples 
being provided.  Nonetheless, Uruguay asked whether in the preparation of its descriptive report the 
Secretariat could include more specific examples to broaden and enrich the scope of the descriptive matrix.  All Members had been asked to reply to th e questionnaire with specific examples and that the 
examples provided had helped identify the market access costs linked to private standards.  Uruguay 
thanked the European Communities for its efforts to  sensitize entities involved with private standards, 
and noted that all Members had to work harder in that regard.  Uruguay recalled the importance of the 
Committee's objective of harmonization of standards, requirements, certification, etc, and of 
achieving harmonization in the area of private sta ndards, as well as increasing transparency.  While 
the most important issue was that of greater compli ance with the standards of Codex, IPPC and OIE, 
all private standards which went beyond these inte rnational standards should be based on scientific 
evidence.  The role and the jurisprudence of Codex,  IPPC and OIE in the area of standards setting had 
to be safeguarded. 
153. The representative of Egypt thanked the Secretar iat and the Chair for what was now concrete 
information and examples from Members on (i) ho w difficult it was for developing countries to 
comply with private standards, and (ii) the costs of  applying those standards.  That information from 
Members provided the Secretariat with useful and rele vant input and material for the preparation of its 
descriptive report, to be followed by an analytical  report on concrete recommendations and actions to 
be taken by the Committee.  Egypt agreed with Ecuador on the need for the Committee to undertake, 
in parallel to the work of the ad hoc working gr oup, the monitoring of new private standards and 
related developments.  Egypt requested that the analy tical report be made available in advance of the 
October Committee meeting so that Members could co me prepared to discuss it at the meeting.  G/SPS/R/54 
Page 28  
 
  154. The Chairman confirmed that the intention was to have the analytical report available in 
advance of the October meeting of the Committee.  Regarding the suggestion by Ecuador and others 
for the Committee to monitor private standards, the Chairman noted th at, as provided for in the agreed 
actions on private standards, Members could use the Committee's standing agenda item on private 
standards to raise concerns and report on developments.  Furthermor e, Members and Observers were 
invited to provide information on any relevant studi es or analysis which they had undertaken, or of 
which they were aware. 
155. The representative of the OIE noted that the concrete examples discussed in the ad hoc 
working group showed that private standards c ould cause confusion and potentially undermine the 
key disciplines of the SPS Agreement of transparen cy and scientific justification of standards.  
Furthermore, while the SPS Agreement was trying to establish a more level playing field for all 
Members, private standards had disproportionate  negative effects on developing countries.  The 
representative of the OIE noted that solutions were no t easy to find, and that it would be unrealistic to 
expect that private standards would disappear.  Ho wever, some actions could be taken, such as 
monitoring and transparency to make it more ev ident how private standards operated and in what 
area, and their effects.  The OIE would continue  participating in the SPS Committee processes, and 
would coordinate with its members to monitor de velopments relating to private standards which 
affected animal health and animal welfare, to pr ovide more transparency and information on relevant 
developments. 
156. The representative of Codex reported that the s ubject of private standards had been discussed 
at the previous Codex Alimentarius Commission meeting in 2007.  The Commission had requested 
the FAO and WHO to compile existing studies and wo rk on private standards in the area of food 
safety and quality and their implications.  The stud y was expected to be presented for information and 
discussion in the next session of the Codex Alimentari us Commission in July 2009.  Codex noted that 
the study would be shared with the SPS Committee as soon as it was completed. 
157. The representative of UNCTAD  reported that over the last three years, UNCTAD had 
conducted 12 country case studies on the subject of private standards with a focus on the exports of 
horticultural products, in particular fresh fruits and vegetables.  Ther e had been four studies in Latin 
America, four in East and Central Africa, and three  in South East Asia.  The results of those country 
case studies had been synthesized in three regional pa pers which had been published last year.  The 
studies were available on the UNCTAD's Website. 
158. UNCTAD noted that it was pursuing the study of private standards at the regional and 
national levels in cooperation with FAO.  Also, under the umbrella of the World Bank and GTZ, 
UNCTAD was overseeing a trade standards practitioners  network which could be  used to coordinate 
analytical and empirical activities among internat ional organizations and international research 
institutes.  Those activities were likely to bring a number of results, including empirical results, to the 
table. 
159. The OECD reported that it had started conducti ng studies on the issue of private standards 
about five years ago.  More recent studies were based on case studies of developing countries under 
the hypothesis that different levels of economic de velopment would probably influence the ability of 
those countries and their producers to meet the privat e standards and integrate international markets.  
Studies in Peru, Ghana, South Africa and Chile had shown the existence of great variations within 
countries, where the medium to larger exporters did not seem to have difficulties in meeting the 
private standards in their export markets, but  for the smaller producers there was clearly a 
disadvantage in meeting these private standards.  Ho wever, the representative of the OECD noted that 
many of those smaller producers were not in the ma rket before in any case.  The OECD representative 
added that other studies conducted with PIP on em pirical work for ten African countries had not  G/SPS/R/54 
 Page 29 
 
 
  shown such internal variations be tween domestic exporters due to private standards, rather there were 
other problems related to quality,  quantity, and meeting deadlines. 
160. The representative of the OECD noted that in many cases there were a number of problems 
other than private standards which affected trade,  such as economic development.  There were often 
problems at the producer level to meet the demands  of the export markets and infrastructure-related 
problems.  For example, Peru was the world's la rgest exporter of fresh green asparagus because of 
various initiatives which had been taken by the pr ivate sector such as building a port facility for 
cooling.  On the other hand, the mango sector in Peru was a traditional product sector and producers 
had difficulties maintaining access to major retail expor t markets as they faced transport and cooling 
problems linked to the nature of the industry itself. 
161. The OECD noted that private standards were not  always the only trade impediment faced by 
developing countries, and it was clear that c ountries which could meet them had a competitive 
advantage.  Furthermore, certification was not necessarily required every year, trust between retailers and suppliers was often the key parameter.  The studies mentioned were available on the OECD 
website, along with the questionnaires used and the r esults and reports.  Finally, the representative of 
the OECD supported the suggestion by Ecuador for the Committee to monitor private standards, in 
parallel with the work of the ad hoc group on private standards. 
XII. MATTERS OF INTEREST ARISING FROM THE WORK OF OBSERVER 
ORGANIZATIONS 
162. The representative of the OIE referred to OIE's report in document G/SPS/GEN/905.  The key 
issues covered in that report were:  a new OIE advi sory document on the rights and obligations of OIE 
Members with regard to international trade and trade disputes;  work on OIE standards for bovine 
spongiform encephalopathy, foot and mouth disease and avian influenza; and a progress report on key 
OIE capacity building activities. 
163. The OIE advisory document summarized the rights and obligations of OIE members with 
regard to trade and trade disputes and explained OIE's voluntary dispute resolution mechanism 
including the procedures, selection of experts, c onfidentiality aspects and how to reach science-based 
solutions.  The second part of the document addresse d the rights and obligations of Members relevant 
to exporting, including SPS provisions.  The OIE considered the document a useful reference, especially in light of discussions about the use or non-use of OIE and other in ternational standards, 
and welcomed any feedback from the Committee.  
164. The representative of Codex referred to th e report in document G/SPS/GEN/909.  He 
informed the Committee that the Codex Comm ittee on Food Import and Export Inspection and 
Certification Systems (CCFICS) had, at its Nove mber 2008 meeting, agreed to forward the renamed 
Generic Model Official Certificate to the 32
nd Session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission for 
final adoption.  The certificate was fully compatible and consistent with OIE certificates.  Codex noted that it was examining whet her the Generic Model should also  apply to its other commodity-
specific certificates. 
165. The representative of Codex indicated that the 40
th Session of the Codex Committee on Food 
Hygiene  agreed to forward to the Codex Alimentarius Commission, for final adoption in July 2009, 
the Microbiological Criteria for Powdered Follow- up Formula and Formulas for Special Medical 
Purposes for Young Children and the Proposed Draft Microbiological Criteria for Listeria 
monocytogenes in Ready-to-Eat Foods.  Given the complexity of the issue, that work had taken ten 
years to finalize, and Codex wished to commend the enormous efforts by Members to contribute 
scientific data.  G/SPS/R/54 
Page 30  
 
  166. The representative of Codex drew attention to upcoming Codex meetings, including the 
Twenty-sixth Session of the Codex Committee on General Principles  (CCGP)  which would consider 
the participation of developing countries in the C odex standards-setting process.  Those discussions at 
the CCGP would be guided by a document prepar ed by the Codex secretariat and which included 
statistics and analysis over a ten year period, togeth er with data and inform ation from the Codex Trust 
Fund.  The April meeting of the CCGP offered an excellent opportunity for Members to look at the 
participation of developing countries in the development of standards. 
167. Finally, the representative of Codex reported that Montenegro, Comoros and Tajikistan had 
joined the Codex Alimentarius Commission:  bri nging the membership to 179 member countries and 
one member organization, the European Communities.   A few other countries were in the process of 
consultation, and Codex hoped to report on new Me mbers at the June meeting of the SPS Committee. 
168. The representative of IPPC reported on standa rd-setting activities by IPPC since the last 
meeting of the Committee, including: a meeting of the Standards Committee in Brazil in November 2008;  a meeting of the technical panel on  forest quarantine in Chile in December 2008;  
and a meeting of the technical panel on phytosanita ry treatments in Japan in January 2009.  The 
Standards Committee had recommended four draft ISPM s for adoption at the Fourth Session of the 
Commission on Phytosanitary Measures (CPM 4), sche duled from 30 March to 3 April.  In addition, 
several draft ISPMs were being presented to the St andards Committee in May, prior to sending draft 
standards to countries for consultation.  
169. The representative of the IPPC observed that:  (i) the IPPC had now 170 contracting parties, 
with three additional countries engaged in the process of ratification;  (ii) the IPPC website was being 
redesigned and should be ready for demonstration in April;  (iii) a on-line system for the submission 
of comments from contracting parties on draft ISPMs was currently being revised;  and (iv) staffing 
was still an issue despite the assist ance from Members with short-term staff, and IPPC was working 
on finding sustainable staffing solu tions and had issued two vacancy  announcements.  The report from 
the IPPC was subsequently circulated as G/SPS/GEN/915. 
170. The representative of ITC reported that three new bulletins had been prepared in 2008 and 
were available on the ITC website.  The bulletin s covered: (i) exporting seafood to the European 
Union;  (ii) an introduction to ISO 22000 on Food Safety Management Systems; and (iii) a directory 
of marks and labels related to food safety, environmental integrity, and social equity. 
171. The ITC also reported on a seminar on "Foste ring Trade through Public-Private Dialogue: 
Business Implications of the Emerging Internationa l Trading System for Central American countries" 
held on 15-16 December 2008 in Santo Domingo.  The seminar focused on three issues:  (i) food 
standards and the challenge of traceability;  (ii) "branding" as a means to improve market position; 
and (iii) public procurement and competition po licy.  Presentations and case studies from the seminar 
were available on the ITC website.  Finally, the representative of ITC mentioned that within the 
framework of the STDF 69 project for the fisher ies sector in Yemen, a workshop on SPS marketing 
issues in the fisheries sector in Yemen would be organized on 22 March in Sanaa.  The workshop was 
aimed at (i) raising awareness among stakeholders about the main SPS and marketing issues that the sector was currently facing, and (ii)  finding solu tions through private-public sector dialogue and 
cooperation.  The report from the ITC was subsequently circulated as G/SPS/GEN/914. 
172. The Secretariat called the Committee's attention to a paper submitted by OIRSA providing an 
update of their activities in document G/SPS/GEN/907.  The Secretariat also informed the Committee 
that it had been invited to participate in a new liaison group of the Conventio n on Biological Diversity 
(CBD) on alien invasive species, not covered by IPPC  standards.  Other organizations, including the 
Codex, IPPC and OIE, had also been invited to pa rticipate in the discussions of the liaison group, and 
the Secretariat would keep the Co mmittee informed on the discussions.  G/SPS/R/54 
 Page 31 
 
 
  XIII. REQUESTS FOR OBSERVER STATUS  
173. The Committee agreed to invite all of the ad hoc observers to participate in its next meeting, 
including  the informal meetings on the Revi ew and on special and differential treatment. 
174. There was no change in the position of Members with respect to the pending requests for 
observer status from the Asian and Pacific Coc onut Community (APPC), Convention on Biological 
Diversity (CBD), International Vine and Wi ne Office (OIV) and the Gulf Customs Council 
Standardization Organization.  These outstanding re quests would be considered at the next regular 
meeting. 
XIV. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON 
175. The Chairman indicated 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 (contained in document WT/L/31).  Those consultations had 
not yet reached a conclusion.  As such, the Chairman  suggested that the election of the Chairperson of 
the Committee be postponed until the next Committee meeting in June.  The Committee agreed to 
take up the election of the Chairperson at the time  of its first informal meeting, scheduled for 
23 June 2009, with the Committee br iefly switching to formal mode to acclaim its new Chairperson. 
XV. OTHER BUSINESS 
176. No issues were raised under "Other Business". 
XVI. DATE AND AGENDA FOR NEXT MEETING 
177. The Chairman recalled that the next meeting of the Committee was tentatively scheduled for 
24-25 June 2009.  Informal meetings on the Revi ew and special and differential treatment were 
scheduled for 23 June 2009. 
178. The Secretariat flagged that the June meetings would face time constraints as the TBT 
Committee was also meeting in that same week, and there was hence a need to start on time.  The 
Secretariat also noted that the June meetings of  the Committee would take place immediately prior to 
the June Codex Alimentarius Commission meeting.   This could hopefully prove convenient for the 
participation of capital-based delegates to both meetings. 
179. The Committee agreed on the following tent ative agenda for the next meeting: 
1. Proposed agenda 
2. Election of Chairperson 
3. Specific trade concerns 
(a) New issues 
(b) Issues previously raised 
(c) Consideration of specific notifications received 
(d) Information on resolution of issues in G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.9 
4. Operation of transparency provisions 
5. Implementation of special and differential treatment 
(a) Report on informal meeting G/SPS/R/54 
Page 32  
 
  (b) Review of operation of S&D transparency procedure (G/SPS/33) 
6. Equivalence – Article 4 
(a) Information from Members on their experiences 
(b) Information from relevant  observer organizations 
7. Pest- and Disease-free areas – Article 6 
(a) Information from Members on their pest or disease status 
(b) Information from Members on their experiences in recognition of pest- or 
disease-free areas 
(c) Information from relevant  observer organizations 
8. Technical assistance and cooperation 
(a) Information from the Secretariat 
(b) Information from Members 
(c) Information from observers 
9. Review of the Operation and Implementation of the SPS Agreement 
(a) Issues arising from the Second Review 
(i) Use of ad hoc consultations 
(ii) Relationship between the SPS Committee, Codex, IPPC and OIE 
(b) Third Review 
(i) Report on informal meeting 
(ii) Consideration of draft report 
10. Monitoring of the use of international standards 
(a) New issues 
(b) Issues previously raised 
(c) Annual report 
11. Concerns with private and commercial standards 
(a) Report on Chair's consultations 
(b) Consideration of descriptive report 
12. Matters of interest arising from th e work of observer organizations 
13. Observers – Request for observer status 
14. Other business 
15. Date and agenda of next meeting 
179. Members were asked to take note of the following deadlines: 
(i) For submitting proposals on issues to be  considered by the Committee during 
the Third Review:  Friday, 27 March ; 
(ii) For submitting new or revised responses to the questionnaire on private 
standards (W/232):  Friday, 24 April ;  
(iii) For submitting comments on the various proposals before the Committee:  
Friday, 24 April  that is: 
  - Argentina/US joint proposal on ad hoc consultations (W/233),  G/SPS/R/54 
 Page 33 
 
 
    - China's proposal regarding Annex C (W/234),  and 
- the revised proposal on transparency of special and differential treatment 
(G/SPS/W/224/Rev.3); 
(iv) For identifying new issues for consideration under the monitoring procedure, 
AND for requesting that items be put on the agenda : Thursday, 
11 June 2009  
(v) For the distribution of the airgram:  Friday, 12 June 2009  
__________